Best
182 Comments
Post
  • #2
    !
    Paul Ryan was fine with the federal government giving his poor family help when his dad died and his mother didn't have much. When the feds give money to him it's a good thing. When they give it to anyone else he's opposed to it. What a hypocrite!
  • #5
    !
    "When they give it to anyone else he's opposed to it."
    I agree with your statement and voted you up. But, Medicare isn't given to people. They pay into it, that money is theirs. Period. The government is stealing it, they need to pony up and give it back.
  • #14
    !
    Wish Lisa Fine would have covered Pelosi's nutjob antics a couple weeks back like this...lol

    Just the opposite thing- a wacko congresswoman thinking she was higher stature than another in the house. She didn't run away, she attacked.

    Oh wait, can't have a headline like that can ya ?
  • #20
    !
    @drpeeper Republicans opposed medicare when it was implemented almost as vociferously as they oppose Obama care now.....but now you all sing a different tune because you want to get elected huh?
  • R Load more replies

  • #22
    !
    He treated this lady poorly and really showed that he doesn't really care about what the people want or think, he only cares about pleasing the corporate overlords.
  • #48
    !
    "ask Paul Ryan why his budget cuts Medicare but gives millionaires a tax cut."

    We should all ask the same question until we get a real answer.

    It's pretty clear that Ryan doesn't really give a shit about the people who are affected by his ideology based policies.

    And why does he still promote trickle down economics?

    Next Time Someone Argues For 'Trickle-Down' Economics, Show Them This

    f an executive makes $20 million a year, his income will eventually trickle down into the rest of the economy and ultimately benefit poor people.

    But that theory hasn't exactly proven true. The highest-earning 20 percent of Americans have been making more and more over the past 40 years. Yet no other boats have risen; in fact, they're sinking. Over the same 40 years, the lowest-earning 60 percent of Americans have been making less and less.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/06/rich...
  • #72
    !
    Not quite. Trickle down economics doesn't say that the executive's salary will eventually benefit the poor. It says the higher incomes will benefit the economy as a whole. Those participating in the economy will benefit.

    The graph in the article you posted shows the impact of the 'Great Society' implementation in the mid 60s. People on welfare are not going to see an increase in income. Over time the government subsidies fail to keep up with inflation.

    From the source of the graph

    "The data presented in Figure 2 are instructive, but it is well
    to bear in mind their limitations. Most importantly, the Cur
    rent Population Survey (CPS) definition of “Money Income”
    includes cash transfers but does not exclude taxes, which
    means that it understates available resources for poorer fami
    lies by virtue of ignoring near-cash transfers and refundable
    tax credits, yet overstates them for some families by virtue of
    ignoring taxes. This series also does not allow us to identify
    changes occurring at the very top of the distribution. In the
    following sections, we present other data series that address
    some of these limitations."

    "How has median income fared in the recovery period? As
    unemployment remained stubbornly high (above 9 percent)
    for most of 2010 and 2011, median household income contin
    ued to fall. It hit a low-point in mid-2011, roughly ten percent
    lower than pre-recession levels. After mid-2011, the unem
    ployment rate drifted down toward eight and then seven
    percent, and median household income began to slowly
    grow. By October 2013, however, nearly five years after the
    end of the Great Recession, median income remains seven
    percent below pre-recession levels, at $52,300. "

    http://web.stanford.edu/group/scspi/sotu/SOTU...
  • #114
    !
    @Cincinnatus

    I would agree that trickle down is pure horse puckey. Supposedly trickle down would help our economy which in turn in theory helps everyone due to an increase in jobs and assuming wages keep up with inflation.

    Tax laws make trickle down moot since trickle down lowered taxes while tax laws make taxes non-existent or nearly so for the 1%.

    NAFTA cost us millions of jobs and numerous employers haven't seen fit to keep their employee's with a liveable wage even though they may very well be making record profits.

    There are many Fortune 500 companies that not only do NOT pay Federal Income Taxes, some of them also receive billions in refunds even though they may have made billions in profits. The catch is, they are hiding their profits off shore.

    Conservatives are using the shelter, "but it's legal!" Maybe it is, but is it ethical?

    Imho, no.

