Thursday, November 11, 2010

Republican Tea Party Senator-Elect Rand Paul Advocates Cutting Social Security and Medicare! (Feed the Elderly Cat Food!)

WASHINGTON - Tea Party superstar Rand Paul bucked the GOP leadership on Sunday by pushing drastic budget-cutting proposals, including a 10% pay slash for federal workers.

Paul, the Republican senator-elect from Kentucky, said on ABC's "This Week" that Social Security, Medicare and defense should also be "on the table."

"You have to look at entitlements," he said.

Another person advocating CAT FOOD for the elderly!


ultima said...

The basic question is whether you want to be a part of the problem or a part of the solution. If the latter, you have to look at entitlements because they are such a large part of the federal budget. Rand Paul is just telling it like it is and his position has already been validated by the draft presentedby the Co-chairs of the Debt Reduction Committee. It is absurd to think that any debt reduction proposal can be formulated that will be painless

ultima said...

Strengthen Social Security for the long haul by returning the system to sustainable solvency.
Prevent the 22% across the board benefit cut projected to occur in 2037.
Reduce elderly poverty by putting into place a new, effective special minimum benefit.
Enable system to continue to provide for a secure retirement as the population grows older and Americans live longer.
Reform Social Security for its own sake, not for deficit reduction.

ultima said...

Rand Paul is advocating a 10% cut in federal salaries. This is about the amount of the differential between federal and private salaries. The Commission proposes a 3 year freeze on military and civilian federal employees. I say freeze them until they reach parity of private company salaries. Perhaps benefits should also be taken into account. I think there are a lot more unemployed in the private economy than there is in the federal government. That must be worth something.

ultima said...

Don't forget Obama appointed the Commission by executive order and appointed the co-chairs. So Rand Paul is in some sense just agreeing with the President's Committee.

Dee said...

You CHOOSE to remain PART OF THE PROBLEM by continuing to be the mouthpiece for Big Business. You and Rand Paul want to extend the Bush Tax cuts to the 1% billionaires. You want Big Business to continue to send jobs Off Shore and hide their assetts in offshore Tax Shelters. Your side continues to advocate removing regulations. Pollute, pollute, pollute. Disregard OSHA safety guidelines. Let diseases infiltrate our Meat and Poultry plants. How many more outbreaks will we see? Eggs.. Spinach.. etc. etc. etc.

You just don't care do you!

Stop siding with the Thugs like Rand Paul (his thugs stomping a waifish woman in the head!) and the Koch Brothers. Try siding with the American People and Jobs and our President FOR A CHANGE!!

Dee said...

And one more thing:
WHY DO RETHUGLICANS ALWAYS ATTACK SENIORS! Grandma and Grandpa who have WORKED all of their lives and now should rest and be able to collect their social security and medicare which they have PAID INTO ALL OF THEIR LIVES!!

Most Seniors collect only about $1000 a month. Then they have to pay about $110 a month for Medicare. It is NOT free. Then they have to pay 20% for doctor visits and BUY a prescription drug plan from a healthcare provider. This is about $50 a month. They barely survive on this YET YOU ALL call it an "entitlement."

I hope ALL of the American People WAKE UP to what YOU ALL are trying to do to our Seniors!

Dee said...

You are SO out of touch.

This statement of yours (or whoevers) is so ludicrous: "Enable system to continue to provide for a secure retirement."

Don't you realize what is happening in Business today? Business is so concerned about profits and CEO bonuses that many companies NO LONGER PROVIDE retirement packages to their employees (except for their Top Managers). Many businesses NO LONGER offer any form of Health Benefits. And those that do are having their employees pay growing copays via weekly payroll deductions.

Healthcare Benefit costs have skyrocketed, yet the 3rd quarter 2010 profits for the Top 10 Healthcare providers have increased to the highest level in History.

Don't you care about the Seniors? Why is it you have NO QUALMs about cutting their Benefits (which you SHAMEFULLY CALL ENTITLEMENTS) Yet NOT ONE WORD about the Massive Profits of Big Business and their continued offshoring of American Jobs. All you can squawk about is extending the taxcuts and making Seniors Eat CAT FOOD!

SHAME ON YOU ReThuglicans! Especially the reprehensible Rand Paul!

ultima said...

Now, now, let's not start the name-calling again, whether it is Rand Paul or his minions.

Keep in mind that I am a senior citizen on social security and medicare and have an older brother and older sister who are dependent on both of those programs. I worry constantly about what cut backs in social security and medicare will mean to my children who are less than 20 years away from age 65.

You still haven't mentioned your solution. I am not in favor of extending the tax cuts for the Buffets and Gates but I think we would be foolish to end them for lesser lights in small businesses who we are depending upon to create the jobs to get our economy moving. If that can be done another way, I am all for it.

