Conquer Club

Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:50 am



This video is actually very sad.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:53 am

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/22085

For those of you who like to read,

This is where you can find the long-term analysis for Ryan's budget.



Is anyone else wondering how making every Senior citizen buy stocks for their Medicare plan going to work out for the 1%?
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:59 am

Ludicrous and Cruel

Paul Krugman wrote: Many commentators swooned earlier this week after House Republicans, led by the Budget Committee chairman, Paul Ryan, unveiled their budget proposals. They lavished praise on Mr. Ryan, asserting that his plan set a new standard of fiscal seriousness.
Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Well, they should have waited until people who know how to read budget numbers had a chance to study the proposal. For the G.O.P. plan turns out not to be serious at all. Instead, itā€™s simultaneously ridiculous and heartless.

How ridiculous is it? Let me count the ways ā€” or rather a few of the ways, because there are more howlers in the plan than I can cover in one column.

First, Republicans have once again gone all in for voodoo economics ā€” the claim, refuted by experience, that tax cuts pay for themselves.

Specifically, the Ryan proposal trumpets the results of an economic projection from the Heritage Foundation, which claims that the planā€™s tax cuts would set off a gigantic boom. Indeed, the foundation initially predicted that the G.O.P. plan would bring the unemployment rate down to 2.8 percent ā€” a number we havenā€™t achieved since the Korean War. After widespread jeering, the unemployment projection vanished from the Heritage Foundationā€™s Web site, but voodoo still permeates the rest of the analysis.

In particular, the original voodoo proposition ā€” the claim that lower taxes mean higher revenue ā€” is still very much there. The Heritage Foundation projection has large tax cuts actually increasing revenue by almost $600 billion over the next 10 years.

A more sober assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office tells a different story. It finds that a large part of the supposed savings from spending cuts would go, not to reduce the deficit, but to pay for tax cuts. In fact, the budget office finds that over the next decade the plan would lead to bigger deficits and more debt than current law.

And about those spending cuts: leave health care on one side for a moment and focus on the rest of the proposal. It turns out that Mr. Ryan and his colleagues are assuming drastic cuts in nonhealth spending without explaining how that is supposed to happen.

How drastic? According to the budget office, which analyzed the plan using assumptions dictated by House Republicans, the proposal calls for spending on items other than Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid ā€” but including defense ā€” to fall from 12 percent of G.D.P. last year to 6 percent of G.D.P. in 2022, and just 3.5 percent of G.D.P. in the long run.

That last number is less than we currently spend on defense alone; itā€™s not much bigger than federal spending when Calvin Coolidge was president, and the United States, among other things, had only a tiny military establishment. How could such a drastic shrinking of government take place without crippling essential public functions? The plan doesnā€™t say.

And then thereā€™s the much-ballyhooed proposal to abolish Medicare and replace it with vouchers that can be used to buy private health insurance.

The point here is that privatizing Medicare does nothing, in itself, to limit health-care costs. In fact, it almost surely raises them by adding a layer of middlemen. Yet the House plan assumes that we can cut health-care spending as a percentage of G.D.P. despite an aging population and rising health care costs.

The only way that can happen is if those vouchers are worth much less than the cost of health insurance. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that by 2030 the value of a voucher would cover only a third of the cost of a private insurance policy equivalent to Medicare as we know it. So the plan would deprive many and probably most seniors of adequate health care.

And that neither should nor will happen. Mr. Ryan and his colleagues can write down whatever numbers they like, but seniors vote. And when they find that their health-care vouchers are grossly inadequate, theyā€™ll demand and get bigger vouchers ā€” wiping out the planā€™s supposed savings.

In short, this plan isnā€™t remotely serious; on the contrary, itā€™s ludicrous.

And itā€™s also cruel.

In the past, Mr. Ryan has talked a good game about taking care of those in need. But as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities points out, of the $4 trillion in spending cuts he proposes over the next decade, two-thirds involve cutting programs that mainly serve low-income Americans. And by repealing last yearā€™s health reform, without any replacement, the plan would also deprive an estimated 34 million nonelderly Americans of health insurance.

