Paul Ryan booed by constituents at town hall meeting

[Agit8r]

Ryan is probably one of those ignorant fucktards who believe that Karl Marx invented the progressive tax

 

[The Infidel]

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.

The polls are overwhelmingly against Ryan's nonsensical plan.

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.


The American people are sick and tired of the taxing and spending going on in DC. We need cuts, VERY DEEP CUTS!

No you are completely wrong and no polls even come close to what you state. The American people want JOBS, and they want the WEALTHY to pay a fair SHARE of what they get by participating in this great nation and what it provides to the businessman and woman.
Yes people want fraud and waste to go away, but not just cutting to save money while letting the people who can least afford it to be the burden holder of it all. They want fairness and the top 2% owning 40% of everything is BS. The system of govt as it is now is set up to allow those whit money to make money off it and not pay the taxes owed at the same rate as us who work for a living. It is the reason we are moving to a two class system, a small very rich class and the rest of the American population.

Get a clue, they(voters) did not send anyone to Washington to screw the middle class and the poor, they want JOBS< JOBS and JOBS, along with decent government for all the people, not just the rich and those who stand up for them because they are willing to take people's rights away for religious purposses.

Oh come on.... really?

The latest data shows that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. This is the group most of are in. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent&#8212;those below the median income level&#8212;now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes.

Look it up... Im telling the truth.

 

[Political Junky]

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.


The American people are sick and tired of the taxing and spending going on in DC. We need cuts, VERY DEEP CUTS!

No you are completely wrong and no polls even come close to what you state. The American people want JOBS, and they want the WEALTHY to pay a fair SHARE of what they get by participating in this great nation and what it provides to the businessman and woman.
Yes people want fraud and waste to go away, but not just cutting to save money while letting the people who can least afford it to be the burden holder of it all. They want fairness and the top 2% owning 40% of everything is BS. The system of govt as it is now is set up to allow those whit money to make money off it and not pay the taxes owed at the same rate as us who work for a living. It is the reason we are moving to a two class system, a small very rich class and the rest of the American population.

Get a clue, they(voters) did not send anyone to Washington to screw the middle class and the poor, they want JOBS< JOBS and JOBS, along with decent government for all the people, not just the rich and those who stand up for them because they are willing to take people's rights away for religious purposses.

Oh come on.... really?

The latest data shows that a big portion of the federal income tax burden is shoul*dered by a small group of the very richest Americans. The wealthiest 1 percent of the population earn 19 per*cent of the income but pay 37 percent of the income tax. The top 10 percent pay 68 percent of the tab. This is the group most of are in. Meanwhile, the bottom 50 percent&#8212;those below the median income level&#8212;now earn 13 percent of the income but pay just 3 percent of the taxes.

Look it up... Im telling the truth.

It means that wealth is more concentrated in the wealthiest Americans than ever before, or certainly since the guilded age

 

[Sarah G]

Democrats running for office were told late last year not to talk about the cost-savings because Obamacare doesn't save anything. It increases costs.

Why? To pave the way for a single-payer health care system.

see mud, now they'll say hey its cool single payer!!! yay!!!

That and gutting the rich like a bone-fish.

I really think the left is full of such nice, friendly, (cough) and compassionate people.

This is an odd pov. We should be more compassionate to the rich slugs who pay no taxes..

 

[JimH52]

I love this thread!

 

[Stephanie]

It cracks me up to hear the Liberals talk about RICH SLUGS and how they should be taxed more.

This is an odd pov. We should be more compassionate to the rich slugs who pay no taxes..

November 6, 2009 3:38 PM
237 Millionaires in Congress
Posted by Brian Montopoli 54 comments .

(CBS/AP)Even in tough times, it's good to be a lawmaker: According to a report released this week by the Center for Responsive Politics, there are 237 millionaires serving in Congress, according to 2008 figures.

That's a slight decline from the previous year, when there were 239 millionaires in the House and Senate. But it still reflects the fact that the average lawmaker is far wealthier than his or her typical constituent. While about one percent of Americans are millionaires, 44 percent of those serving in Congress can claim as much.

"The biggest takeaway from all of this is that even thought the collective wealth of members of congress appears to have declined, members of Congress are still so much more wealthy than the average American – and even more wealthy than a lot of wealthy Americans," CRP spokesman Dave Levinthal told Hotsheet.

