Whose votes does this swing (either way)?
This may move me from a likely Romney voter to actually providing some support since I view Ryan as one of the few politicians who has actually done anything to try and come up with ways to fix the budget.
Printable View
Whose votes does this swing (either way)?
This may move me from a likely Romney voter to actually providing some support since I view Ryan as one of the few politicians who has actually done anything to try and come up with ways to fix the budget.
It will be interesting to see how they repackage him - draconian budgets and dumping Medicare for vouchers are probably not the best platforms for an election year.
I don't know why anyone would think a platform of destroying Medicare was a boffo selling point for a veep, but by Republican standards, he's a good choice.
Ryan is a great sell to the "I can take care of myself; you should, too" crowd. Destroying Medicare and slashing budgets matters little if you're the type of person who believes you'll never get old and sick, are willing to work at two or three jobs to make a living wage, are not a minority where you live, and don't know anyone among your family or friends who is disabled or in desperate need of psychological help. There are legions out there who believe that about themselves.
I know, I was PUMPED about this choice! Ryan is synonymous with fiscal restraint. Only Rubio would have been an equally good choice. They both represent young conservative common-sense guys plus Ryan is a Midwesterner, always a plus in my book. Way to go Mitt! I can see Romney putting Ryan on Capitol Hill to monitor, shape, and influence Congressional spending. Slap those sanctimonious MF's around, Paul! Pushing for responsible spending should be the VP's sole job, forget gadding about on diplomatic junkets.
As far as slashing Medicare, the changes he proposes do not affect those over 55 years old. Granny is not involved but SteveinMN please continue to have as the picture in your head pushing granny over the cliff if that's what makes you happy.
In order for there to BE a MEdicare program for the 30 years olds something's gotta happen. But I am as skeptical about his social engineering for our 30-years- into- the- future scene as I am about anyone else's plan. Paul Ryan has no crystal ball. But he is touching the thrid rail and someone has got to do it, take charge of that monstor for his own generation.
Unless something changes, most of us will be over 55 eventually, with the concomitant health concerns. Having to choose between medical care and a roof over your head isn't something I'd wish on anyone--even the dog-eat-dog crowd. I get the image of Granny on an ice floe, but there are fewer of those left..better get yours while you can.
I was a little surprised Rubio didn't get the nod, but I do think Ryan is a great choice. The media is playing up his lack of foreign policy experience. Along the lines of what Iris said, I would like to see him in 4 years still not having any foreign policy experience! Stay home and hawk the hell out of Congress. I think he can be a major influence helping get our budget back under control. And he's smart enough to turn his mic off.
I think it's worse than that - the trick with vouchers is you generally have to have money to use them. Kind of like the high risk insurance pools some states have - available, but expensive. It's a handout which restricts itself to those with the money to use it.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinMN
I think he's a wonderful choice and am a little surprised that the sustainability crowd can't seem to appreciate his efforts to make social programs sustainable for the long haul, choosing instead to demonize the effort.
I'm also excited about his choice because now the opposing campaign will be forced to address the issues of the day rather than trying to make the opposing candidate out to be a felonious, dog hating, woman hating, non tax paying, evil capitalist. The Obama administration has been scared of Paul Ryan for the past several years as a result of his efforts to repair the country's current economic outlook and future liabilities. He will certainly change their focus, hopefully in a beneficial way.
The upcoming Presidential and Vice Presidential debates are going to be very enlightening, and entertaining as well.
Says two things to me...
One, trying to get some excitement with the Tea Party and the rest of the base that Romney doesn't bring.
Two, throwing in the towel for this election and setting sights on the next with a candidate with a future.
That's just my hip shot analysis, mind you, so I could be wrong. I stopped paying attention to this race the moment it was apparent Romney was going to be the nominee. He doesn't have a shot in the world of being president.