So the pundits who praised this proposal when it was released were punked. The G.O.P. budget plan isnā€™t a good-faith effort to put Americaā€™s fiscal house in order; itā€™s voodoo economics, with an extra dose of fantasy, and a large helping of mean-spiritedness.


http://economistsview.typepad.com/econo ... story.html
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Aug 13, 2012 4:00 am

Krugman's very skilled in rhetoric.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Night Strike on Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:08 am

Paul Ryan stands against lies and gimmicks in Obamacare (in 2010):

Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Victor Sullivan on Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:26 am

Why should we care that much who the vice presidential candidate is?

-Sully
User avatar
Corporal Victor Sullivan
 
Posts: 6010
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:17 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Night Strike on Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:53 am

Victor Sullivan wrote:Why should we care that much who the vice presidential candidate is?

-Sully


Because it's really the first concrete decision a presidential candidate must make to indicate how they may govern if they win election. Bush picked Cheney and Obama picked Biden because those VP picks were seen to shore up an area the presidential candidate was weak on: military and foreign affairs. Romney picking Ryan indicates that Romney is looking to run on a platform that includes concrete ideas on how to cut government spending to restore fiscal sanity rather than just running as "Not Obama".
Image
User avatar
Major Night Strike
 
Posts: 8512
Joined: Wed Apr 18, 2007 2:52 pm

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby heavycola on Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:56 am

BigBallinStalin wrote:Krugman's very skilled in rhetoric.


Isn't he the guy who predicted the subprime meltdown?
Image
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class heavycola
 
Posts: 2925
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 10:22 am
Location: Maailmanvalloittajat

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby rockfist on Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:36 am

Symmetry wrote:
rockfist wrote:Given that most of what our government spends its money on is at best waste and in most cases immoral - it would be immoral to pay more taxes than you are legally obligated to. It is immoral to advocate higher taxes. If Romney paid only 14% the question isn't how do we get him to pay a higher percentage - its how do we limit everyone to that percentage at most? Any taxation beyond a minimal amount is just state sanctioned theft.


I'm not sure I give your given on this one- looks like you're starting out from an ideological premise and ending up at your ideal outcome, then fitting in logical steps, which are kind of a stretch, to fit.

Where's the waste, if you had to look at a table of gov't spending?:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_United_States_federal_budget#Total_revenues_and_spending

Hint- just saying "most of it" ain't gonna do you well, unless you're Paul Ryan, where it gets you a nomination for VP, just like Sarah Palin.

And which parts are immoral?


I am starting from the view that all government spending is waste. It is not up to me to prove it is, it is up to the government to prove to me that it is not - or I will be voting for those who want to lower taxes and cut spending as should every other American. The government is taking our money to fund its spending. If you want something from me - prove that you deserve it - if you can't or won't the answer is no.

It is immoral to take money from one person and give it to another. It is moral and right for people to freely give money to those in need, when the government compels it - it becomes immoral.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier rockfist
 
Posts: 2146
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:17 pm
Location: On the Wings of Death.
3222

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby AndyDufresne on Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:53 am

Night Strike wrote:
Victor Sullivan wrote:Why should we care that much who the vice presidential candidate is?

-Sully


Because it's really the first concrete decision a presidential candidate must make to indicate how they may govern if they win election. Bush picked Cheney and Obama picked Biden because those VP picks were seen to shore up an area the presidential candidate was weak on: military and foreign affairs. Romney picking Ryan indicates that Romney is looking to run on a platform that includes concrete ideas on how to cut government spending to restore fiscal sanity rather than just running as "Not Obama".


I think he just liked the way they looked together, plus the alliteration of their names (it is always a strong crowd drawing factor).


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby AndyDufresne on Mon Aug 13, 2012 9:34 am

This just in, Paul Ryan drove a weinermobile in college.

Image

We'll have to re-evaluate his stance on franks and morals.


--Andy
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class AndyDufresne
 
Posts: 24919
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 8:22 pm
Location: A Banana Palm in Zihuatanejo

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby jonesthecurl on Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:32 am

Doesn't matter now: Cain is back. Maybe he'll pick Palin as VP.
instagram.com/garethjohnjoneswrites
User avatar
Lieutenant jonesthecurl
 
Posts: 4442
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 9:42 am
Location: disused action figure warehouse

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Aug 13, 2012 10:45 am

heavycola wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Krugman's very skilled in rhetoric.


Isn't he the guy who predicted the subprime meltdown?