I don't understand why you object to the word "entitlements". Its usage is very common in all branches of government and by the president himself. I suggest you look it up in Wiki so you will know what you are talking about.

I am not the mouthpiece for big business or anyone who ships jobs overseas.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I have never advocated the removal of regulations that are essential to our food supply and the quality of our environment. You, on the other hand, are encouraging unfettered growth by your advocacy for illegal aliens and immigration reform that will cause our population to balloon, creating untold havoc with our environment, quality of life, and standard of living.

You wrote, "They barely survive on this YET YOU ALL call it an "entitlement."" That is the proper name for it and that name is used by everyone.

You wrote, "This statement of yours (or whoevers) is so ludicrous: "Enable system to continue to provide for a secure retirement."

Maybe so, but that is not my statement. It is the stated goal of the debt reduction committee, tempered, I think, by reality.

I think we should find a way to keep hedge fund managers like George Soros from becoming billionaires and receiving huge bonuses. I would favor a 75% tax rate for those folks.

I think we need all the creative thinking we can find to address this problem. I personally favor major reductions in the federal goverment staffing, programs and departments. As Rand Paul mentioned federal employees are overpaid as are many state employees. Let's curb those excesses as one element of the solution.

Re: Social Security, I have long been an advocate of removing the cap on taxable income while limiting the maximum benefit to the present level as adjusted annually for inflation. There is a move in that direction in the debt reduction plan but it doesn't go far enough.

What are your ideas?

Dee said...

I'm glad you are at least acknowledging the needs of our Senior Citizens and at least you know seniors, like many others, who are in such desperate straits. I've been talking to my friend MeeMaw and she is in the Healthcare Industry. She talks to desperate Seniors every day.

I don't know how any of us could even consider touching Social Security or Medicare. They are NOT Free. They are NOT entitlements, I don't care how many bureaucrats or their friends in the media use the term. They do NOT recieve much from these Benefits which they PAID for all of their lives.

I've shared my solutions with you but you do not acknowledge them.
1. DO NOT extend the Tax Cuts to the rich which would enable Trillions back into our Budget/Economy.
2. Stop/Limit Outsourcing of our jobs offshore and payback Big Business who comply with taxcuts. (which means more taxes by the increase of those employed)

WHY Don't YOU Acknowledge MY Recommendations?

These are Creative Solutions and they WILL WORK!

Anonymous said...

I don't know what the "average" SS monthly benefit is. Mine is much higher than $1,000 a month. Medicare is not $110.00 a month either. It is around $93.00 per month for Part A. I have absolutely no co-pay to see my doctor. I had a major operation and I never paid one damned dime! My prescriptions only have a $5.00 co-pay. Know what the hell you are talking about before spouting nonsense.

Dee said...

Bad Anon,

What IS Sad is you don't have a clue about what you are talking about. You live in California where all of the Healthcare Providers propagate. You have Medicare Advantage offered by a Healthcare Provider. You pay for Part B of Medicare, for your service area, $95 a month.

You don't know this but your healthcare provider only provides services to those areas where they reap the most revenue/gain and that is why your co-pays are so low.

Most Medicare A, B recipients do NOT receive the same advantages you do. The Healthcare providers that support your service area are reaping in all the gains from the participating physicians who are willing to participate in HMO, HMOPOS and HMOPPOs that participate -- many of whom are upcoding or out and out taking advantage or defrauding the system.

What is sad is, most Americans, just like you, are totally BLIND to the abuses.

ultima said...

Dee wrote, "WHY Don't YOU Acknowledge MY Recommendations?"

I'm afraid your memory is fading. I did acknowledge those ideas the first time you mentioned them. Do you really think that is enough to do the job? As I recall, the increased revenues from a tax increase on the rich would be $700 billion over ten years. I wonder what the impact of that would be on job creation in small businesses whose propriators earn more than $250,000/year. As someone pointed out $250,000 hardly qualifies as "rich" now that we are talking about trillions. I think to avoid an adverse impact on job creation I would advocate raising the taxes on everyone who earns more than $100 million immediately; those who earn $50 million plus next year; $25 million plus the following year; $5 million the third year and then $250,000 plus the fourth year if the economy has recovered; otherwise put that fourth year figure at $1 million.

Nobody seems to be interested in stopping the exportation of jobs; it seems this is all about free trade. Obama gave away the farm in India and came away empty handed from Korea. I'm not much of free trader myself even though both democrats and republicans have been free trade advocates. I do believe we must avoid unfair tariffs that could initiate a trade war and plunge the world into a deep depression. Was it the Smoot-Hawley Tariffs that had an adverse effect last time tariffs were tried or was that bill about something else?

Do you acknowledge my suggestions?

Page Hits