Ryan: Obama 'sowing social unrest'

[Raskolnikov]

Become?

It is, but facts like that ruin a perfectly emotional arguement

As opposed to what? The “rationality” of dismissing a program on the basis that it is “socialist?” “Look at the USSR! Ergo, Social Security doesn’t work.” Is that a rational argument? How is social security socialist? I suppose perhaps for the same reason the existence of a federal government is socialist. If giving aid to people who can’t work because they’re elderly is socialism then I suppose a little socialism is just fine. Put any lable you want on it if you will, but a label isn’t an argument. Calling my chair a minion of Satan is not going to dissuade me form sitting in it,

 

[JimR-OCDS]

\What about the next three generations?

Better vote for the right people.

Jim

 

[estesbob]

Better vote for the right people.

Jim

I will-Paul Ryan being the example of the kind of person we need to vote for.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Except it is no longer the first place. And some wonder what is the point of taking measures to try to prevent the catastrophe that already happened. And accusations of socialism betray little more than a lack of an argument.

Social Security isn’t a socialist program by definition where money is divided among that populist and distributed evenly.

Instead, all people pay into social security and all can collect when elligible, regardless of need.

This means a person who works his way into becoming a billionaire, can still collect his/her social security pension.

That isn’t Soviet Style socialism which many on the right try to paint it as.

Jim

 

[Ridgerunner]

This means a person who works his way into becoming a billionaire, can still collect his/her social security pension.

Jim

Which is one of the things wrong with it.

Using the fiction that it is somehow a “funded” program, people have been encouraged in the notion that it’s “their money” that “they paid in” like into a savings account. There is no savings account. The government has always just spent any excess on other things and traded the money for an IOU. It’s as if I spent all the money in my bank account but wrote myself an IOU for it and put it in my bank box and claimed I still had savings because of the IOU. It’s a pretense.

SS is welfare, period. Always was, and always will be. It’s really a “pay as you go” system, and should be recognized as such. If we want to ensure an income for older folks who need it, or disabled people who need it, fine. But I see no reason whatever to burden younger working people in order to pay SS to millionaires who don’t need it.

But that’s what we’re doing. If it was up to me, SS would be means tested like any other welfare program and the SS tax would just be called a tax.

 

[EmperorNapoleon]

He does raise a valid question: Is Obama trying to sow social unrest, or not?

The answer to that question is that he is not sowing social unrest. He’s capitalizing on the existing social unrest which resulted from 11 years of job loss, socialized corporate loses, class warfare waged against the poor and middle class, and all followed by proposals from Republican candidates to drastically lower taxes on the rich while raising them for the poor and middle class.

 

[gubernova]

The answer to that question is that he is not sowing social unrest. He’s capitalizing on the existing social unrest which resulted from 11 years of job loss, socialized corporate loses, class warfare waged against the poor and middle class, and all followed by proposals from Republican candidates to drastically lower taxes on the rich while raising them for the poor and middle class.

Finally, someone reasonable…

 

[gnjsdad]

The answer to that question is that he is not sowing social unrest. He’s capitalizing on the existing social unrest which resulted from 11 years of job loss, socialized corporate loses, class warfare waged against the poor and middle class, and all followed by proposals from Republican candidates to drastically lower taxes on the rich while raising them for the poor and middle class.

Indeed, I find the accusation that Obama, the President of the United States, is sowing social unrest, ridiculous.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Sorry, but if the working young are able to opt out of SS, then there is no money going in for those who are currently living on SS benefits.

Sure, he told the Bishop that these folks would not lose their benefits, but if there aren’t enough young healthy workers paying into the system, where will the funding come from?

Jim

So you admit that Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme, a transfer of wealth from the young to the old.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

Indeed, I find the accusation that Obama, the President of the United States, is sowing social unrest, ridiculous.

Correction, he is the President of the American Democrats.

 

[Pirate_Talker]

Ah yes, paul ryan and the tea party express!

washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-continue-to-be-their-own-worst-enemy/2011/06/01/AGKcU5GH_story.html

For even as Republicans have imperiled themselves on the national level, they also seem to be committing political hara-kiri in one statehouse after the next. Republican governors who took office this year or last — the ones as determined as Ryan to do a wholesale rewrite of America’s social contract — have approval ratings that we normally associate with strains of bacteria. What’s more, they’re tanking in many of the swing states that will be key in next year’s presidential election.

[end quote]

It certainly seems that ryan has sewn not only social unrest, but his own fate as well.

jomoco

What until the real compaigning strarts. CAn you imagine how the tea party express is going to appeal to the young vote? They can keep making fun of the OWS at their own peril No wonder they are hell bent on preventing college kids from voting.

 

[Pirate_Talker]

Indeed, I find the accusation that Obama, the President of the United States, is sowing social unrest, ridiculous.

It’s the best they can do. Quite the pity, isn’t it.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

It’s the best they can do. Quite the pity, isn’t it.

Its a pity that the Great Uniter has been the most divisive President in American history.

 

[Pirate_Talker]

Its a pity that the Great Uniter has been the most divisive President in American history.

To you, maybe.

 

[Gift_from_God]

As opposed to what? The “rationality” of dismissing a program on the basis that it is “socialist?” “Look at the USSR! Ergo, Social Security doesn’t work.” Is that a rational argument? How is social security socialist? I suppose perhaps for the same reason the existence of a federal government is socialist. If giving aid to people who can’t work because they’re elderly is socialism then I suppose a little socialism is just fine. Put any lable you want on it if you will, but a label isn’t an argument. Calling my chair a minion of Satan is not going to dissuade me form sitting in it,

Americans support socialism without even knowing it. You guys have highways, the fire department, police forces, the military, public education, social security, the post office, medicare, and medicaid. Most Americans support all those services and programs I listed and would never want them to cease or be privatized

 

[bbarrick8383]

Americans support socialism without even knowing it. You guys have highways, the fire department, police forces, the military, public education, social security, the post office, medicare, and medicaid. Most Americans support all those services and programs I listed and would never want them to cease or be privatized

Thanks for admitting that Social Security is a socialist program, it really is foolish to claim that it is not.

As for the rest of the programs, we all accept the fact that government at each level must exist and be responsible for a certain amount services to provide to the taxpayer. It’s unfortunate that people can not see that the problems with socialist programs manifest when the highest level of government controls them and uses them in ways that they are not meant to be used.

Local officials know better than to abuse taxpayer money. Federal officials could care less.

 

[Pirate_Talker]

My nephew-in-law worked for ACORN. On voting days, he would go to the polls and make sure people knew their rights. The way he said it made it seem that people are routinely denied their rights at polling places. I have never had my rights denied, nor do I know anyone whose rights are denied.

What he saw as community service, I saw as causing unrest.

This is what community organizers do. Rile people up on the pretext their rights are being denied.

Here’s the skinny on acorn.

mediamatters.org/research/201110270020

Sleep well, they no longer exist. But the legend lives on!!!

 

[rlg94086]

Here’s the skinny on acorn.

mediamatters.org/research/201110270020

Sleep well, they no longer exist. But the legend lives on!!!

A rose by any other name…

 

[Pirate_Talker]

A rose by any other name…

What’s the rose by another name?

 

[rlg94086]

What’s the rose by another name?

In the case of the New York office of ACORN, the “New York Communities for Change (NYCC) – which is led by a former ACORN official.”

“…New York Communities for Change (NYCC). That organization was created in late 2009 when some ACORN offices disbanded and reorganized under new names…”

Did you not read your own link?