This is actually from an article on Japan today but it illustrates the problem so many countries face. Interesting to see that even though our projected percent of population being elderly is lower than many other countries, our spending is as crazy as theirs.
http://s.wsj.net/media/JBLOAT0812charts5.jpg
I have been doing SO well in my summer plan to severely limit my internet time, so have successfully been able to break my "Simple Living Forum addiction".....well, until today.....just had to come in and see what all of you thought of the Republican VP choice......was pretty much as predicted, given our various proclivities. Looks like both the Republicans AND the Democrats are happy.....something very hard to achieve, hahahaha.
I found Nate Silver's analysis to be kind of spot on to my own thoughts, and since he can detail them so much better than I can, here's the link. Lots here for Republicans to cheer, and lots of potholes that might be fallen into. Pop up some popcorn, this is going to be interesting.......
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...an/#more-33035
let the campaign truly begin.......
I've missed all you guys, BUT, have also read almost dozens of books since I broke the internet addiction, and re-acquainted myself with "real life" for a change........
Skimmed over all that has happened here in the past month since my last trip here.....lots of good stuff in the simple living departments, same-oh, same-oh on all the political stuff.....we really ARE a predictable bunch, hahahahaha.......
we are here in southern CA, enjoying our first real heat wave of the summer, after lovely weather for weeks and weeks.......it's 97 degrees in the motorhome, but I'm trying to help out the power company, who is doing their level best to prevent any rolling blackouts since the San Onofre nuclear plant is down, plus another plant offline now just in the past few days......doing our part to conserve (although having the pool to jump into periodically makes it a LOT easier, and not having to wear clothes even more so)......
I'm off again........just had to put my (well, Nate Silver's) two cents in.........chew over his thoughts.....I'll come back and see what you think. I found stuff in there for the Republicans to cheer, but stuff for the Dems to cheer as well.....we live in interesting times.
To me, fiscal restraint means figuring out how to pay with real money for whatever you buy. It does not mean being a cheap *&@$ that never spends any money on anything -- or at least the stuff privileged people don't think they need. Or treating one's buddies and campaign contributors royally and telling the poor folks to eat cake.Quote:
Originally Posted by Iris lily
So can we assume that Ryan's synonymousness with fiscal restraint includes making sure there's money to pay for what we say we want to have, even if that means -- gasp -- increasing taxes or -- warfare! -- means-testing benefit recipients? Or will he merely wield a machete?
I'm all for the former. I agree there's money that's poorly spent*. Clearly, sustainability is critical. But the right-wing version of "sustainability" and "fiscal restraint" appears to be whacking at social-program funding and infrastructure maintenance and then declaring that it's a lost cause anyway. Odd how not much time is spent similarly evaluating weapons programs and corporate-welfare benefits.
So what kind of restraint does Ryan display?
* I don't think you should get Social Security if you make enough money, no matter how much you've paid into the system. I think we need to take a serious look at our environmental policy, because without a good one, we're toast anyway. I think we should figure out why, with 5% of the world's population, we have (and pay a lot for) 25% of the world's incarcerated. Or why we pay the highest medical costs anywhere but have some of the worst outcomes. I don't think we should pay farmers to grow crops for liquor and tobacco and then spend millions more trying to ward customers away from their use. There are plenty of places to save money. People just have to want to look.
Not demonizing, just wary. Vouchers seem to be a good way to provide the same benefit to everyone, but do it in such a way that only those better off can really take advantage of it. If sustainable is the only factor of concern, though, it would probably work.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Quote:
Originally Posted by loosechickens
Join me in the very cool and lovely public library down here by the beach (where it's still very hot). Will be heading off northward soon as it's going to get even hotter here next month! Plus Gary (AKA Simply Gib) is off on another bicycle trip down the coast of Oregon and Northern Calif and keeps sending me photos of all the cool, green, misty redwood forests and beautiful coastline. Talk about gloating!! Anyways, hope you post more often LC, your insight is sorely missed.
As for Ryan...er, eye candy for the ladies (along with Mitt) but, as other's have pointed out, his ideas of "fiscal restraint" and mine aren't the same. Lots of other areas for restraint and downsizing then Medicare or Medicaid or reduction of services for the elderly, sick or poor.
