For Eisboch...a different view of Ryan's Plans

External Since: Oct 28, 2011 Posts: 31

Mr. Ryan’s Cramped Vision
NY Times

Mitt Romney’s safe and squishy campaign just took on a much harder edge.
A candidate of no details — I’ll cut the budget but no need to explain
just how — has named a vice-presidential running mate, Paul Ryan, whose
vision is filled with endless columns of minus signs. Voters will now be
able to see with painful clarity just what the Republican Party has in
store for them.

As House Budget Committee chairman, Mr. Ryan has drawn a blueprint of a
government that will be absent when people need it the most. It will not
be there when the unemployed need job training, or when a struggling
student needs help to get into college. It will not be there when a
miner needs more than a hardhat for protection, or when a city is unable
to replace a crumbling bridge.

And it will be silent when the elderly cannot keep up with the costs of
M.R.I.’s or prescription medicines, or when the poor and uninsured
become increasingly sick through lack of preventive care.

More than three-fifths of the cuts proposed by Mr. Ryan, and eagerly
accepted by the Tea Party-driven House, come from programs for
low-income Americans. That means billions of dollars lost for job
training for the displaced, Pell grants for students and food stamps for
the hungry. These cuts are so severe that the nation’s Catholic bishops
raised their voices in protest at the shredding of the nation’s moral
obligations.

Mr. Ryan’s budget “will hurt hungry children, poor families, vulnerable
seniors and workers who cannot find employment,” the bishops wrote in an
April letter to the House. “These cuts are unjustified and wrong.”

Mr. Ryan responded that he was helping the poor by eliminating their
dependence on the government. And yet he has failed to explain how he
would make them self-sufficient — how, in fact, a radical transformation
of government would magically turn around an economy that is starving
for assistance. At a time when state and local government layoffs are
the principal factor in unemployment, the Ryan budget would cut aid to
desperate governments by at least 20 percent, far below historical
levels, on top of other cuts to mass transit and highway spending.

Those are the kinds of reductions voters of all income levels would
actually feel. People might nod their heads at Mr. Romney’s nostrums of
smaller government, but they are likely to feel quite different when
they realize Mr. Ryan plans to take away their new sewage treatment
plant, the asphalt for their streets, and the replacements for retiring
police officers and firefighters.

All of this will be accompanied, of course, by even greater tax
giveaways to the rich, and extravagant benefits to powerful military
contractors. Business leaders will be granted their wish for severely
diminished watchdogs over the environment, mine safety and food quality.

Mr. Romney had already praised the Ryan budget as “excellent work,” but
until Saturday the deliberate ambiguity of his own plans gave him a
little room for distance, an opportunity to sketch out a more humane
vision of government’s role. By putting Mr. Ryan’s callousness on his
ticket, he may have lost that chance.

--
I'm a liberal because the militant fundamentalist ignorant
science-denying religious xenophobic corporate oligarchy of modern
Republican conservatism just doesn't work for me or my country.

External Since: Feb 19, 2011 Posts: 15

"X ` Man" wrote in message

Mr. Ryan’s Cramped Vision
NY Times

Mitt Romney’s safe and squishy campaign just took on a much harder
edge.
A candidate of no details — I’ll cut the budget but no need to explain
just how — has named a vice-presidential running mate, Paul Ryan,
whose
vision is filled with endless columns of minus signs. Voters will now
be
able to see with painful clarity just what the Republican Party has in
store for them.

As House Budget Committee chairman, Mr. Ryan has drawn a blueprint of
a
government that will be absent when people need it the most. It will
not
be there when the unemployed need job training, or when a struggling
student needs help to get into college. It will not be there when a
miner needs more than a hardhat for protection, or when a city is
unable
to replace a crumbling bridge.

And it will be silent when the elderly cannot keep up with the costs
of
M.R.I.’s or prescription medicines, or when the poor and uninsured
become increasingly sick through lack of preventive care.

More than three-fifths of the cuts proposed by Mr. Ryan, and eagerly
accepted by the Tea Party-driven House, come from programs for
low-income Americans. That means billions of dollars lost for job
training for the displaced, Pell grants for students and food stamps
for
the hungry. These cuts are so severe that the nation’s Catholic
bishops
raised their voices in protest at the shredding of the nation’s moral
obligations.

Mr. Ryan’s budget “will hurt hungry children, poor families,
vulnerable
seniors and workers who cannot find employment,” the bishops wrote in
an
April letter to the House. “These cuts are unjustified and wrong.”

Mr. Ryan responded that he was helping the poor by eliminating their
dependence on the government. And yet he has failed to explain how he
would make them self-sufficient — how, in fact, a radical
transformation
of government would magically turn around an economy that is starving
for assistance. At a time when state and local government layoffs are
the principal factor in unemployment, the Ryan budget would cut aid to
desperate governments by at least 20 percent, far below historical
levels, on top of other cuts to mass transit and highway spending.

Those are the kinds of reductions voters of all income levels would
actually feel. People might nod their heads at Mr. Romney’s nostrums
of
smaller government, but they are likely to feel quite different when
they realize Mr. Ryan plans to take away their new sewage treatment
plant, the asphalt for their streets, and the replacements for
retiring
police officers and firefighters.

All of this will be accompanied, of course, by even greater tax
giveaways to the rich, and extravagant benefits to powerful military
contractors. Business leaders will be granted their wish for severely
diminished watchdogs over the environment, mine safety and food
quality.

Mr. Romney had already praised the Ryan budget as “excellent work,”
but
until Saturday the deliberate ambiguity of his own plans gave him a
little room for distance, an opportunity to sketch out a more humane
vision of government’s role. By putting Mr. Ryan’s callousness on his
ticket, he may have lost that chance.

--------------------------------------------------------------

What is missing in this NY Times article is the basis for the debate.
Government spending is soon to bankrupt this country ... in fact
according to many economists it already has. Entitlement programs
are at an all time high. The food stamp program is no longer
financially supported by the tax base. But some want to spend even
more.

It would be nice if we could, but we can't. You can tax the 1% up
the kazoo and it might make a nice political statement but it's a drop
in the bucket compared to what is needed. You can cut defense
spending by 50% and it won't return the USA to financial solvency ...
in fact it will hurt even more in terms of job and tax revenue losses.
Also a bad time to start hacking away at defense while nut cases like
Putin is on a mission to bring Russia's military back up to Cold War
status.

Spending has to be cut across the board .... but in a responsible
manner.