The richest member of Congress is Republican California Rep. Darrell Issa, whose net worth is estimated to be in excess of $250 million. He's followed by four Democrats: California's Jane Harman (approx. $245 million), Wisconsin's Herb Kohl (approx. $215 million), Virginia's Mark Warner (approx. $210 million) and Massachusetts' John Kerry (approx. $209 million).

Among the top 25 wealthiest legislators – which includes boldface names Nancy Pelosi, Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snowe – there are 14 Democrats and 11 Republicans, suggesting no clear wealth divisions between party.

from.
237 Millionaires in Congress - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

 

[Cuyo]

I'm rich according to obama so I'll be alright. .

Where did Obama define 'rich?' Trajan? Really? Where do you guys get this shit?

now, I know you must be kidding, hes never said anything different not that the number won't go lower...do I really really really need to spell it out for you? my god man.....he created his own benchmark...are you going to pretend that he didn't ?

No, to my knowledge he never 'Defined rich.' That's an imaginary fascination on the right. He has proposed eliminating tax breaks for certain income earners; But I'm not aware that he's stated "If you make such and such, you are rich." That's a sophistry created by right wing radio.

Of course if you can indicate otherwise I'm open to hearing it...

 

[Sallow]

I'm very confident that SEIU, AFSCME and their network of henchthugs are sending paid operatives into Ryan town halls for the purpose of disrupting them.

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.

The polls are overwhelmingly against Ryan's nonsensical plan.

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.


The American people are sick and tired of the taxing and spending going on in DC. We need cuts, VERY DEEP CUTS!

I am all for Deep cuts. We can start with the military.

Then we can stop government contracting infrastructure work to private firms.

In fact..the government should starting building it's military gear, supplying it's own food and logistics, selling what it comes out of government labs directly to the people, and cutting out the middle man when it comes to health care and loans.

The government should STOP funneling tax payer money to private firms entirely.

I am sure you are for this..right?

 

[JimH52]

You realize that if it were not for the Democratic Senate and the President, Medicare would be gone and replaced with vouchers, the rich would receive more tax breaks, and the GOP would be well on their way to their "social engineering" experiment. Yes, the trickle down from Reagan has worked perfectly, hasn't it?

NONE of the GOP candidates have endorced this draconian plan, and they won't. It would be political suicide.

 

[mudwhistle]

Where did Obama define 'rich?' Trajan? Really? Where do you guys get this shit?

now, I know you must be kidding, hes never said anything different not that the number won't go lower...do I really really really need to spell it out for you? my god man.....he created his own benchmark...are you going to pretend that he didn't ?

No, to my knowledge he never 'Defined rich.' That's an imaginary fascination on the right. He has proposed eliminating tax breaks for certain income earners; But I'm not aware that he's stated "If you make such and such, you are rich." That's a sophistry created by right wing radio.

Of course if you can indicate otherwise I'm open to hearing it...

No, he's lying. He calls people that make $200k millionaires and billionaires.

You people really have no shame at all.

 

[Cuyo]

now, I know you must be kidding, hes never said anything different not that the number won't go lower...do I really really really need to spell it out for you? my god man.....he created his own benchmark...are you going to pretend that he didn't ?

No, to my knowledge he never 'Defined rich.' That's an imaginary fascination on the right. He has proposed eliminating tax breaks for certain income earners; But I'm not aware that he's stated "If you make such and such, you are rich." That's a sophistry created by right wing radio.

Of course if you can indicate otherwise I'm open to hearing it...

No, he's lying. He calls people that make $200k millionaires and billionaires.

You people really have no shame at all.

When? When did he say that? I need the quote s'il te plait.

 

[mudwhistle]

You realize that if it were not for the Democratic Senate and the President, Medicare would be gone and replaced with vouchers, the rich would receive more tax breaks, and the GOP would be well on their way to their "social engineering" experiment. Yes, the trickle down from Reagan has worked perfectly, hasn't it?

NONE of the GOP candidates have endorced this draconian plan, and they won't. It would be political suicide.

Oh, those evil vouchers.

Social engineering? You mean like segregation, diversity, and the Nanny State?

 

[editec]

Paul Ryan is a corporate tool.

He's nothing more than apologist for an economic/goverment system that is DESIGNED to bankrupt this nation on behalf of the super wealthy.

He has NO PLAN for solving the debt crises.

