Romney VP

[BenWSU]

I'll vote for Romney if he doesn't mess with social security - Alot of older people in my family worked 40 and 50 years paying into a system and now they need the monthly check to avoid being homeless.

[SubGod22]

I'll vote for Romney if he doesn't mess with social security - Alot of older people in my family worked 40 and 50 years paying into a system and now they need the monthly check to avoid being homeless.

If I remember correctly, Ryan doesn't change SS for those who are on it or soon to be on it. The only changes would be for those who are younger and paying into it and will never get any of it back. As it is, people I believe are getting less than they put in anyway. So what's the point of paying into it? I'd be better off if I were allowed to take the money that I'd be paying into SS and put it into some sort of savings plan. I know not everyone would choose to do such a thing, but I know I could handle it and not worry about touching it. And I'd have more of my own money when I needed it down the road than what the gov't is going to give me under the current system. And I'm not convinced I'd get anything at this point anyway. I want to say that it would only change for those under 50. And there may have been some sort of balancing act with some. It's been a while since I've read up on it.

[SB Shock]

I'm pretty sure Paul Ryan is who the Democrats hope he picks.

False bravado. MSNBC during the announcement were talking about how Ryan intelligence and remains professional even when attacked and then is able to effectively interject his side. They said he would be a great guest on their show. They even showed the clip when Obama administrative asked him to attend a speech (which then the Obama administration then ambushed him) - and they were impressed with his tempered reaction and didn't fall for the trap.

[SB Shock]

Ryan takes apart Obama

[rrshock]

When itI comes to Ryan I do have some issues with his budget as it tries to mess with a seperate retirement system that he has no clue about how it works. He is big on changing the medicare system which is absolutely broken. Im Republican but in a union so i have conflicting views of him.

[1979Shocker]

I'll pay more taxes, I just wanna agree how they are spent.

Your taxes will be used to help pay for things such as an increase in Defense spending, and if Paul Ryan's budget plan gets passed, to help pay for the $4-5 trillion dollars in tax cuts over 10 years.

If you're someone whose income is all based on investments, you're in luck. Ryan's plan wants to eliminate capital gains taxes completely. But to be fair, Romney doesn't want to eliminate it completely. But if Ryan's plan goes through unchanged, Romney won't pay any taxes. But then some were saying he didn't pay any taxes for some years anyway, so that won't be any different.

The way the Ryan plan wants to pay for all this is by cutting programs such as food stamps, education, etc. If you're a family that relies on food stamps to help supplement your grocery bill, you'll have to rely on other means to supplement it, either by cutting back on other necessities, or even cutting back on the number of meals a day. Or maybe there will be some kind person out there willing to help out. Maybe someone that no longer has to pay any taxes.

And how long does it take to balance the budget under Ryan's plan? How about 28 years.

[SubGod22]

28 years is better than the never that we have now. Handouts should absolutely be cut. People abuse the system as it is and it must be cleaned up. Nobody was ever meant to spend their entire life on welfare but we have that system in place now and it must absolutely be fixed.

And I'm tired of hearing people talk about cutting spending in education. First, gov't shouldn't be involved. Second, we continue to increase spending with zero results. We're spending more per student than ever and results are down. So why throw more money at it? Schools across the country need to cut their spending and budget better as well. There's a lot of wastefulness involved. And I have a lot of friends and family that are teachers. So it's not like I just don't care about them. I know teachers in certain districts around here that have complained that the school district keeps buying stuff that the teachers don't want or need. There's a lot of money right there that could be saved and invested elsewhere.

