Well Said Paul Ryan

[zitothebrave]

https://sojo.net/articles/watch-paul...nts-about-poor

And an important thing in the world of politics, you can be wrong, you can change your opinion, you don't need to be stubborn.

[striker42]

The hostility that has pervaded American politics the last 20 years or so has been sickening. It's gotten progressively worse so that we're reaching the point that otherwise rational people actually advocate that people who disagree with them should be punished for their disagreement. And radicalization of ideas breeds radicalization of idea. When someone is screaming at you that you're evil, wrong, and need to be punished all the while completely ignoring what you want you're going to tend to react in kind. People get caught up in it.

I hope more people on both sides take Paul Ryan's lead.

[57Brave]

I didn't notice where he took his endorsement of Trump or Cruz off the table -- so his comments ring hollow.
Faith without works ...
....

On a more personal note,
Does this mean we have to stop accusing people people we disagree with of infanticide ?

[57Brave]

oh and one more thing before I have to go off and be a maker the rest of the day,

Does this make Ryan a partisan hack ?
I've been saying for 10 years he was wrong in his assessment and was called a "partisan hack"
By him admitting it -- is he now the wearer of that crown ?

What a crock a **** - "we" never learns

just noticed this
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ort-of-anyway/

[striker42]

oh and one more thing before I have to go off and be a maker the rest of the day,

Does this make Ryan a partisan hack ?
I've been saying for 10 years he was wrong in his assessment and was called a "partisan hack"
By him admitting it -- is he now the wearer of that crown ?

What a crock a **** - "we" never learns

just noticed this
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ort-of-anyway/

This post is a good example of what is wrong with political discourse in this country. Someone steps up, makes a concession, and admits they were wrong and instead of accepting it as a positive step, you have the other side of the aisle laying into the guy. No wonder compromise has become impossible in Washington. People have become incapable of seeing anything positive in people who ascribe to a different political viewpoint.

[57Brave]

He made no concessions. He is still willing to support Cruz or Trump and the accompanying rhetoric. He is still espousing the same policies that define his faux confessional .

Like I said faith without works is dead.

I am perfectly willing to see something positive in Ryan. However all he has done is give , an up to this point , empty speech.

You did not read the WP piece that says prettyuch what I said. Put yor money where your mouth is

[acesfull86]

On a more personal note,
Does this mean we have to stop accusing people people we disagree with of infanticide ?

Maybe when we stop accusing those who don't advocate for more gun control of having blood on their hands

[BedellBrave]

This post is a good example of what is wrong with political discourse in this country. Someone steps up, makes a concession, and admits they were wrong and instead of accepting it as a positive step, you have the other side of the aisle laying into the guy. No wonder compromise has become impossible in Washington. People have become incapable of seeing anything positive in people who ascribe to a different political viewpoint.

57 being 57. Striker, you knew he'd chime in the way he did. Like death and taxes as they say.

[50PoundHead]

The hostility that has pervaded American politics the last 20 years or so has been sickening. It's gotten progressively worse so that we're reaching the point that otherwise rational people actually advocate that people who disagree with them should be punished for their disagreement. And radicalization of ideas breeds radicalization of idea. When someone is screaming at you that you're evil, wrong, and need to be punished all the while completely ignoring what you want you're going to tend to react in kind. People get caught up in it.

I hope more people on both sides take Paul Ryan's lead.

You are a young man indeed. I think the invective has been fierce since the turbulent 1960s. The big difference now is that with media saturation, the 24-hour news cycle, and the various other modes of social connectivity, things have undoubtedly gotten nastier. One of the things that the new technology has accomplished is that it used to be "every town had a nut," but now these nuts can all gather on the internet and make a pretty big community of nuts. Makes for louder voices.

[57Brave]

I will be willing to take Ryan at his word when he legislates according to his talk.
My money says he will still see makers and takers. But with a bow and a pearl necklace .
That is his history

[57Brave]

57 being 57. Striker, you knew he'd chime in the way he did. Like death and taxes as they say.

I thought we were talking about Speaker Ryan

[57Brave]

The Ryan plan would also increase the full retirement age, currently scheduled to reach age 67 for people born in 1960 or later. Ryan would accelerate this schedule by one year and would index the retirement age to life expectancy thereafter. As a result of indexing, the full retirement age would increase by one month approximately every two years. For example, the full retirement age would be about 68 for people born in 1983. Although frequently not understood, increasing the full retirement age results in a cut in benefits at any given age — it is an across-the-board cut that applies to everyone, regardless of the age at which they retire.[21]



http://www.cbpp.org/research/the-rya...cal-priorities

[57Brave]

March 2016, Cherrie Bucknor and Dean Baker

A recurring theme in debates over Social Security policy is that workers should be encouraged to work later into their lives by raising the age at which they can get full benefits. Implicit in this argument is that most workers are in a situation where they would be able to work to an older age; however, many older workers stop working because they can no longer meet the physical demands of their job.