    I'm no stock expert but it's my understanding the value of stock is based on the success of the company the stock is for. If they're hiding their profits, they're saying they're less profitable which means they're also manipulating their own stock prices.

    It's also my understanding that the dividends stock holders receive is also based on profits.

    If a company hides the lions share of their profits overseas to avoid their tax obligations, they're legally saying, "but those aren't our profits since they're overseas".

    Since they're legally saying they didn't make the amount of profits they actually did they're also legally cheating their stock holders since they can't have it both ways.

    The mantra of "we have the highest corporate tax rates in the world" is moot when a number of our Fortune 500 companies pay zero taxes and take more out of our pockets via refunds.

    GE btw seems to be the worst and they did make headlines a few years ago more or less bragging about it.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/25/corp...

    Add onto that the welfare or the ability to write off private planes, yachts, hedge funds and equities that are reported as capital gains. Then we have the promise to bail out to big to fail banks that also borrow at a minuscule interest rate which costs the middle class around 83 billion a year to take up the slack.

    Add another 80 billion or so for subsidies on the middle class tax payers tab to get companies to operate locally.

    And then we have a number of these same corps deferring their taxes promising they'll pay them later,,, which never seems to happen. Instead their tax bill just gets bigger and bigger due to deferment after deferment.

    The middle class of course picks up the tab.

    Looking at the numbers leads me to believe the aged, disabled and poor aren't the problem on unsustainability. It's the 1% that live off of the Gov welfare that we obviously can no longer afford to sustain.

    Imho, the trickle down economics farce pales in comparison since the middle class is forced to take up the slack for the trillions lost due to corporate welfare.

    Curious how the extreme right considers these people to be "smart" when they're obviously can't seem to survive unless they're living off of our tax dollars but when someone poor is needing welfare they're lazy incompetents so inbred they were born with a banjo wedged firmly in their rectums and the males also have fiddle bows for a penis, won't take responsibility and always expect their entitlements.
  • #117
    !
    @ithink

    " It says the higher incomes will benefit the economy as a whole. Those participating in the economy will benefit."

    It hasn't worked out that way.
  • #125
    !
    @Cincinnatus It all depends. If you have stood still, you didn't benefit much. If you worked your way up, you did benefit. Unfortunately right now there a lot of standing still because of the instability of the economy.

    Employers are not hiring, so no one's moving. Employers are not hiring because the cost to do business has gone up to a prohibitive level. Because the costs to do business is up, so is the cost of product. When the cost of product goes up and you don't, even if your in the same spot, you've lost ground.

    When government decides to take a larger piece of the pie, less pie is available for everyone else.
  • #25
    !
    In his book, he referred to the "makers" and the "takers"....the rich versus the poor. The elderly in this country today are definitely not "takers". They have worked all of their lives contributing to Social Security and they have a right to ask questions and not be shoved up under the rug as if they do not exist.
  • #63
    !
    @DP_Cassie -good take, I'd say he revealed his true colors and character. I figure someome will save that clip to break out if he does run for president.
  • #95
    !
    @DP_Cassie They do. However... we don't need another generation of people who plan to retire on social security alone. A person would actually be better off investing the money they are required to put into social security in private investments. It's an outdated system, that is broke, and needs to be eliminated.
  • #98
    !
    @KentuckyJim How can you make an assertion like that when Reagan was the one who opened the door to pilfering the social security trust fund? I propose the government puts back the 2.7 trillion lifted from the lock box.
  • #102
    !
    @zipyourlip From where? We have no money. The people would be better off handling their own retirement than being forced to invest in a very poor retirement plan designed and administered by the government, who are clearly only using it to harvest money from the masses. If I could opt out of social security tomorrow I'd do it.
  • R Load more replies