This country will be better off when we get people off of welfare and into jobs and paying taxes. I believe the number right now is 47% don't pay. That's absolutely ridiculous. But some want to tax those who actually earn money even more so they can give more to those who don't work and don't want to work. And don't try and twist this as I know not everyone abuses the system, but there are way too many who do. And I've also heard too many stories of people who actually work for a living who don't have the purchasing power of those who are on food stamps. And that includes military personnel. But some are ok with that. And we also need to stop rewarding single moms for cranking out babies. At a certain point, I'd be ok with the State taking the children away from the mother until she proves that she can care for them without nothing but taxpayer assistance. Lets put those kids into homes that will actually give them a chance to succeed and keep them out of a home that only teaches them to be lazy and let gov't (working people) pay for everything that they want. Not need, but want.

If you get gov't out of taking care of people, which they have no business doing anyway, people in need will find assistance through local organizations. I know my church helps a lot of people in need and you don't have to attend to receive it. But they also know who really wants and needs help and who is just looking for a free handout. We don't give money to anyone but we'll buy groceries or clothes for those who need it. And I know we're not the only church that does such things. You'd see a lot more help locally and you'd also see a lot more people get off their fat lazy asses and actually try and work for something.

Going the direction that Obama and the left are taking us won't solve ANY of these issues and will only make things worse. I'm not saying that Romney will solve it all either. None of this can be done short term or easily. It should be a long and painful process and I fear that's why it won't get done. Too many voters don't look at the long term effects of the actions that are taken in Washington. They just want what's best for them right then and there.

Healthcare must be dealt with and putting gov't in control of it is not the answer. Social Security must be dealt with because I'm paying into it and will never see a dime in return for it. Gov't needs to stop regulating and taxing the hell out of businesses so they can create jobs. We have if not the highest corporate tax rate, one of. And you want to demonize businesses for moving overseas where they don't get taxed to death? They'll stay in the States if they're not taxed like they are. Businesses are for profit. That's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. They're going to do what makes sense for themselves financially and our gov't is pushing them overseas. There's a reason that California is losing so much business from the state. They think they can tax their way into prosperity and it's kicking them in the ass. But by all means, lets just raise taxes on those who earn it their money so the lazy can have more free stuff. Our gov't is trying to do what has failed in Greece and is failing in Spain, Portugal and France as well as California. But I guess we'll be the ones to get it right....

[1979Shocker]

28 years is better than the never that we have now. Handouts should absolutely be cut. People abuse the system as it is and it must be cleaned up. Nobody was ever meant to spend their entire life on welfare but we have that system in place now and it must absolutely be fixed.

And I'm tired of hearing people talk about cutting spending in education. First, gov't shouldn't be involved. Second, we continue to increase spending with zero results. We're spending more per student than ever and results are down. So why throw more money at it? Schools across the country need to cut their spending and budget better as well. There's a lot of wastefulness involved. And I have a lot of friends and family that are teachers. So it's not like I just don't care about them. I know teachers in certain districts around here that have complained that the school district keeps buying stuff that the teachers don't want or need. There's a lot of money right there that could be saved and invested elsewhere.

This country will be better off when we get people off of welfare and into jobs and paying taxes. I believe the number right now is 47% don't pay. That's absolutely ridiculous. But some want to tax those who actually earn money even more so they can give more to those who don't work and don't want to work. And don't try and twist this as I know not everyone abuses the system, but there are way too many who do. And I've also heard too many stories of people who actually work for a living who don't have the purchasing power of those who are on food stamps. And that includes military personnel. But some are ok with that. And we also need to stop rewarding single moms for cranking out babies. At a certain point, I'd be ok with the State taking the children away from the mother until she proves that she can care for them without nothing but taxpayer assistance. Lets put those kids into homes that will actually give them a chance to succeed and keep them out of a home that only teaches them to be lazy and let gov't (working people) pay for everything that they want. Not need, but want.

If you get gov't out of taking care of people, which they have no business doing anyway, people in need will find assistance through local organizations. I know my church helps a lot of people in need and you don't have to attend to receive it. But they also know who really wants and needs help and who is just looking for a free handout. We don't give money to anyone but we'll buy groceries or clothes for those who need it. And I know we're not the only church that does such things. You'd see a lot more help locally and you'd also see a lot more people get off their fat lazy asses and actually try and work for something.

