Nervous God Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I had to laugh when I got this in a web board I am on about USA politics. Who Is John Galt? Maybe He's Paul Ryan Rachel Slajda | February 11, 2010, 11:00AM Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) Rep. Paul Ryan's (R-WI) determination to privatize Social Security and dismantle Medicare -- what he calls a "collectivist system" -- comes, at least in part, from his longstanding devotion to the works of Ayn Rand. Rand developed the objectivist philosophy, which values the self, capitalism and laissez-faire economics. Ryan, the ranking member of the House Budget Committee, reportedly requires staffers and interns to read her opus, Atlas Shrugged, and gives out copies as gifts. In his keynote address to CPAC last year, Ryan said Obama's policies sound "like something right out of an Ayn Rand novel." Fearing political suicide, Republican leaders have tried to distance themselves from Ryan's "roadmap" budget proposal, which calls for privatizing Social Security. But Ryan is upfront about it. At a 2005 celebration of what would have been Rand's 100th birthday, Ryan called for reforming the "collectivist system" of Social Security by changing it to individual savings accounts. "If we actually accomplish this goal of personalizing Social Security, think of what we will accomplish. Every worker, every laborer in America will not only be a laborer but a capitalist. They will be an owner of society," Ryan said at the 2005 event, according to a profile written last year in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel. In interviews, he has said Republicans should frame the choice between "collectivism" and capitalism as a moral choice. "We have an opportunity to make a choice clearly once and for all in the next two elections, and we owe it to the American people to give them a clear choice: Do you want a collectivist welfare state or do you want to get back to being a free market? We need to make a moral, not just practical or statistical, case," he told Reason, a libertarian magazine, in December. In last year's CPAC address, he claimed the White House had blamed the free market for the financial crisis, then used the crisis as an "excuse to impose a more intrusive state." And despite GOP attempts to frame these entitlement reforms as something other than privatization, Ryan has been clear on the point. "Rather than depending on government for your retirement and health security, I propose to empower people to become much more self-dependent for such things in life," he said in a speech to the Hudson Institute last June. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 I suspect what the Republicans want to do is eliminate the debt the USA has from borrowing from Social Security and Medicare. GWB claimed in a speech that the USA was not going to pay the money back. I consider this injustice one of the worst injustices a civilized country has ever done to its people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Posted April 16, 2011 Report Share Posted April 16, 2011 In my college days I was a 'Greed is Good', Gordon Gecko esque devotee to captialism. A free market disciple. At my present age I am still a captialist but my definition of free market has changed. If left unchecked, the so called free market has deveastating effects on the economy as evidenced by the recent near collapse of the economy. Its interesting to note that those who advocate a free market pushed for a non free market approach to resolving the issue with government bailouts. This isn't new. Remember the Chrysler government loan about 30 years ago? I'm not an all corporations are evil person as some on the farther left of the scale would see as a trusim. However, I do believe this. If companies were allwoed to do what ever they wanted, they would rever to the lowest common denominator. If they knew they would not be prosecuted for dumping chemicals in rivers they would. If they knew they wouldn't be prosecuted for forming a syndicate with their competitors they would. On the other hand how much is too much regulation. One thing I do know is that there is a whole lot of hypocracy. Corporate welfare being at or near the top. Social welfare is demonized and how its run should be but corporate welfare dwarfs the amount we spend on social welfare but its considered sacrosanct. The well over 1 trillion dollars that has vanished...poof! from defense spending over a generation (according to our own government) could have been used for social security. Do you know the best way to get rid of welfare? Education. Teenagers who want to go to college rarely have chidlren out of wedlock. Fix education and you can take a massive bite out of welfare. I had to go to a suburban HS for calculus, latin and organic chemistry (my flirtation with chemical engineering ended with that class...lol). There is a private school in the slums of west Chicago by Marva Collins, who got famous (and got on 60 minutes) turning kids who even the Chicago school district said were unteachable and almost to a person they all went to and graduated from college. None of them had out of wedlock kids and are all contributing members of society. I guarantee you if you asked this person to cut defense waste and stop corporate welfare they wouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted April 17, 2011 Report Share Posted April 17, 2011 In my college days I was a 'Greed is Good', Gordon Gecko esque devotee to captialism. A free market disciple. At my present age I am still a captialist but my definition of free market has changed. If left unchecked, the so called free market has deveastating effects on the economy as evidenced by the recent near collapse of the economy. Its interesting to note that those who advocate a free market pushed for a non free market approach to resolving the issue with government bailouts. This isn't new. Remember the Chrysler government loan about 30 years ago? I'm not an all corporations are evil person as some on the farther left of the scale would see as a trusim. However, I do believe this. If companies were allwoed to do what ever they wanted, they would rever to the lowest common denominator. If they knew they would not be prosecuted for dumping chemicals in rivers they would. If they knew they wouldn't be prosecuted for forming a syndicate with their competitors they would. On the other hand how much is too much regulation. One thing I do know is that there is a whole lot of hypocracy. Corporate welfare being at or near the top. Social welfare is demonized and how its run should be but corporate welfare dwarfs the amount we spend on social welfare but its considered sacrosanct. [[color:red]b]The well over 1 trillion dollars that has vanished...poof! from defense spending over a generation (according to our own government) could have been used for social security. [/b][/color] Do you know the best way to get rid of welfare? Education. Teenagers who want to go to college rarely have chidlren out of wedlock. Fix education and you can take a massive bite out of welfare. I had to go to a suburban HS for calculus, latin and organic chemistry (my flirtation with chemical engineering ended with that class...lol). There is a private school in the slums of west Chicago by Marva Collins, who got famous (and got on 60 minutes) turning kids who even the Chicago school district said were unteachable and almost to a person they all went to and graduated from college. None of them had out of wedlock kids and are all contributing members of society. I guarantee you if you asked this person to cut defense waste and stop corporate welfare they wouldn't. [color:red] $1 trillion?[/color] That is what we are told. How much was it really? [color:red]Add the $2.7 trillion[/color] taken from Social Security and Medicare and it makes you wonder who is running th ountry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 << GWB claimed in a speech that the USA was not going to pay the money back. >> I've got news for you. The Dems feel the same way. Both parties are robber barons, only differing somewhat in the degree of greed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted April 18, 2011 Report Share Posted April 18, 2011 << GWB claimed in a speech that the USA was not going to pay the money back. >> I've got news for you. The Dems feel the same way. Both parties are robber barons, only differing somewhat in the degree of greed. I agree but I believe it was GWB who was the first to put it in writing that the money isn't going to be paid back. I consider this issue one of the biggest black marks against our country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.