Nader to Ryan: Time to Debate

[georgephillip]

Is that a mansion?

Uh, 14,000 sq ft?

Yeah, I'd say so.

It looks like a somewhat Victorian-style house, which tended to be on the big side...seeing that it's in New England it probably is.

I know an older couple that owns an old house that size, they make about 100,000 a year combined.

Rev. Jones makes a tad more than that.

{Nader told the Post he believes he’s made between $13 million and $14 million over the course of his career; and according to his just-released financial disclosure statement he is worth at least $3.8 million. Even more striking, much of that wealth is invested in a small group of high-flying tech stocks such as Cisco Systems, Comcorp, Iomega and Ziff-Davis. }

Ralph Nader: Millionaire hypocrite? - Salon.com

"TUESDAY, JUN 20, 2000 9:00 AM UTC
Ralph Nader: Millionaire hypocrite..."

Couldn't find any less current numbers?
Maybe the Koch brothers can help...

"So is Nader a hypocrite for amassing a personal fortune while advocating consumer rights and railing against corporate power?

"In a word, no.

"To think otherwise would be to buy into the common but thoroughly fallacious argument that pursuing public service and advocacy is somehow incompatible with making a good living. Under this reasoning, someone with no social conscience can make millions upon millions of dollars and still be in the clear, but someone with a social conscience is a hypocrite unless he or she lives like a monk..."

"But even with the fortune Nader has managed to accumulate, he also appears to have donated enough of his personal wealth to the various public advocacy organizations he’s founded to get around any charge of hoarding.

"Nader told the Post he gives away more than 80 percent of his after-tax income and noted, as an example, the fact that he used $500,000 of his own money to fund the Congress Project in 1972."

Ralph Nader: Millionaire hypocrite? - Salon.com

 

[georgephillip]

I think it's likely most voters without a college education would find their eyes glazing over if they tried to read it.
Most voters without at least a Bachelors degree in Economics would find a debate helpful in order to arrive at an informed choice.
Certainly any undecided voters would be influenced by Ryan's defense of his budget; maybe that explains why he's "too busy" to provide one?

So you think people are stupid. Got ya.

You're the only one using the word "stupid."
Twice.

The Dismal Science isn't easy to follow for most of those without a Bachelor's degree, at least.

If Ryan was forced to debate the specifics of his budget with a radical leftist economist, those who haven't been able to afford a college education would be more likely to make an informed choice about which economic class Ryan's budget serves and which it scapegoats.

The word "stupid" would apply more appropriately, imho, to those whose knee-jerk ideological reflexes make them afraid of what an open debate would reveal about Ryan and his corporate lords.

 

[georgephillip]

I think it's likely most voters without a college education would find their eyes glazing over if they tried to read it.
Most voters without at least a Bachelors degree in Economics would find a debate helpful in order to arrive at an informed choice.
Certainly any undecided voters would be influenced by Ryan's defense of his budget; maybe that explains why he's "too busy" to provide one?

So you think people are stupid. Got ya.

apparently, only Nader and he "get it". The rest of us, regardless of our politics are just following the Wall Street Shills.

"The Ryan budget plan is a Koch brothers’ dream and the American peoples’ nightmare. It leads with a lie – namely to control deficit spending by continuing it for at least 30 more years before his concoction of big tax cuts for the rich, further increases in the already bloated defense budget, and savage cuts in public services for the people, somehow balance the budget around mid-century."

The above is one of Nader's opinions on the Ryan budget.
Do you "get it" about whether he's correct, or not?
Why shouldn't Ryan have an opportunity to prove Ralph wrong?
Unless you think the Koch brother would disapprove, of course.

Ryan

 

[georgephillip]

Stockman? The guy that went to divinity school? Do you seriously think he can go up against a guy with a degree in economics?

Stockman's not my first choice...

"(Richard D.) Wolff earned a BA magna cum laude in history from Harvard in 1963 and moved on to Stanford—he attained a MA in economics in 1964—to study with Paul A. Baran. Baran died prematurely from a heart attack in 1964 and Wolff transferred to Yale University, where he received a MA in economics in 1966, MA in history in 1967, and a PhD in economics in 1969. As a graduate student at Yale, Wolff worked as an instructor.[1] His dissertation, 'The Economics of Colonialism: Britain and Kenya,'[2] was eventually published in book form in 1974."

