22 thoughts on “Looks like Paul Ryan has a lot of fans…

    1. Yeah but they’re gullible. And they’ve been told that Ryan’s plan will “take away their social security & medicare.” I guarantee not a one of them protesting has actually read the plan.

      This is the curse of anyone – most especially any Republican – who has the guts to put forward a plan to make the solvent. And of course the irony is that this is one way to actually save the programs. Without action, they will either be bankrupt, destroy our budgets, or require tax raises that will be painful and hurt the economy.

      1. I agree they probably have not read it, had they read it, they would be carrying pitchforks. tar and feathers!

        1. Well, you must fall into the people that haven’t read it, because it is quite clear that the changes he proposes do not affect people in or near retirement(55 and older).

          1. of course it doesnt affect those 55 and older, they vote. It affects everyone else. I am pointing out that everyone in his district has been touched by his incredibly irresponsible policies and votes.

  1. when you factor in the fact that every single auto job has disappeared from his district under Ryan, I think everyone in the state has been touched by his “plan”

    1. By your logic, then Feingold lost a lot of jobs in representation area. Paul Ryan voted for the auto bailout. You lefties that dislike him seem to forget that.

  2. Better recheck that vote, Ryan has made a habit of complaining about the auto bailout. Ryan is also a strong supporter of all of our “free trade” agreements that have devastated manufacturing in the US.

      1. You are correct, he did bail out the auto companies, because he felt guilty after giving unlimited, unaccounted for billions to wall st, he thought he should help his district also. He has since complained about doing it and also was an advocate AGAINST cash for klunkers.

        1. Ah ah ah, you’re spinning out of control. Let’s go back to your previous statement –

          “when you factor in the fact that every single auto job has disappeared from his district under Ryan”

          I just showed you that he voted for the auto bailout. Then you replied saying “he thought he should help his district also.”

          So which is it? Either his district has high unemployment because of Ryan’s actions or Ryan tried to help the situation with his auto bailout vote.

          “You’re right squidknuckle, if I would have known that Paul Ryan did what he could for his constituents, I wouldn’t have gone on my uninformed spiel about unemployment in his district.”

          Apology accepted.

          1. There is a HUGE difference and LONG leap from voting for the auto bailout and “doing what he could for his constituents”. Besides voting for the auto bailout, what else has he done? has he worked to end NAFTA? GATT? China most favored nation status? add tariffs? Cash for klunkers? extend unemployment benefits?

        2. and also was an advocate AGAINST cash for klunkers.

          Which, just like many of the critics said would happen, turns out to be a tremendously regressive form of “stimulus.” Richer people upgraded their 2nd or 3rd vehicles so their kids are driving nicer cars. Meanwhile destroying older, functioning vehicles and their parts has brought used vehicle prices up and made repair costs higher. About the only way to target people on the lower end of the income scale any better than that program would be to raise cigarette taxes.

          Oh and why do you hate foreigners? Are you just a xenophobe or what? We live in a global world & free trade will happen whether you like giving exchanging goods & services with people who look & talk different than you or not.

  3. Actually Cash for Klunkers was very successful, it directly led to GM hiring more workers. It would of been even more wildly successful had they made it good only on cars made in America. The republicans, including ryan, stopped that amendment in its tracks.

    Its not foreigners I hate, its American workers that I love. What we are practicing is no where near “free” trade, its deck stacked against american workers trade. Every other country stacks the deck against us, especially China. If we made them actually follow the rules that they agreed to it would be somewhat tolerable but we all know that they dont. Until we start making things in America again we will not get out of this recession.

    1. If China wasn’t buying our treasuries at 1% interest what do you think the U.S interest rate would be?

      The fact is China is almost single handedly saving us from inflation. Sure we could say we don’t need their money, we’ll do it ourselves but that would mean we would need to raise the funds domestically–which we don’t have. We both know that we are are not going to get out of any recession in a period of inflation.

        1. First of all, not treasures, treasuries. That point sailed completely over your head – which I’m assuming, is why you didn’t answer the question about what the interest rate would be without China.