A lot of people did, but most who were aware of it murmured about it while continuing to play the game until the very end.

This guy Peter Schiff wrote this book Crash Proof on February 26, 2007, which strongly warned of that upcoming meltdown but also showed strategies for mitigating one's losses and/or for profiting.


Here's a list of Krugman predictions from 1998, assessed by Tyler Cowen: http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalr ... tions.html

I can't find much else about Krugman though, as far as predictions are concerned, and with someone reviewing them.


Here's Cowen in 2005 talking about overinvestment in housing:

http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalr ... ved_i.html
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby thegreekdog on Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:07 pm

I was a little surprised by Paul Ryan being the presumptive nominee for vice president. However, the more I think about it, the more I think it makes sense, I guess. He's the poster-boy for taking anti-Obama stances (as opposed to Romney, who is the poster boy for taking pro-Obama stances, until he becomes a presidential candidate). Ryan is seen as the "smart guy" who, compared to Joe Biden, is going to seem brilliant. Ryan is sort of the opposite of Sarah Palin: he's smart, doesn't "talk funny," and doesn't have the cache as a social conservative (although he is).

I was thinking Romney would choose someone with a non-rich, female, non-white person feel just to balance shit out. But I guess the Republicans aren't going for that again.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:14 pm

rockfist wrote:I am starting from the view that all government spending is waste. It is not up to me to prove it is, it is up to the government to prove to me that it is not - or I will be voting for those who want to lower taxes and cut spending as should every other American. The government is taking our money to fund its spending. If you want something from me - prove that you deserve it - if you can't or won't the answer is no.

It is immoral to take money from one person and give it to another. It is moral and right for people to freely give money to those in need, when the government compels it - it becomes immoral.


Are you a libertarian?

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are the three spending programs that are hot topics at this point in the thread, and there's nothing "immoral" about them. People pay into them their whole lives and they deserve the full benefits of the programs. And I hope that when I reach the age of retirement that most young people feel the way that I do. That old man in the video got arrested for espousing as much. I find his red-hot bravery heartening.

Now you might call Medicaid a wasteful program because it pays for hospital visits for poor children and such, but these kids will be full citizens one day. A country's success isn't measured in how much money a single person can make, but in how it treats it's own people. This country is wealthy, it doesn't do the country good to lock that wealth up in 10 individual bank accounts.
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby thegreekdog on Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:21 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:Now you might call Medicaid a wasteful program because it pays for hospital visits for poor children and such, but these kids will be full citizens one day. A country's success isn't measured in how much money a single person can make, but in how it treats it's own people. This country is wealthy, it doesn't do the country good to lock that wealth up in 10 individual bank accounts.


I'm not sure the country is wealthy (if you define the country as being the US government). If certain individuals in the country are wealthy, I suspect the measurement of their success is how they've been treating people. Maybe that's what you meant to say. I mean, apart from the assumption that people who support Medicare and Medicaid do it because they want to treat the people of the country well (and not for, you know, selfish reasons).
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby rockfist on Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:37 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:
rockfist wrote:I am starting from the view that all government spending is waste. It is not up to me to prove it is, it is up to the government to prove to me that it is not - or I will be voting for those who want to lower taxes and cut spending as should every other American. The government is taking our money to fund its spending. If you want something from me - prove that you deserve it - if you can't or won't the answer is no.

It is immoral to take money from one person and give it to another. It is moral and right for people to freely give money to those in need, when the government compels it - it becomes immoral.


Are you a libertarian?

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are the three spending programs that are hot topics at this point in the thread, and there's nothing "immoral" about them. People pay into them their whole lives and they deserve the full benefits of the programs. And I hope that when I reach the age of retirement that most young people feel the way that I do. That old man in the video got arrested for espousing as much. I find his red-hot bravery heartening.

Now you might call Medicaid a wasteful program because it pays for hospital visits for poor children and such, but these kids will be full citizens one day. A country's success isn't measured in how much money a single person can make, but in how it treats it's own people. This country is wealthy, it doesn't do the country good to lock that wealth up in 10 individual bank accounts.