His voodoo economic policies won't work.

Do the freaking math.

We could cut every social service this nation provides and it wouldn't make a dent in the deficeit.

We want to start cutting we've got to go after those programs that do not contribute to the economy and cost it a lot.

And that sacred cow is the DoD budget, folks.

 

[BenNatuf]

Even Paul Ryan's own constituents don't buy his BS. Of course, this is not surprising given the fact that a majority of Americans, including Republicans, oppose the GOP's proposed tax cuts for the rich and their plan to privatize Medicare.

ThinkProgress » VIDEO: Paul Ryan Booed At Town Hall For Defending Tax Breaks For The Wealthy

Earlier this week, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) embarked on a series of town halls across his southern Wisconsin congressional district. Ryan has gained notoriety in recent weeks as the architect of the Republican budget which extends tax breaks for the wealthy and phases out Medicare. House Republicans voted 235-4 in favor of the plan.

During a town hall meeting in Milton, a constituent who described himself as a “lifelong conservative” asked Ryan about the effects of growing income inequality in our nation. The constituent noted that huge income disparities contributed to the Great Depression and the Great Recession, and thus wanted to know why the congressman was “fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire.”

Ryan argued against “redistribut[ing]” in this manner. After the constituent noted that “there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down,” Ryan argued that “we do tax the top.” This response earned a chorus of boos from constituents:

CONSTITUENT: The middle class is disappearing right now. During this time of prosperity, the top 1 percent was taking about 10 percent of the total annual income, but yet today we are fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire? And we’re fighting to not raise the Social Security cap from $87,000? I think we’re wrong.

RYAN: A couple things. I don’t disagree with the premise of what you’re saying. The question is what’s the best way to do this. Is it to redistribute… (Crosstalk)

CONSTITUENT: You have to lower spending. But it’s a matter of there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

RYAN: We do tax the top. (Audience boos). Let’s remember, most of our jobs come from successful small businesses. Two-thirds of our jobs do. You got to remember, businesses pay taxes individually. So when you raise their tax rates to 44.8 percent, which is what the president is proposing, I would just fundamentally disagree. That is going to hurt job creation.

The "constituent" was a lifelong conservative. It was great to see the crowd of conservatives boo Ryan.

You keep believing that.

 

[BenNatuf]

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.

The polls are overwhelmingly against Ryan's nonsensical plan.

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.


The American people are sick and tired of the taxing and spending going on in DC. We need cuts, VERY DEEP CUTS!

Are you polling now? What percent of Americans want to see Medicare as we know it disappear?

Hyperbole serves no purpose in polling. What percentage of Americans would oppose changing medicare from a fee for services based system to a more traditional insurance based system? The only thing they're talking about is changing the way we pay for the services madicare will still be paying to provide. Instead of doctors billing medicare (where much of the fraud comes from), doctors will be billing insurance companies with a profit motive and medicare will be paying for the insurance. If the care you get from your doctor when insurance companies pay for it is good enough for working people, it's good enough for retired people.

 

[BenNatuf]

Even Paul Ryan's own constituents don't buy his BS. Of course, this is not surprising given the fact that a majority of Americans, including Republicans, oppose the GOP's proposed tax cuts for the rich and their plan to privatize Medicare.

ThinkProgress » VIDEO: Paul Ryan Booed At Town Hall For Defending Tax Breaks For The Wealthy

Earlier this week, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) embarked on a series of town halls across his southern Wisconsin congressional district. Ryan has gained notoriety in recent weeks as the architect of the Republican budget which extends tax breaks for the wealthy and phases out Medicare. House Republicans voted 235-4 in favor of the plan.

During a town hall meeting in Milton, a constituent who described himself as a “lifelong conservative” asked Ryan about the effects of growing income inequality in our nation. The constituent noted that huge income disparities contributed to the Great Depression and the Great Recession, and thus wanted to know why the congressman was “fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire.”

Ryan argued against “redistribut[ing]” in this manner. After the constituent noted that “there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down,” Ryan argued that “we do tax the top.” This response earned a chorus of boos from constituents:

CONSTITUENT: The middle class is disappearing right now. During this time of prosperity, the top 1 percent was taking about 10 percent of the total annual income, but yet today we are fighting to not let the tax breaks for the wealthy expire? And we’re fighting to not raise the Social Security cap from $87,000? I think we’re wrong.