          Our “precious” “natural treasure” GM is the #1 selling automaker in China. GM sells more Buicks in China than in the US. To say they aren’t buying our stuff, & cite the trade deficit shows either tragically flawed logic or understanding of the situation. The only thing helping keep GM alive more than China is the $50+ billion from the federal government. The deficit is because we buy so much stuff from China, not because they buy too little. And of the 2 million Buicks sold in China, it took 8 years for the first million, but only 3 years for the second. A hockey-stick graph here would actually be reasonably accurate.

        2. They are buying are T bills: “China holds $867.7 billion of Treasuries, making it the biggest lender to the U.S.” Bloomberg. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-07-19/treasury-bids-rise-18-as-investors-surpass-dealers.html

          Perhaps we should discuss the economics of treasury bonds and interest rates. If buyers are bullish on treasuries the interest rate the US has to pay decreases. However, if the US is unable to sell their bonds with a certain interest rate it must raise the Interest rates to attract buyers.

          So let’s say we decide to remove China’s most favored nation status, what would the consequences be?

          From your comments, I can see your concerned with the trade deficit. Agreed. That is a potential problem. But you need to remember that the trade deficit is the reason China must buy the T bills. If we cut the China’s MFN’s status, they become a seller of T bills, which drives interest rates up. As you know, inflation during a recession creates stagflation. Not good. In other words, the only way we can reduce the trade deficit is cut our own deficit. Doing so will strengthen the U.S. currency, which would attract buyers on its own merits.

          1. As you know, inflation during a recession creates stagflation. Not good.

            I realize you’re probably just going for a calm, understated and uncontroversial statement there, but “Not good” just does not do that situation justice and people who either haven’t lived through it first hand or haven’t taken economics courses won’t get it. And they need to. We can do things to help combat inflation, and we can do things to combat a slow economy. But generally the two are inversely related – and so are the levers to pull to deal with them. When we have inflation during recession, there’s very little that can be done. More or less you pick one or the other to fix and while doing so, the other will get worse.

            In other words, the only way we can reduce the trade deficit is cut our own deficit. Doing so will strengthen the U.S. currency, which would attract buyers on its own merits.

            I’ll have to disagree with you there as I don’t believe it’s the only way to reduce the deficit. For decades, in the US we’ve been able to get through things because our economic growth has been so great. Now, it’s looking more and more like we can’t grow our way out of our problems. But in terms of trade deficit, China can and will grow out of this problem. Well I won’t say it’s inevitable that our trade deficit will break even or flip over our way, but with a billion people and an exploding middle class, so long as we can come up with stuff the want, it’s certainly going to improve.

  4. actually Locke its both, its because we buy too much stuff and they buy too little. We used to be the worlds largest exporter of finished goods and the worlds largest creditor nation, now (thanks to reaganomics) we are the largest exporter of raw goods and the largest debtor nation.

    And Super a much more logical approach would be to make China live up to all of their agreements and to charge tariffs as we did for years. Its time to protect our economy. China charges usa 26% tariff to ship a car there, and we charge them I believe 1.9%. The equation for what to charge is simple also, what they charge us we charge them. It is time to protect our economy and our workers and start making things in America again.

    1. actually Locke its both, its because we buy too much stuff and they buy too little.

      On the first front – if you don’t like it, quit buying cheap stuff from China. The vast majority of American consumers don’t seem to be with you.

      The second part will take care of itself. US exports to China has averaged over 18% growth per year since 2000 and gone from $16 billion in 2000 to $70 billion in 2009. Unless we do something stupid like ratchet up tariffs, the development of their economy and the emergence a middle class from a population of a billion people…well the math isn’t tough.

  5. I was there and spoke with some of these people. All they knew about the Roadmap was that it would “privatize” and “take away” their social security. As I reported on my blog, most of the protesters would be, as Squidknuckle phrased it, untouched by Ryan’s plan.

    Oh, one of the speakers, Keith Kelleher, is a former ACORN organizer.

Comments are closed.