Rep. Paul Ryan calls for cuts in anti-poverty programs


#21

HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE: The Democrats want a 10% increase in spending on these programs & the Republicans counter w/ 5% increase in spending. Democrats, w/ the help of the liberal media, announce that the Republicans want to cut the anti poverty programs by 50%.
Gullible and uninformed public is required to keep this old myth afloat.


#22

Add point #5:

The liberal propaganda scares people who, like Holly, legitimately receive assistance, thus pushing them firmly into the liberal camp (regardless of their feelings about other liberal planks) (No, I’m not saying “Holly” is in a particular camp…I’m saying “people like Holly”…)


#23

The Law of Distribution says we will have rich and poor. Christ even stated that the poor will always be with us. It’s all relative. We can only hope we all will become more prosperous going forward.


#24

And Obama has been in the WH for over 5 years. :confused: Bush’s socialist lite agenda and Obama’s full speed ahead authoritarianism have necessarily lead to greater wealth inequality. The government class lords over us as if we were vassals. And many of us are all too willing to submit. How much failure are YOU willing to tolerate before you reject progressivism? Rob


#25

Some quick back-of-the envelope figuring: In 2013, the government spent $851 billion just on Medicaid and Medicare. From numbers on Wikipedia (yes, I know…), that’s almost $10,000 per person. That’s over $4000 more than my current insurance, which covers several things that Medicaid/Medicare doesn’t.


#26

Check this out.


#27

Check this out. You can read more about him through this search.

And then, of course, we have John Paul II’s commentary (which I’m sure your friend at the New York Times would also disapprove):

By intervening directly and depriving society of its responsibility, the Social Assistance State leads to a loss of human energies and an inordinate increase of public agencies, which are dominated more by bureaucratic ways of thinking than by concern for serving their clients, and which are accompanied by an enormous increase in spending.
[RIGHT]Encyclical Centesimus Annus, 48
[/RIGHT]
Coupled with the fact that the actual report did not call for increasing or decreasing a single thing, but, rather reported on the effectiveness of existing programs, I’m not sure what your point is. Frankly, it seems as if you’re shadow boxing.


#28

Not trying to be argumentative or uncharitable, and I speak as a Conservative-leaning man myself, but it’s pretty silly to assume that one side has all the facts and the other side is just “propaganda”. Perhaps a little reflection into the nature of our own bias and assumptions is in order

God Bless


#29

You mean like Solyndra? Obama is the king of crony “capitalists”. :eek: Rob


#30

Neither side has any facts because neither side understands basic economics, or cause and effect for that matter. Politicians only care about the short-term and what special interest groups they can appease to get elected.


#31

What an anti-inspiring leader. No vision. Just bean counting. Build up the economy first; cut the waste, fraud and abuse second. Stop welfare? Stop corporate welfare. Oops. Too big and powerful a lobby. Ryan made no mention of the blood letting at the IRS, with 27 billion in fraudulent refunds in a three-year period. How about stopping that hemorrhage first? Ryan ignored the risk of a second “too big to fail” scenario as no regs are effectively controlling derivaties. This isn’t Tea Party, it’s “Tea for Two,” quaint and lacking all creativity. God help us. He’s the smart one.


#32

What a noteworthy and profound comment!

It’s rare that I see such insight into a complex issue like this. Perhaps a person like yourself can go to post 10 ( there is a link to the actual document in that post) and show the rest of us the specific examples upon which you based your analysis.


#33

Exactly! Its just another example at how conservative policies are not in line with catholic teaching just like the Bishops have said.


#34

Please refer to the post immediately above. Perhaps you can identify something particular in the actual document itself.

But I doubt it.


#35

You hit it on the nose. So far all I’ve seen from the liberal posters is ad hominem attacks and distortions devoid of any substance at all. And fear mongering. I mean, if you disagree with Ryan, where specifically do you disagree? We are getting no answers from the usual suspects. I believe the left fears the truth because it threatens the whole basis for their source of power. The war on poverty started 48 years ago. It has succeeded only in electing politicians. It hasn’t reduced poverty at all.

Ishii


#36

Like the advice given to some lawyers: *“If you have the law, hammer the law. If you have the facts, hammer the facts. If you have neither the law nor the facts, hammer the table” *


#37

I disagree with his priorities.

If I had to look for places to cut spending, welfare for the poor, elderly and disabled would be way down on the list.


#38

A link to the report the news is talking about is at post #10. Could you please take a look at it and say specifically what is said there that is false, inaccurate, or just plain wrong-headed? Be specific, though.


#39

We live in an age where a reduction in the scheduled increase is considered a “cut” so I don’t believe anything I read anymore without thoroughly vetting it.


#40

They should be cut because they don’t work.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.