  • #1
    !
    Glad to see that Paul Ryan is on the (R) or (D) corporate band wagon.
    You people from either party can deny this, but BOTH parties are for big corporations both in tax cuts and subsidization.
    They (the corporations) have more money than us peons and that's ALL that matters to the DC politicians.
  • #4
    !
    This woman has a right to know. She like others (me since I was 16), have paid into this our entire work lives. That money is owed to us. Its not a godamn entitlement, its OURS! The government stole it. Just like they have Social Security.
  • #6
    !
    @Fishbone345 I'd argue with you if I hadn't also paid into those same non-entitlements since I was 14 years old. 44 years and counting and if it's not there when I retire, I'm gonna be launching canes and false teeth on DC.........
  • #7
    !
    @stepped_in_it As will I. A kid steals cigars and gets shot dead and people are ok with it, but the government steals money from you the moment you are hired for the first time and its A OK with us bud!!! In fact its Patriotic!!!
  • #8
    !
    @Fishbone345 I once figured out what the government would owe me from what I (employer matched) "donated" into the SS system.
    At 1.5% annual interest, it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 1.5 MILLION dollars.
    Waiting for my check, Uncle Sam........
  • #13
    !
    @stepped_in_it And YET mention SS reform and they buckle at the knees like children.

    They know we are getting screwed, WE know we are getting screwed.......... and no one changes it.
  • R Load more replies

  • #31
    !
    How did that baby on meet the flockers say it that's right "assss hooole assss hooooole"hey that's about as good as he did in his last debate against a senior (VP Joe) at least he learned to shut up.
  • #9
    !
    Hmmmm...lessee......Rand Paul runs like a scared little girl when confronted with a question he doesn't want to answer, trying his best to choke down that first bite of burger and hide in the men's room at the same time. Today, we witness Paul Ryan trying to strong-arm an old woman into an unwanted, unrequested photo-op to try and duck any accountability from her or any real voters.

    Yesterday, a reporter directly asks Rick Perry "If your two-felony Indictment is just a "political stunt", why is it that the ONLY two people on the planet prosecutiong you are a Republican Judge and Republican prosecutor, both whom were fully endorsed by both Tean Republican senators?"

    Perry's NON-answer" I fully agree with (names 4 Democrats totally-unrelated to his indictment) that the indictment is just political."

    Is this just a Republican "thang", an incompetence, a compulsion, an inability to correctly answer direct questions any 2nd-grader could answer.....questions based entirely on FACTS?

    Take note, America. Yes, this is the face of our "tough-guy", non-nonsense Republican Party..........sheer abject cowardice and yellow-stain evasionary tactics when even a slight whiff of "Danger Rick Robinson, Danger!!, facts approaching!!" presents itself.

    Oh, Run Paul, run! Run away, run away, run away!

    Looks like Paul Ryan better stick to concocting fantasy budget proposals that have 5 TRILLION dollars of "unspecified cuts" that come from "yet to be discovered loopholes."
    Yeah, Paul, we've had someone try to sell us the Brooklyn Bridge, already.

    Thanks...but no thanks.
    Maybe a career in AmWay would be a better fit for Ryan.

    Seeing this unfold on the internet or CNN, ISIS must be praying to Muhammed (blessings be upon him) that Republicans take the White House in 2016. It may be the best chance of an ISIS victory.

    Hell........All ISIS would have to do is request ONE straight answer from Republican WH "leadership", and then watch the entire GOP Administration piss its pants and head for the next helicopter bound for NORAD's underground safety compound in Colorado.
  • #27
    !
    Though I get your point and basically agree. I think you are not being completely fair as Paul Ryan is concerned. He definitely handled the situation wrong. I wonder why his publicist ir PR personal were to allow this. The correct way would have been to quickly explain that this is a book signing tour and it is not fair to hold up the line with complex questions. He could have the offered to adress the qiestion after the book signing if she was willing yo wait.

    I think it was the situation that did not allow him to address the question.
  • #57
    !
    @Waynestew
    "Handlers"...politic ians should screen them better. Did you see Rand Paul's (Handler) in Iowa with Steve King? He throws his head back and gestures, let's get out of here.

    With the Social media today...these guys better 'wise-up'; everything is out there before everything can be 'made-up' and/or 'changed'.
  • #61
    !
    @SandySF I did not see the Rand Paul, but from the sounds of it he has a terrible OR team (handlers LOL) As A PR person you must anticipate the unexpected. And a rouge question SHULD be expected. I don't understand how they are not teaching their clients skills to avoid (dodge) them.