Going the direction that Obama and the left are taking us won't solve ANY of these issues and will only make things worse. I'm not saying that Romney will solve it all either. None of this can be done short term or easily. It should be a long and painful process and I fear that's why it won't get done. Too many voters don't look at the long term effects of the actions that are taken in Washington. They just want what's best for them right then and there.

Healthcare must be dealt with and putting gov't in control of it is not the answer. Social Security must be dealt with because I'm paying into it and will never see a dime in return for it. Gov't needs to stop regulating and taxing the hell out of businesses so they can create jobs. We have if not the highest corporate tax rate, one of. And you want to demonize businesses for moving overseas where they don't get taxed to death? They'll stay in the States if they're not taxed like they are. Businesses are for profit. That's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. They're going to do what makes sense for themselves financially and our gov't is pushing them overseas. There's a reason that California is losing so much business from the state. They think they can tax their way into prosperity and it's kicking them in the ass. But by all means, lets just raise taxes on those who earn it their money so the lazy can have more free stuff. Our gov't is trying to do what has failed in Greece and is failing in Spain, Portugal and France as well as California. But I guess we'll be the ones to get it right....

I agree with a lot that you say. However, there are a lot who are not abusing the system and the churches are helping them out. But there's not enough help. More churches and organization need to help out those that really need it. Then the government could get completely out of this welfare system.

[shocksrbest]

Romney vs Obama in a debate.
Ryan versus Biden in a debate.

Are you kiddin' me!? This election cycle is gonna be AWESOME!!!

LOL...gonna be great. The VP debate will be laughable.

[shocksrbest]

28 years is better than the never that we have now. Handouts should absolutely be cut. People abuse the system as it is and it must be cleaned up. Nobody was ever meant to spend their entire life on welfare but we have that system in place now and it must absolutely be fixed.

And I'm tired of hearing people talk about cutting spending in education. First, gov't shouldn't be involved. Second, we continue to increase spending with zero results. We're spending more per student than ever and results are down. So why throw more money at it? Schools across the country need to cut their spending and budget better as well. There's a lot of wastefulness involved. And I have a lot of friends and family that are teachers. So it's not like I just don't care about them. I know teachers in certain districts around here that have complained that the school district keeps buying stuff that the teachers don't want or need. There's a lot of money right there that could be saved and invested elsewhere.

This country will be better off when we get people off of welfare and into jobs and paying taxes. I believe the number right now is 47% don't pay. That's absolutely ridiculous. But some want to tax those who actually earn money even more so they can give more to those who don't work and don't want to work. And don't try and twist this as I know not everyone abuses the system, but there are way too many who do. And I've also heard too many stories of people who actually work for a living who don't have the purchasing power of those who are on food stamps. And that includes military personnel. But some are ok with that. And we also need to stop rewarding single moms for cranking out babies. At a certain point, I'd be ok with the State taking the children away from the mother until she proves that she can care for them without nothing but taxpayer assistance. Lets put those kids into homes that will actually give them a chance to succeed and keep them out of a home that only teaches them to be lazy and let gov't (working people) pay for everything that they want. Not need, but want.

If you get gov't out of taking care of people, which they have no business doing anyway, people in need will find assistance through local organizations. I know my church helps a lot of people in need and you don't have to attend to receive it. But they also know who really wants and needs help and who is just looking for a free handout. We don't give money to anyone but we'll buy groceries or clothes for those who need it. And I know we're not the only church that does such things. You'd see a lot more help locally and you'd also see a lot more people get off their fat lazy asses and actually try and work for something.

Going the direction that Obama and the left are taking us won't solve ANY of these issues and will only make things worse. I'm not saying that Romney will solve it all either. None of this can be done short term or easily. It should be a long and painful process and I fear that's why it won't get done. Too many voters don't look at the long term effects of the actions that are taken in Washington. They just want what's best for them right then and there.

