Skip to comments.Ryan: Romney would protect social safety nets
Posted on 10/24/2012 5:04:59 AM PDT by KantianBurke
AURORA, COLO. -- Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan is planning to tell poor voters they would be better off if he and Mitt Romney win the White House and will urge middle-class and independent voters to consider whether they want another four years like the past ones under President Barack Obama.
Ryan, in remarks prepared for delivery Wednesday afternoon at Cleveland State University, was set to promise to Americans most in need that a Romney-Ryan administration would protect safety-net programs for them while overhauling benefits for wealthier Americans who might not necessarily need Social Security in their later years.
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
Socialism by another name.
I’m not a Romney fan but the simple fact is that welfare, social security, unemployment, etc aren’t going away, period. They never were going away no matter who won the nomination and eventually the white house.
The trick is to spur real job creation. Those who fell into the safety net last will likely rush back to work and from there you start whittling away at the edges to encourage the less eager.
Well I agree that these programs won’t go away through any voluntary political decision, but they will either go away or be radically reduced. This will happen when America is insolvent and is no longer able to borrow money. Once America’s credit is revoked, there are going to be a lot of sacred cows thrown onto the bonfire. Reality is going to smack America upside the head big time, because a majority of Americans are unable or unwilling to accept the hard truth that it can’t afford these programs. The lights will only come on when America gets hit with a Greek tragedy.
Actually, the problem of crime in the streets in this country is caused by the welfare “safety net.” If you take away welfare, food stamps, free housing, and Obamaphones, people will have to be responsible for themselves in order to survive. That constraint has a way of dis-incentivizing criminal behavior.
Well, I’ll agree that poor voters will be better off with President Romney. A rising economy floats all boats, whereas Obama is a lead weight around everyone’s neck.
Just get rid of all agencies and funding which should be the purview of State, County and/or local bodies.
Defund every non-essential program: i.e. PBS, Planned Parenthood and scientific research that should be voluntarily supported by donors or charities.
Income taxes are NOT VOLUNTARY and it is unconcionable to use those monies to initiate or fund programs which are against the religion or other principles of a free people.
I have no problem with a safety net.
I do have a problem with people that purposely jump into the net, and/or make no effort to climb out.
It is not something you can take a hatchet to - it will have to be phased out slowly. Else millions will suffer and die due to the crime wave that hits if all the “largess” is just cut off at once. Reality exists and we live in it...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.