Paul Ryan!!

[gilliam]

Also, if Romney wins, you can expect the Senate to go to the GOP also.

Highly unlikely the Republicans can get up to 61 Senate seats. May actually be impossible.

 

[Jeffrey]

Pretty much a slam dunk for Catholics and Christians on who to vote for. ( That would be Romney/Ryan ).

Obama just tweeted

Obama is obsessed with protecting abortion

 

[irishpatrick]

Highly unlikely the Republicans can get up to 61 Senate seats. May actually be impossible.

I agree…but I am not talking super majority, only a majority.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Did you know that he’s not as socially conservative as he’s made out to be? Look at this:

“…he’s notably further to the left on the issue of lesbian, bisexual, gay and transgender rights than the base of the party. He broke with a lot of his party to support the Employee Non-Discrimination Act in 2007. He explained his reasoning for the vote in this way: “They [his gay friends] didn’t roll out of bed one morning and choose to be gay. That’s who they are.””

–http://news.yahoo.com/5-things-mitt-doesnt-want-know-paul-ryan-162758609.html

Ryan voted against DADT, homosexual marriage and homosexual adoption

 

[Jeffrey]

This says a whole lot more about yourself than anyone else.

derp

 

[Jeffrey]

But they aren’t being honest with themselves if they don’t think thats its STILL murder.

Maybe because most Americans don’t subscribe to the Catholic view? This may surprise you but some people are willing to make exceptions in certain cases and allow it to be legal in cases like rape, incest, to protect the life of the mother. Others might include the first trimester. There are honest differences of opinion on this issue among Americans.

 

[Jeffrey]

I agree. God willing.

I hope Ryan can serve two terms as VP and then two more as President. The problems of our country need more than one Reagan to reverse. The entitlement attitude will take at least an entire generation to forget. The one misgiving I have is that the House will lose its premier budget expert.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Twisting scriptures to support a political view isn’t right, in my opinion. You have, however, shown the concern is more about personal wealth than sharing with others.

Government confiscation to give to others is not sharing. What I have been saying is that old age is perfectly predictable, and it is something that people can easily prepare for. But with Social Security and Medicare has encouraged an entitlement mentality where people start to expect others to take care of them instead of taking care of themselves.

Please explain how a 60 or 70 year old person is slothful? Someone who has worked all their life and possibly had bad fortune that cost them their savings, possibly on a health problem. You generalize too much.

In the 1880s, over 75% of men who were 65 and up were in the labor force. Today that number is around 15%. We have people who are able to work and choose not to. Which is fine, except when you demand that working people pay for it.

Not everyone has had the same opportunities in life. I hope I’m not arguing a point with someone who believes in the prosperity gospel, similar to what Joel Osteen preaches.

I categorically reject the prosperity gospel. I think we have a lot of us in the US are rich and just too stupid to know it, because we determine whether or not we are rich by looking at our neighbors. But even lower income people can save for their old age. If someone saved even $2000 per year from age 22 to 32 and saved nothing else, at age 65 they would have over $800k, assuming a 10% return (the historical return on stocks). But our entitlement mentality does not encourage this sort of thing.

 

[eightandsand]

Thanks for posting this!

As with all Republican politicians with national ambitions, there is ALWAYS something more important.

I’d say ending legal abortion is priority #11 in Romney/Ryan’s top 10.

Well said.

The Republican Party is alienating its traditional base with Romney/Ryan and scaring away the independents.

It will only help Obama.

 

[gilliam]

Well said.

The Republican Party is alienating its traditional base with Romney/Ryan and scaring away the independents.

It will only help Obama.

Who are the Republican Party’s “traditional base” that you say they are scaring away?

 

[Trader]

You agree that Ryan should reverse exactly which entitlements?

Do you consider what has been paid in, with explanations it would come back in future years, an entitlement?