I'm indifferent. A bit intrigued by that he voted for TARP, his sometimes-supportive comments on LGBT, and how that will all affect potential supporters, but otherwise unmoved. I've never thought it a great feat to put forth a swell recovery plan that gets 62% of its savings from gutting programs for the poor and elderly in order to spare the defense budget, so I don't see the economic savant everyone else does, apparently. But hey, it's still grand to live in a democracy where we get to vote for the people who most closely match our own goals and values. Onward!
I would be amenable to either of those as annoying as they are.Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveinMN
edited for grammar doh
If anything, I think standing Ryan next to Romney will show him to be even more of the empty, arrogant, entitled fluff he is as he flits from 'position' to 'position' to please whoever happens to be standing in front of him at the time. Ryan IS a man of convictions...pretty scary, mean spirited, and bleak convictions if you aren't one of the chosen few, but convictions none the less. Romney, quite obviously, has none. His choice of Ryan actually says a lot about his character, and how he would govern. As usual, he fairly easily bends to whomever pushes the hardest, in this case the far far right. It will be interesting to see how this plays with the vast majority of the electorate, right and left, who are pretty much down the middle.
Whew! Thank goodness Ryan's plan doesn't affect anyone over 55 cause, you know, grandma is perfectly willing to sell her kids, who are all in their early 50's, down the river! Yeah, that'll make them vote for ya!
Loosechickens, hi! Good to see you here.....it's been awhile. Have been to Los Algodones twice since I last saw your pixels here and I think of you every time I go. You were so right about the place! Sorry to be so extremely off topic but my excuse is I don't see you around here much these days. Glad you're doing fine, too.....RobQuote:
Originally Posted by loosechickens
It pays to read the details of Ryan's fiscal "plan": http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/op...08krugman.html
When reporters talk about polls being conducted, how many people actually are actually contacted since many fewer people have landline phones? Do pollsters dial cellphones? Does that not distort the results to the ridiculous?
I'm 45 now and I'm thinking if RomneyRyan get into office, the clock is really ticking on this citizenship for me.....Just don't think this (or any other for that matter) country is worth being in a position where the choices are roof over head or medical care.....RobQuote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I do think Ryan was a good choice for the Republican VP - as much as I am not a Republican, I still think this was a bright choice. Reason being - it's like drawing a line in the sand and attempting to differentiate the Republican party from the Democrat party. Both have been HUGE spenders - Obama AND Bush - but choosing Ryan with his budget plan and the buzz around that does seem to be a fair attempt at differentiation for those willing to not think the consequences through. And I even like Paul Ryan in the sense that I agree with him to a point - this spending IS unsustainable and something DOES have to be done. I just don't agree with his road to get to a better place. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by peggy
I could (probably should) have jumped ship right after I retired, when I still had marketable skills and wasn't so old as to be undesirable. Have you taken Canada's qualification quiz? That might be place to start.
Another reason for me to tune out the rhetoric & volunteer for the Obama campaign. I detest Rep. Ryan's budget proposals, especially privatizing the big M's. I was surprised by Romney's choice, and no one he chose would have changed my mind about him.
Just curious, why do you think Romney doesn't have much chance at winning? My take - being an Obama supporter but not as thrilled with him as I was four years ago - is that this is going to be major political theater, very fifty fifty, very very very close, lots of nasty mud flying from both sides, and just a downer for those in general who feel disconnected from the process to begin with - that would be many of us is my take. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by The Storyteller
I am not impressed. I am very close to retirement and his proposals for Medicare are unacceptable. My other opinion is that Romney's team has written off the West Coast. Why else would he make this major announcement at 6AM on a Saturday.
To give you something nice to wake up to?Quote:
Originally Posted by morning girl
LOL this board reflects society, political divisions and all.....RobQuote:
Originally Posted by Alan
Word is (the pundits) this choice doesn't quite rise to the level of Hail Mary pass. Quite.