Richard D. Wolff - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Think Ryan would show up?

Stockman was the first one you thought of though.

Stockman was the first one mentioned in Ralph's article.
My first thought was a Marxist:

"The Ryan budget proposed earlier this year was his ticket to the publicity that got him the VP nomination. See who bears the brunt of the $5.3 trillion in Ryan's proposed non-defense budget cuts over 10 years (these are the cuts his plan proposes versus the spending that would result from maintaining current policies, according to the straightforward calculations of Washington's Center on Budget and Policy Priorities).

"Just like Europe's austerity regimes, the goal of Ryan and the Republicans is to protect corporations and the rich from bearing the costs of the economic crisis and of the massive government bailouts that benefited primarily them.

"Ryan and the Republicans seek to make sure that government debts are not paid for by raising taxes on corporations and the rich.

"Let's remember why government debt soared since 2007..."

Choosing Ryan, Embracing Austerity | Professor Richard D. Wolff

 

[georgephillip]

Now that's a debate I'd love to see/hear! Nader is way too socialist for me but I sure the hell appreciate his intelligence and his understanding of the plutocratic overtones of Ryan's budget.
Being anti-plutocratic isn't socialist, it's being pro-Main Street America/Middle Class and finally pro-American.
Now I know that there are posters who have no problem sacrificing their own well-being, just so the wealthy can realize even more expendable income. They seriously believe in the trickle down philosophy.
But the fact of the matter is the best form of trickle down is jobs and jobs that pay the employees a livable wage. After over three decades of flat wages for working Americans who make up a huge majority of the consumer class, it's no wonder our economy is so very slow to recover. Over 70% of the US economy is driven by consumer spending and working Americans have less and less expendable income thanks to flat wages.
Who determines wages?
Who reaps the rewards for keeping wages flat while thickening their own billfolds/purses?
I wonder if Ryan gets lump in his throat whenever he tries to say the words,,,,Middle Class? To Ryan, the Middle Class are here to serve a purpose.. To work for low pay, to pay for his budget and to be good little serfs.

Ryan, the corporations he fronts for, and the richest 5% of Americans no longer need to worry about the US middle class since the middle class in China, India, and Brazil dwarfs the one in this country.

The only lump in their throats that Ryan and his corporate lords have to worry about will happen when the working class in the US stops concerning itself with wedge issues and starts focusing on the class conflict inherent in the Path to Prosperity.

 

[georgephillip]

I just can't stand Ralph Nader anymore, he keeps inserting himself into the campaigns just to split the vote like Ron Paul.

He used to be a good debater, I wouldn't mind seeing him debate Ryan. Ryan will probably be arrogant and stupid enough to accept the challenge.

Millions of Americans still badger Nader for his opinions.
If there's one thing he's proven over the last six decades it is this: he can be wrong but he can't be bought.
There aren't too many others with his knowledge and experience that can say that.
Almost all of the best and brightest will go with the big money.
Eventually.

I don't think the Powers That Be in the Republican Party would allow Ryan to defend his budget in front of a national television audience, especially if Ryan's opponent was someone like Paul Krugman or Dean Baker. The technology exists today to allow both sides of that debate to make their points visually as well as verbally; there aren't many Republicans who want Ryan's budget on full multi-media display before next November.

 

[Uncensored2008]

The guy needs some money to keep his message going.

Look, I don't care that the hypocritical old extortionist lives an opulent lifestyle, most cult leaders do. But it sure is funny watching the faithful spout off about how pure and humble their leader is.

Are you expecting him to live in gutter somewhere to prove his point? I don't think that's the way to do it.

It'd be one thing if the guy was obviously living it up, but he's obviously not.

He lives in a mansion, hobnobs with the Hollywood elite, and uses insider trading to fund it.

What the fuck could be more "living it up?"

He never married, has no kids, doesn't even have a personal car. He has spent his adult life doing the same thing...and continues to do it well into his golden years.