RYAN: A couple things. I don’t disagree with the premise of what you’re saying. The question is what’s the best way to do this. Is it to redistribute… (Crosstalk)

CONSTITUENT: You have to lower spending. But it’s a matter of there’s nothing wrong with taxing the top because it does not trickle down.

RYAN: We do tax the top. (Audience boos). Let’s remember, most of our jobs come from successful small businesses. Two-thirds of our jobs do. You got to remember, businesses pay taxes individually. So when you raise their tax rates to 44.8 percent, which is what the president is proposing, I would just fundamentally disagree. That is going to hurt job creation.

I heard nobody boo.

I saw a guy reading a prepared text asking a question that sounded like one of Obama's speeches.

This video was too brief to say ether way what was going on other then some guy was reading a question off of a document.

No boos. I couldn't understand what Ryan said that caused everyone to say something, but it wasn't boos.

Thinkprogress btw is a Progressive blog site.

It's horseshit.

Liberals penchant to live in the echo chamber and believe its "all the people" is their downfall... let them live there and laugh on election day. Don't think so? Just ask klappenbagger in WI.

 

[NYcarbineer]

That's consistent with the rest of your idiocy.


The American people are sick and tired of the taxing and spending going on in DC. We need cuts, VERY DEEP CUTS!

Are you polling now? What percent of Americans want to see Medicare as we know it disappear?

Hyperbole serves no purpose in polling. What percentage of Americans would oppose changing medicare from a fee for services based system to a more traditional insurance based system? The only thing they're talking about is changing the way we pay for the services madicare will still be paying to provide. Instead of doctors billing medicare (where much of the fraud comes from), doctors will be billing insurance companies with a profit motive and medicare will be paying for the insurance. If the care you get from your doctor when insurance companies pay for it is good enough for working people, it's good enough for retired people.

Medicare is an insurance based system.

The Republicans want to turn over Medicare to the for-profit insurance companies, AND they want to repeal the healthcare bill that protects people from being refused insurance if they have a pre-existing condition or being dropped by their insurance company if they get sick.

How's that going to work for seniors, given that they are the group most likely to have a pre-existing condition AND most likely to suffer a serious, expensive affliction?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Paul Ryan is essentially David Stockman, before Stockman woke up and saw the light.

 

[BenNatuf]

Are you polling now? What percent of Americans want to see Medicare as we know it disappear?

Hyperbole serves no purpose in polling. What percentage of Americans would oppose changing medicare from a fee for services based system to a more traditional insurance based system? The only thing they're talking about is changing the way we pay for the services madicare will still be paying to provide. Instead of doctors billing medicare (where much of the fraud comes from), doctors will be billing insurance companies with a profit motive and medicare will be paying for the insurance. If the care you get from your doctor when insurance companies pay for it is good enough for working people, it's good enough for retired people.

Medicare is an insurance based system.

if you happen to have medicxrae advantage it is, but thats what obama wants to do away with. medicare is a fee for sevices based system where the people who are on it get services that the providors bill medicare for. It's a single payor government based system, not insurance.

The Republicans want to turn over Medicare to the for-profit insurance companies, AND they want to repeal the healthcare bill that protects people from being refused insurance if they have a pre-existing condition or being dropped by their insurance company if they get sick.

dropping people from insurance if they get sick is illegal in all 50 states and that what insurance commissioners are for, the argument is a red herring and always has been. The provision allowing people will pre existing conditions to purchase insurance does not call for the insurance to actually cover the pre-existing condition. You're still out of pocket for that. How many people with pre existing conditions can afford to pay for the medical care for the condition and insurance?

How's that going to work for seniors, given that they are the group most likely to have a pre-existing condition AND most likely to suffer a serious, expensive affliction?

You'll have to show me where any politician is talking about repealing HC and NOT continuing the provision in a different reform....

oh wait... none are.

 

[8537]

if you happen to have medicxrae advantage it is, but thats what obama wants to do away with. medicare is a fee for sevices based system where the people who are on it get services that the providors bill medicare for. It's a single payor government based system, not insurance.

Every insurance company is a fee-for-service single-payer system with the exception of maintenance coverage.

What Ryan's plan does is cap the subsidized premium and require the insured to cover the premium spread - which is pure folly. The risk pool for Medicare simply won't allow such a system without tossing about 1/2 its participants off the rolls.