In 2010, CEPR did an analysis that examined the percentage of older workers (ages 58 and over) who either worked in physically demanding jobs or in difficult work conditions. This paper is an update of that earlier study and is based on data from 2014.

Using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) and Occupational Information Network (O*NET) it finds that in 2014, 8.0 million workers ages 58 and older (34.5 percent) had physically demanding jobs, while 5.1 million workers ages 58 and older (22.1 percent) had jobs with difficult working conditions. About 10.2 million workers ages 58 and older (43.8 percent) were employed either in physically demanding jobs or jobs with difficult working conditions. The workers who were most likely to be in these jobs were Latinos, the least educated (less than a high school diploma), immigrants, and the lowest wage earners.

Physically demanding jobs include general physical activities, handling and moving objects, spending significant time standing, walking or running, making repetitive motions, or having any highly physically demanding work. Highly physically demanding jobs require dynamic, explosive, static, or trunk strength, bending or twisting of the body, stamina, maintaining balance, or kneeling or crouching. Difficult working conditions include working in a cramped workspace, labor outdoors, or exposure to abnormal temperatures, contaminants, hazardous equipment, whole body vibration, or distracting or uncomfortable noise.

[Oklahomahawk]

I applaud what Ryan said, at least as a starting point. I'm just not convinced it was really meant the way people are taking it. Perhaps it's because I've grown to be such a cynic, perhaps it's something else. Here's an article posted by a friend of mine on Facebook. I have no idea if it's true or not, but it is worth thinking about as to Ryan's POSSIBLE motives in his speech.

Paul Ryan...

[goldfly]

i will take what he said with a grain of salt but it's a good first step

will see what his 2nd step is and if it backs up the rhetoric or if it's a piece of the chess game against trump

[BedellBrave]

Agreed, it's a good first step. What I disagree with with critics above is the demand that he must lead a congress to take immediate action that they'd approve of (i.e., Progressive policy initiatives). Better to be more deliberate (something both sides of the aisle need to be) and to be open to different takes than the same old espoused by the old players (be they conservative or progressive). I'm still holding out hope for guys like Sasse and Ryan to offer something different than that which is cheered by the FOXNews or the MSNBC crowds.

[57Brave]

Hasn't Ryan made a political career out of "makers v takers" ?

Is he abandoning those stances or just the rhetoric of makers/takers ?

I do disagree with his policy initiatives but his rhetoric can't be one thing and his policies a total 180 degrees flip.
I actually respect him more for using the language of M&T and following it with policy that matches than the political shell game I think I see coming down the pike.

This speech pretty much goes counter to his whole career

[sturg33]

Wouldn't be nice if we could just abolish social security and let individuals have the liberty to do with their money what they wish?

[Julio3000]

Wouldn't be nice if we could just abolish social security and let individuals have the liberty to do with their money what they wish?

You have a pretty short memory there, boss. GWB made that the centerpiece of his 2004 post-reelection, only to see it catch a brick in congress and then see that failure justified by the financial crash. Frankly, that crushed your idea for another generation.

So, "wouldn't it be nice if..."

Yeah, maybe, for young folks who are decades from retirement. Not so much for anyone who is closer. There's a reason that Americans signed onto the idea of a guaranteed-benefit pension program (and Medicare, too) and you ignore it at your peril. Libertarians like you (pardon the generalization) tend to be young folks who, right or wrong, see themselves as potential winners in the zero-sum market game. It's odd to see you reference periods in American history when, for example, we didn't pay significant income tax (glossing over the fact that we also had no standing army and no social safety net) but ignore the historical forces that created Social Security and other social insurance programs.

[sturg33]

You have a pretty short memory there, boss. GWB made that the centerpiece of his 2004 post-reelection, only to see it catch a brick in congress and then see that failure justified by the financial crash. Frankly, that crushed your idea for another generation.

So, "wouldn't it be nice if..."

Yeah, maybe, for young folks who are decades from retirement. Not so much for anyone who is closer. There's a reason that Americans signed onto the idea of a guaranteed-benefit pension program (and Medicare, too) and you ignore it at your peril. Libertarians like you (pardon the generalization) tend to be young folks who, right or wrong, see themselves as potential winners in the zero-sum market game. It's odd to see you reference periods in American history when, for example, we didn't pay significant income tax (glossing over the fact that we also had no standing army and no social safety net) but ignore the historical forces that created Social Security and other social insurance programs.

How do we have a "social safety net" if the country is adding a trillion dollars of debt per year?

I'd prefer to be able to have my money and invest it how I please. The unfunded liabilities attributed to social security make it completely unsustainable... and anyone who suggests making changes to it are vilified.


I know that giving people more responsibility is a foreign concept to you folks... but, wouldn't it be nice? Instead, the government confiscates 13% of my pay because it thinks I'm too stupid to save for retirement... I guess they're afraid I may spend more than I save... and clearly they are much better at handling finances than the average american