Healthcare must be dealt with and putting gov't in control of it is not the answer. Social Security must be dealt with because I'm paying into it and will never see a dime in return for it. Gov't needs to stop regulating and taxing the hell out of businesses so they can create jobs. We have if not the highest corporate tax rate, one of. And you want to demonize businesses for moving overseas where they don't get taxed to death? They'll stay in the States if they're not taxed like they are. Businesses are for profit. That's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination. They're going to do what makes sense for themselves financially and our gov't is pushing them overseas. There's a reason that California is losing so much business from the state. They think they can tax their way into prosperity and it's kicking them in the ass. But by all means, lets just raise taxes on those who earn it their money so the lazy can have more free stuff. Our gov't is trying to do what has failed in Greece and is failing in Spain, Portugal and France as well as California. But I guess we'll be the ones to get it right....

You are right on all counts...very well articulated--IMO.

[SubGod22]

I believe churches and other organizations would be more involved. They can only help those who seek help. But right now, we have far too many that will sit back and let gov't "take care of them" instead of making an effort to take care of themselves or find those who will help them get on their feet. I don't have a big problem with gov't helping out for a small time period to help someone get back on their feet. I do think there are other organizations/churches that could and should do it, but I'm ok with some help. But there's no reason someone should be on it as long as they are. And if gov't pulled out now, I can guarantee that most would find help elsewhere and many would end up finally looking for work. It's easier to accept the free handouts when you don't have to do anything for it. Searching out churches/organizations that will help is different. Plus, those entities aren't going to just give you stuff because you want it.

I truly believe that we as Americans will help our neighbors when they're in need. And we can do it better and more efficiently than Washington. And I'm not saying you ax the program and be done with it. And not just welfare. But drastic decisions HAVE to be be made or we're in deep crap.

That's why I believe the Ryan plan is just the first step towards such goals. I wouldn't mind seeing us go farther, but the people will have a hard enough time dealing with the first step. And sometimes it has to get worse before it gets better, but that doesn't mean it was the wrong decision. And I hope I didn't come off as too harsh in my previous post. But I honestly believe that drastic steps must be taken and people need to learn to take care of themselves. Others will help as they learn and adjust. I have no doubt in my mind that we as a people don't want to see others suffer. But it's hard for many to step out and help those who have a "give me" attitude and who are already taking more than they need from a system that shouldn't have ever been designed to allow people to live like they do off it. I know I've focused more on welfare here, but there are many other issues as well. And I wish we'd drug test those who receive handouts. As others have said, if I have to pass a drug test to work and make money for you to take for doing nothing, the least you can do is pee in a cup and prove you're not wasting money on drugs and whatnot.

[1979Shocker]

One other thing about the 28 years to balance the budget in Ryan's plan. If the Democrats in Congress said they had a plan to balance the budget, but it would take 28 years to do it, the Republicans in Congress and everyone on here would be up in arms about it. I haven't heard anyone complain about it. At least not on here.

[SubGod22]

I'll give you that it should be done faster. But are people going to accept what it would take to get done? We're talking about even more drastic cuts in spending/funding/handouts. We're not talking about small steps, but giant leaps. I think with Ryan, this plan starts at 28 years, but will speed up once more steps are taken. Maybe I give Ryan too much credit, but I don't think that this plan ends what he's trying to do.

And I'll be honest, if the Dems presented a plan that I thought would work to reduce spending and whatnot, I'd be ok if the first report said 28 years as long as I felt there were more steps that would follow and bring that number down. I do think that's what we see with Ryan and some of the others.

Either way, voters are going to have to see that these are necessary steps that have to be taken for their own good. And maybe not their own good, but for that of their children or grandchildren. I'm fairly young, but if I have to suffer, so be it. I look at my nieces and pray that they don't have to face what we are and that we deal with it. And if I'm blessed enough to have children someday, I sure as hell don't want them to be dealing with the crap that we've been left by those before us. We need to stand up and say enough is enough and at least start us on a path to remedy some of these issues.