For starters Social Security should be changed from a tax and spend Ponzi Scheme to a mandatory savings program where workers have ownership and control of their savings. When I started receiving SS payments last year, my statement showed that I had paid about $38,000 into the system plus employer taxes. That just happened to be almost exactly the same amount I put in to my own IRA’s (19 years times $2000). If I die tomorrow, SS will pay my nieces and nephews exactly nothing. The IRA’s will pay out $463,000 and change. Which would you rather have for the same cost? BTW, SS had a 10 year head start on my IRA, which only started in 1982. That $463,000 is the cost of letting government do for us what we can and should do for ourselves.

Next, Medicare and Medicaid need to be more market oriented before they bankrupt the country. Why should the sexually promiscous, drug abusing, morbidly obese smoker get health insurance for the same cost as a person who does not make choices that are foolish, immoral, and criminal? It would be like charging the driver of a 1997 minivan with no tickets in 46 years(me), the same auto insurance premium as my neighbor with the brand new $70,000 Corvette and a recent DWI conviction. It is well established that a subsidy for a behavior, good or bad, tends to produce more of the subsidized behavior. Our current government health insurance plans subsidize bad behavior.

Third, welfare plans should aim to change the behaviors that cause poverty, not just maintain millions in perpetual poverty. Getting pregnant should not be the key to your own apartment. Most aid programs should be temporary loans rather than gifts that have to be spent in full, often wastefully, or lost. Progress toward self-support should be monitored with requirements for completing education, training, and attendance at jobs.

Fourth, all the special and temporary preferences in the tax code need to go. We need lower rates and fewer loopholes that encourage everyone to make rational choices for spending and investment, without needing to check with a lawyer and accountant to see what the tax or entitlement implications are.

 

[JoeBowen7]

In the 1880s, over 75% of men who were 65 and up were in the labor force. Today that number is around 15%. We have people who are able to work and choose not to.

But if more people over 65 were to work, wouldn’t that mean that fewer jobs would be available to the younger generation and consequently, the unemployment rate for those just graduating from college would increase?

 

[JoeBowen7]

For starters Social Security should be changed from a tax and spend Ponzi Scheme to a mandatory savings program where workers have ownership and control of their savings. When I started receiving SS payments last year, my statement showed that I had paid about $38,000 into the system plus employer taxes. That just happened to be almost exactly the same amount I put in to my own IRA’s (19 years times $2000). If I die tomorrow, SS will pay my nieces and nephews exactly nothing. The IRA’s will pay out $463,000 and change. Which would you rather have for the same cost? BTW, SS had a 10 year head start on my IRA, which only started in 1982.

Next, Medicare and Medicaid need to be more market oriented before they bankrupt the country. Why should the sexually promiscous, drug abusing, morbidly obese smoker get health insurance for the same cost as a person who does not make choices that are foolish, immoral, and criminal? It would be like charging the driver of a 1997 minivan with no tickets in 46 years(me), the same auto insurance premium as my neighbor with the brand new $70,000 Corvette and a recent DWI conviction. It is well established that a subsidy for a behavior, good or bad, tends to produce more of the subsidized behavior. Our current government health insurance plans subsidize bad behavior.

Third, welfare plans should aim to change the behaviors that cause poverty, not just maintain millions in perpetual poverty. Getting pregnant should not be the key to your own apartment. Most aid programs should be temporary loans rather than gifts that have to be spent in full, often wastefully, or lost. Progress toward self-support should be monitored with requirements for completing education, training, and attendance at jobs.

Fourth, all the special and temporary preferences in the tax code need to go. We need lower rates and fewer loopholes that encourage everyone to make rational choices for spending and investment, without needing to check with a lawyer and accountant to see what the tax or entitlement implications are.

What is to be done with the people over 65 who are now collecting SS benefits. Should they be cut?

 

[stinkcat_14]

But if more people over 65 were to work, wouldn’t that mean that fewer jobs would be available to the younger generation and consequently, the unemployment rate for those just graduating from college would increase?