    Yes social media changes the game. But it can also be used for PR purposed. For example As soon as the old lady asked her question I would have tweeted an answer respons from Paul Ryan account. I then would have talked to the lady smoothed everything out and posted her saying how nice Paul Ryan was.
  • #62
    !
    @Waynestew
    Your post cracked-me-up!!!
    1st...Paul Ryan should hire you - you would 'handle' the situation right and 'shape-him-up'.
    2nd...You would have to remember not to say "old lady" - women are sensitive about 'someone else' calling them old; and after all I'm going to be one some day...although some say that's a 'past-tense'.
  • #68
    !
    @SandySF I should know a little something. I am a Mass Communication Major a lot of the core deals with PR.

    I would not work for politicans though I'd feel to dirty. But I do think I'd be good. Sorry bout the "old lady" comment. Women are like wine ;-)
  • R Load more replies

  • #16
    !
    Sadly, to many people, seniors are well, just old...Their accomplishments and contributions to this life just don't matter anymore...They want to waste your time and tickle your ears with stories about the good old days, maybe throw in some wisdom they've learned along the way,,, that no one wants to hear...Man, it's a b---- sometimes, to be getting old.
  • #143
    !
    haditup2here - Ryan's just hoping that the 'Grandmas' will vote for him because he's, as Granny's sometimes say,'such a cute young man'. "And look! He's brought his Mother with him." Ryan's a total load of BULLSHIT!

    What's really scary is, I remember my Mother, when she got up in her late seventies, and eighties, voting for people because she, "Liked the way they looked".
  • #146
    !
    @eyesonu True, some do. And the Ryan family would make a beautiful 1st family to look at, but don't worry too much, most grannies of today look at voting records and take in the whole picture...My elderly parents (80's) are nobodies fools...The 80's are the new 50's as far as age goes:)...lol...My politically and racially diverse, large family will do America proud this mid-term, and in 2016:)...
  • #147
    !
    @haditup2here - Excellent! I think you're right (Er, I mean correct). I was finally able to get my Mother to actually look at the issues. lol. She was a very smart lady. An educator for many years. Her students loved, and hated, her.(She'd routinely tear up their assignments, and tell them to do them over, if she felt they were capable of something better).

    She went back to substitute teaching while my youngest brother was still in Junior High. His friends all complained to him that they didn't want her, even as a sub, because she was too demanding. Guess you don't raise six kids without being a bit of a 'drill sergeant'.

    I live in a neighborhood that's really 'red'. Lot's of retirees. I hate to admit it, but all but a few don't really care how good the guy in the White House is. He could end global warming, and make everyone in the country a millionaire, and they'd still not vote for him for one reason....... And we all know what that is.
  • #148
    !
    @eyesonu :)....Lol, you poor kids! If you can overcome that stigma, you can rise above anything! Back in the day, I had a teacher who refused to give A's, even if you had 100%...My mother asked why, and she said, "That wouldn't give them anything to strive for." lol:)--- You were right on the 'right'...I'm a tad right of center, politically:), but hey, hopefully some day, we can all live as one big happy political family for the sake of our great Nation?!:)---Imagine and dream of how wonderful life would be...
  • #76
    !
    "I love you, vote for me, but bend over because I'm going to take food off your table and give it to some rich guy because he needs it more than you, at least that's what my budget will do"
  • #91
    !
    If he had responded with "Ma'm I understand these Medicare cuts will be painful for many, however we believe that our tax cuts will stimulate the economy, encourage job growth and ultimately make the Medicare program more sustainable", I would have continued to disagree with him... however my respect for him as a person would have gone up immensely.
  • #78
    !
    First off, she picked a book signing to ask that question, which is an inappropriate time.

    However, Paul Ryan has a lot to answer for as he was one of the people who has been vocally anti-ACA, but has done virtually nothing to undo or protect the American people from it, yet he was part of the voting block that would protect himself and his staff from it.

    He isn't the financial whiz-kid that the Republicans make him out to be. He knows as many tricks to hide money, as Bill Clinton, which was a nifty PR trick.
  • #64
    !
    What a disrespectful phallic object!!!!
    Another government hack who's already been in gov too long. If you wont listen to people, you won't represent them.
  • #35
    !
    @DontBlameMe2 What in the world are you talking about?

    How could more of the video mitigate the fact that he was a total jerk in the video we saw?
  • R Load more replies

  • R Load more comments...
Post