I am a proud libertarian - are you a statist? Those are three programs that never should've been born, but now we need to figure out how to reduce the spending on them before they implode. The current levels of growth are unsustainable. Statists should be more interested in figuring out how to keep the programs alive than anyone else.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier rockfist
 
Posts: 2146
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:17 pm
Location: On the Wings of Death.
3222

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Aug 13, 2012 5:57 pm

rockfist wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:
rockfist wrote:I am starting from the view that all government spending is waste. It is not up to me to prove it is, it is up to the government to prove to me that it is not - or I will be voting for those who want to lower taxes and cut spending as should every other American. The government is taking our money to fund its spending. If you want something from me - prove that you deserve it - if you can't or won't the answer is no.

It is immoral to take money from one person and give it to another. It is moral and right for people to freely give money to those in need, when the government compels it - it becomes immoral.


Are you a libertarian?

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are the three spending programs that are hot topics at this point in the thread, and there's nothing "immoral" about them. People pay into them their whole lives and they deserve the full benefits of the programs. And I hope that when I reach the age of retirement that most young people feel the way that I do. That old man in the video got arrested for espousing as much. I find his red-hot bravery heartening.

Now you might call Medicaid a wasteful program because it pays for hospital visits for poor children and such, but these kids will be full citizens one day. A country's success isn't measured in how much money a single person can make, but in how it treats it's own people. This country is wealthy, it doesn't do the country good to lock that wealth up in 10 individual bank accounts.


I am a proud libertarian - are you a statist? Those are three programs that never should've been born, but now we need to figure out how to reduce the spending on them before they implode. The current levels of growth are unsustainable. Statists should be more interested in figuring out how to keep the programs alive than anyone else.


Right on, rockfist.

It's interesting how some people fail to be logical consistent when it comes to theft. It's an involuntary exchange made under the threat of force, and so is taxation. Call me crazy, but theft is immoral to me, and since theft is taxation, then taxation is immoral. (same with deficit spending which ultimately relies on taxes and/or depreciating one's own US dollars).
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby thegreekdog on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:00 pm

Most statists have a good idea on how to keep those programs going - tax people more. I'm just saying, it's not like statists don't have ideas in mind; it's just that politicians don't like saying "let's raise taxes" because then their chances of reelection dwindle.
Image
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class thegreekdog
 
Posts: 7245
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 6:55 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Juan_Bottom on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:03 pm

rockfist wrote:I am a proud libertarian - are you a statist? Those are three programs that never should've been born, but now we need to figure out how to reduce the spending on them before they implode. The current levels of growth are unsustainable. Statists should be more interested in figuring out how to keep the programs alive than anyone else.


Wow that is incredibly short-sighted.

Before Social Security, almost half of all Senior Citizens lived below the poverty line. Today it's less than 10%. It's done everything it was designed to do.

I can't even begin to understand how you rationalize that this country doesn't need Medicare or Medicaid.

I'm not sure why you think that these programs are unsustainable. I don't believe that you've ever looked into why Social Security or Medicare was loosing funds or what we need to do to replenish them. At a glance it seems you're opinions are reactionary rather than "let's find the best solution" because you've offered no information except that you're against the poor, elderly, and sick.


Libertarianism as a Philosophy requires ignoring great swaths of history (AMERICAN HISTORY) and the state of world Affairs. Somalia has free markets, and the Wild West also had Libertarian freedom. None of this is a good thing. As a Modern Philosophy, it reminds me of the Communist-Socialist push that came following the great Depression. Except today we have a Libertarian push after the great recession. It all looked great on paper, but thank God smarter men prevailed.



Nice sig. What part of the Constitution do you think that I oppose? The part that says the government has the right to tax you?
I'll make-up my own too, but I'll give you an option. Do you prefer I put your name after "I despise the coloreds" or "The elderly are an unnecessary drain on the productive."
User avatar
Sergeant 1st Class Juan_Bottom
 
Posts: 1110
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 4:59 pm
Location: USA RULES! WHOOO!!!!

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Woodruff on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:04 pm

Victor Sullivan wrote:Why should we care that much who the vice presidential candidate is?


Because they're one bullet away from being our President. That was the largest motivating factor for me to be against John McCain.

Aside from that, as Night Strike pointed out, it is the first concrete decision regarding the Presidency that a Presidential candidate makes.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby Woodruff on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:05 pm

heavycola wrote:
BigBallinStalin wrote:Krugman's very skilled in rhetoric.


Isn't he the guy who predicted the subprime meltdown?