Canada's skilled worker immigrant program is closed for new applicants, as of a few weeks ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
Historically, how significant is the VP choice in a Presidential race?
redfox, the 538 Blog post loosechickens provided (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes...an/#more-33035) discusses that.Quote:
Originally Posted by redfox
I've always liked Ryan. He seems willing to take the unpopular position when everyone around him is equivocating. It seems clear that government spending can't continue on its present course even if we double or triple taxes on whoever we care to define as the undeserving rich. I'm not sure realism is an effective political strategy, however.
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDAHL
People would rather hear that increasing taxes on anyone making over $200K per year, or families making over $250K per year will put us back on the right track to sustainability. Nevermind the fact that it would only add $70B a year to an annual deficit of $1T or more.
Also, nevermind that we are projected to increase welfare spending over the next decade to approximately $1.3T per year (that's one third of the budget for those keeping score) and that all other social spending (about $2.1T) takes up pretty much all the remainder.
Under current Democrat plans, the variance between revenues and social spending as a percentage of GDP through the year 2080 are as follows:
Attachment 869
I think it's high time someone started pointing these things out and making plans to keep the current systems from imploding.
Anyone actually serious about using tax increases to solve the deficit argues for repeal of the entire of the Bush tax cuts. Not just some over 200k nonsense. That shows how much taxes could really bring in (tax rates that were already in existence before Bush). Doing so would bring in 3.7 trillion over 10 years. While that's not enough, it's not insignificant, it's not some silly 70 billion a year. An argument that taxes may not be the *entire* solution so therefore taxes should be none of the solution is just silly on the face of it. So lets not even bother with 3.7 trillion over 10 years, lets just leave it on the table right? You can maybe add in an additional $175 billion a year if you get rid of Obama's payroll tax cuts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
I read an interesting point that the Bush tax cuts actually cost us more than this as they increased the deficit on which we are now paying interest. Makes sense, but it is all so much sunk cost in terms of future policy.
I regard of course the entire system as unsustainable in deeper ways than just the budget (although sure taken as an isolated phenomena and as if it was the only phenomena the budget is unsustainable). But I'm extrapolating further, perhaps on more uncertain ground (but the environmental unsustainability is becoming obvious just in terms of water use etc.) than just bean counting will take one.
Well, it's a start. It's not exactly like rich people were streaming out of the country on trains, planes, and ships when the income-tax rate was at pre-Bush-tax-cut levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan
But we're not going to get out of the current mess by just repealing a few income-tax cuts or even completely eliminating benefits to the poor/disabled/elderly (of which there probably will be only more in the future). We really need to look at everything, including sacred cows like military bases outside the U.S., corporate/farm subsidies, local TIF, and "entitlement" social spending. Unfortunately, Ryan's plan doesn't even touch on most of those areas.
There's no easy way out of this country especially to some rich English speaking country. Latin America sounds far and away the most promising. Learn spanish.Quote:
Canada's skilled worker immigrant program is closed for new applicants, as of a few weeks ago.
I couldn't agree with you more! This is what I have discovered personally in my comparion shopping for countries to move to so I don't have to work until I drop dead.....I am jokingly now among those who know me in Phoenix referring to Spanish as the language of not working until you drop dead....Some good bets from what I have discovered would be Chile and Uruguay, and maybe Argentina, but keep in mind Argentina has become quite corrupt since the recession of 2001. Also perhaps Ecuador and Peru, but both can have safety issues.....however both have growing populations of ex pats fleeing working until they drop dead, willing to make some sacrifices to have control of their time and to some degree their lives. RobQuote:
Originally Posted by ApatheticNoMore
Iris Lilly, true that, I heard this somewhere recently. For me this is no big loss as I am thinking of the developing world anyway - to me it is far more interesting in many ways and is some ways is more human - an example would be the concept of time in much of the developing world vs. in the US - or to be fair, in Canada or Western Europe also. Personally for me, it does take a little getting used to but I much prefer a different concept of time than the one I deal with in the US.....RobQuote:
Originally Posted by Iris lily