It is possible that the unemployment rate would increase in the short run, but in the long run the economy would absorb them. Plus businesses would be more likely to invest and create new jobs without the prospect of massive tax increases in the future because of out of control entitlements.

 

[followyourbliss]

Last April, the US Catholic Bishops sent a blistering message to the House Ways and Means Committee saying that any federal budget must be judged by the way it protects the ‘least of these.’ In Bishop Blaire’s words: “The House-passed budget resolution fails to meet these moral criteria.”

The architect of the budget the Bishops deemed immoral was Rep. Paul Ryan, a Catholic, who has now joined Mitt Romney as his running mate on the GOP ticket.

huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/18/ryan-budget-catholic_n_1434919.html

 

[JoeBowen7]

It is possible that the unemployment rate would increase in the short run, but in the long run the economy would absorb them. Plus businesses would be more likely to invest and create new jobs without the prospect of massive tax increases in the future because of out of control entitlements.

Take for example a teaching job. There are three teachers over 65 years old and they have the option to retire or not. Suppose they retire. Then there are three jobs open to young teaching professionals. Suppose they stay on the job. Then these three positions are closed to the young teaching professionals. So, if those over 65 continue to work, the young teaching professionals end up collecting unemployment compensation or have to join the homeless and sleep on the streets. It is not that easy to raise a family if you and your children are homeless and have to sleep on the streets begging for food every day.
i am not sure what this has to do with Paul Ryan in particular, except that he is quite conservative, and in general, some conservatives want to do away with SS benefits for the elderly, which would in effect require the elderly to keep their jobs, thus denying the younger worker that position.

 

[Tampa_Dave]

Until recently I had no idea how many Catholics were in government.

The Vice President is Catholic, Nancy Pelosi is Catholic, a lot of the governors are Catholic, 6 of the Supreme Court Justices are Catholic.

Wow.

I consider Biden, Sebelius and Sotomayor as Catholic in name only. That is my perception, at least.

 

[followyourbliss]

Some forum members consider Ryan a good Catholic. But not only has his budget run afoul of the US Catholic Bishops as immoral, he’s also a longtime devotee of Ayn Rand, the novelist and anti-statist. Ryan tried to deny his devotion, but has spoken at Rand foundation events and expressed his admiration and acknowledged her influence. The problem is: Rand was a vehement atheist, adamantly anti-church. So what does Ryan really believe?

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

Take for example a teaching job. There are three teachers over 65 years old and they have the option to retire or not. Suppose they retire. Then there are three jobs open to young teaching professionals. Suppose they stay on the job. Then these three positions are closed to the young teaching professionals. So, if those over 65 continue to work, the young teaching professionals end up collecting unemployment compensation or have to join the homeless and sleep on the streets. It is not that easy to raise a family if you and your children are homeless and have to sleep on the streets begging for food every day.

That’s a problem I wrestle with. I’m 70, collect SS, and have in addition a well-paying job for the State, which I can keep at forever (there is no forced retirement). As I accumulated large debts in the past, I work to pay them off. I’d prefer to retire so that a young person could take my staff job, but can’t afford to. I am entitled to a half salary retirement BTW.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Take for example a teaching job. There are three teachers over 65 years old and they have the option to retire or not. Suppose they retire. Then there are three jobs open to young teaching professionals. Suppose they stay on the job. Then these three positions are closed to the young teaching professionals. So, if those over 65 continue to work, the young teaching professionals end up collecting unemployment compensation or have to join the homeless and sleep on the streets. It is not that easy to raise a family if you and your children are homeless and have to sleep on the streets begging for food every day.
i am not sure what this has to do with Paul Ryan in particular, except that he is quite conservative, and in general, some conservatives want to do away with SS benefits for the elderly, which would in effect require the elderly to keep their jobs, thus denying the younger worker that position.

The problem with your argument is the assumption that a newly minted education degree holder stays unemployed because a job is already taken. And of course in the real world they move on and go to school in nursing, or engineering, or some field where we have a shortage of workers.