Krugman is a very smart guy, and someone who I tend to agree with (though not always, certainly)...but yes, he is very skilled in rhetoric, as well. He annoys me.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Corporal 1st Class Woodruff
 
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby BigBallinStalin on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:11 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:
rockfist wrote:I am a proud libertarian - are you a statist? Those are three programs that never should've been born, but now we need to figure out how to reduce the spending on them before they implode. The current levels of growth are unsustainable. Statists should be more interested in figuring out how to keep the programs alive than anyone else.


Wow that is incredibly short-sighted.

Before Social Security, almost half of all Senior Citizens lived below the poverty line. Today it's less than 10%. It's done everything it was designed to do.



Note how JB implies that a correlation is the primary cause--and no other factor is relevant or even influential.

To be logical consistent, JB would have to admit that senior citizens who lived below the poverty line would remain there in any place in the world which doesn't have a social security program similar to the US'.

(Note: lack of sources; shifting definition of poverty line; and this is only the first two lines of his post.)

Why is SS unsustainable? That isn't the issue. The issue is unfunded liabilities, and who is going to pay for them (us young'ins) and how much (most likely a lot--especially if most people remain as ignorant selfish statists as JB does. He's well-intended but completely mistaken).


Haha, JB's history "lesson" was hilarious. It's okay rhetoric because he could at least have used a flimsy existence proof or something to bolster his weak assertions.
User avatar
Major BigBallinStalin
 
Posts: 5151
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 10:23 pm
Location: crying into the dregs of an empty bottle of own-brand scotch on the toilet having a dump in Dagenham

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby rockfist on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:32 pm

Juan_Bottom wrote:
rockfist wrote:I am a proud libertarian - are you a statist? Those are three programs that never should've been born, but now we need to figure out how to reduce the spending on them before they implode. The current levels of growth are unsustainable. Statists should be more interested in figuring out how to keep the programs alive than anyone else.


Wow that is incredibly short-sighted.

Before Social Security, almost half of all Senior Citizens lived below the poverty line. Today it's less than 10%. It's done everything it was designed to do.

I can't even begin to understand how you rationalize that this country doesn't need Medicare or Medicaid.

I'm not sure why you think that these programs are unsustainable. I don't believe that you've ever looked into why Social Security or Medicare was loosing funds or what we need to do to replenish them. At a glance it seems you're opinions are reactionary rather than "let's find the best solution" because you've offered no information except that you're against the poor, elderly, and sick.


Libertarianism as a Philosophy requires ignoring great swaths of history (AMERICAN HISTORY) and the state of world Affairs. Somalia has free markets, and the Wild West also had Libertarian freedom. None of this is a good thing. As a Modern Philosophy, it reminds me of the Communist-Socialist push that came following the great Depression. Except today we have a Libertarian push after the great recession. It all looked great on paper, but thank God smarter men prevailed.



Nice sig. What part of the Constitution do you think that I oppose? The part that says the government has the right to tax you?
I'll make-up my own too, but I'll give you an option. Do you prefer I put your name after "I despise the coloreds" or "The elderly are an unnecessary drain on the productive."


First of all the number of people of any specific type living or not living in poverty does not justify taking from others - it does not matter. If you are in poverty does it justify your taking all my stuff so you are no longer in poverty - no, not if you believe in private property.

Second, I imagine you oppose the parts you don't agree with; you actually said that in response to someone a year or so ago maybe it was sarcasm, but then its the internet who knows. I never said those things. So that would be dishonest.

Third, I reject your premise of "replenishing funds" for those programs. Instead we need to limit spending.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier rockfist
 
Posts: 2146
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:17 pm
Location: On the Wings of Death.
3222

Re: Who is Paul Ryan and what does he stand for?

Postby rockfist on Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:34 pm

thegreekdog wrote:Most statists have a good idea on how to keep those programs going - tax people more. I'm just saying, it's not like statists don't have ideas in mind; it's just that politicians don't like saying "let's raise taxes" because then their chances of reelection dwindle.


Then it would be dishonest and deceptive to not run on that plank. So most statists (presuming they aren't Walter Mondale) are deceptive and dishonest.
Image
User avatar
Brigadier rockfist
 
Posts: 2146
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2009 9:17 pm
Location: On the Wings of Death.
3222

PreviousNext

Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users