I don't much care that he's gay.

 

[georgephillip]

How big is Ralph's mansion?

Got a picture?

 

[whitehall]

Ralph Nader has sent Paul Ryan three letters requesting a debate on the Ryan Budget.
Paul's "too busy" to defend his budget in front of millions interested American voters on national television.

Heeeere's Ralph:

"Very well, Mr. Ryan, then why have you refused to civilly debate your proposals and their consequences with any of your critics inside and outside the Congress before a national television audience?

"I requested that you have this important exchange in three letters (first,second,third). Finally, your office demurred on the grounds that you were too busy.

"Are you really too busy to debate your plan which has passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and has been generally endorsed by Mitt Romney?

"Or are you too fearful of trying to defend your numbers and their plutocratic values to the likes of Princeton professor and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman, who has called the Ryan budget 'the most fraudulent in American history'”?

Ryan

Why doesn't Nader want to debate Joe Biden? Are they on the same team?

 

[Uncensored2008]

How big is Ralph's mansion?

Got a picture?

Other than the one I already posted.

 

[georgephillip]

Back on the purple Kool-aid?

 

[georgephillip]

Ralph Nader has sent Paul Ryan three letters requesting a debate on the Ryan Budget.
Paul's "too busy" to defend his budget in front of millions interested American voters on national television.

Heeeere's Ralph:

"Very well, Mr. Ryan, then why have you refused to civilly debate your proposals and their consequences with any of your critics inside and outside the Congress before a national television audience?

"I requested that you have this important exchange in three letters (first,second,third). Finally, your office demurred on the grounds that you were too busy.

"Are you really too busy to debate your plan which has passed the Republican-controlled House of Representatives and has been generally endorsed by Mitt Romney?

"Or are you too fearful of trying to defend your numbers and their plutocratic values to the likes of Princeton professor and Nobel Laureate Paul Krugman, who has called the Ryan budget 'the most fraudulent in American history'”?

Ryan

Why doesn't Nader want to debate Joe Biden? Are they on the same team?

Possibly Ralph hasn't read the Biden Budget?
Could you post a copy?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Possibly Ralph hasn't read the Biden Budget?
Could you post a copy?

democrats don't bother making budgets.

King Obama spends whatever he likes, he is not restrained by budgets, fiscal responsibility, or any such notion.

 

[georgephillip]

King Bush didn't display much fiscal responsibility either.

If Republicans AND Democrats are profligate, shouldn't we be asking who profits?

 

[thanatos144]

King Bush didn't display much fiscal responsibility either.

If Republicans AND Democrats are profligate, shouldn't we be asking who profits?

I always wondered who the guy was supporting Nader......

 

[georgephillip]

King Bush didn't display much fiscal responsibility either.

If Republicans AND Democrats are profligate, shouldn't we be asking who profits?

I always wondered who the guy was supporting Nader......

Even Ralph didn't get himself arrested in a bank lobby (I think):

"Jill Stein, the Green Party's 2012 presidential candidate, was arrested in Philadelphia Wednesday afternoon during a bank protest sit-in."

Green Party Presidential Candidate Jill Stein Arrested at Bank Protest | Common Dreams

 

[uscitizen]

Why did Romney have a fundraising breakfast in Israel?

 

[georgephillip]

"...designed to help Romney broaden his appeal to Jewish American voters and other supporters of Israel, including evangelical Christians. Obama won the Jewish vote by a wide margin in 2008 and still holds an edge among the group in recent polling."

Romney in Israel: ‘Any and all measures’ should be used to dissuade Iran - The Washington Post

Mitt and Bibi go way back.

Maybe they were planning an October Surprise?

 

[Uncensored2008]

King Bush didn't display much fiscal responsibility either.

If Republicans AND Democrats are profligate, shouldn't we be asking who profits?

You know, I remember federal budgets under Bush.

Obama is beyond the need for things like budgets, the constitution, checks and balances.

The desire, the mad yearning, of the left for dictatorship never ceases to amaze me.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Why did Romney have a fundraising breakfast in Israel?

Maybe Obama can have a fundraising breakfast in Teheran?