[60Shock]

Oops, I really blew that one.

And now I will very probably be banned from the Bat Cave indefinitely and my heafty $5 check I sent to support Mr. West's campaign won't fly because of my mix-up in names.

Woe is me.

[Wu du Nord]

28 years is better than the never that we have now.

Just so you know: 28 years, in this game, means never.

Handouts should absolutely be cut.

Perhaps, but you're walking into some strange territory.

First, gov't shouldn't be involved [in education].

You do realize what the 'S' in WSU stands for, right? Education is absolutely, precisely and unquestionably one of the specific areas in which the mechanisms of the private sector are inadequate to the task. This is not to say that any and every form of government involvement in education is correct, good, or even capable of producing positive results; however, your claim that government shouldn't be involved in education demonstrates that your own government has failed you. (I'm saying you're uneducated, in case you didn't catch that subtle turn of phrase.)

This country will be better off when we get people off of welfare and into jobs and paying taxes. I believe the number right now is 47% don't pay. That's absolutely ridiculous. But some want to tax those who actually earn money even more so they can give more to those who don't work and don't want to work. And don't try and twist this as I know not everyone abuses the system, but there are way too many who do. And I've also heard too many stories of people who actually work for a living who don't have the purchasing power of those who are on food stamps. And that includes military personnel. But some are ok with that. And we also need to stop rewarding single moms for cranking out babies. At a certain point, I'd be ok with the State taking the children away from the mother until she proves that she can care for them without nothing but taxpayer assistance. Lets put those kids into homes that will actually give them a chance to succeed and keep them out of a home that only teaches them to be lazy and let gov't (working people) pay for everything that they want. Not need, but want.

Here you suggest that governments could or should be in the business of redistributing children. In your world, an entity that can't and shouldn't be trusted to redistribute money should be in the business of determining the fitness of a parent and the adequacy of a family to raise a child. Redistribute wealth? Hells no. Redistribute children? Hells to the rafters yes.

Also your claim that 47% of people don't pay taxes is false. You know better than that. Do we need to revisit the previous discussion about how the government subsidized education that you enjoy has rendered you incapable of making sense of the world around you? At best, you intended to highlight payment of Federal Income Taxes. That's quite different from taxes at large. Every single person, regardless of income levels, spending money in SG country paid for construction of Intrust Arena.

If you get gov't out of taking care of people, which they have no business doing anyway, people in need will find assistance through local organizations.

Think for a moment about the words 'organization' and 'government'. With any luck you're now laughing with me at the absurdity of your statement here.

Going the direction that Obama and the left are taking us won't solve ANY of these issues and will only make things worse. I'm not saying that Romney will solve it all either. None of this can be done short term or easily. It should be a long and painful process and I fear that's why it won't get done. Too many voters don't look at the long term effects of the actions that are taken in Washington. They just want what's best for them right then and there.

Are you saying that there are too many single issue 'values voters' participating in American elections? That it's just possible that rushing people to the polls to vote on issues like abortion and chicken sandwiches is actually bad for America? That supporting political parties in a fashion best suited for promoting local sports teams might not result in good policy?

Healthcare must be dealt with and putting gov't in control of it is not the answer.

In what magic kingdom is this working today?

Social Security must be dealt with because I'm paying into it and will never see a dime in return for it.

Haha.

Businesses are for profit. That's not a bad thing by any stretch of the imagination.

The first sentence is a truism. Thanks. The second sentence is, in this case, an unwarranted and unnecessary moral claim. I don't believe you've thought this through.

Ultimately, you would do well to listen to a little less AM radio - unless of course it's 1330 and the Shockers are playing - do a lot less regurgitation and do a lot more looking at the world around you. Think about the people you encounter, the people you know, the people you influence, and the people that influence you. You're vomiting a narrative that you assume is based on actual happenings in the world, and it's poisoning your mind to a glob of useless ruin and rot.