pkarnig’s posthaven

A Republican House candidate in Florida wants senior citizens to share the burden of reducing the national budget deficit through cuts to Social Security benefit

I believe cutting Social Security will hurt the already weak economy. If seniors have less money to spend the economy will fall further and add to the already building snowball effect that we see in our downturn economy. Who in their right mind would vote for anyone espousing this kind of legislation? ANSWER: only wealthy individuals that do not need social security in the first place. THIS IS A SMALL MINORITY.

Paul claimed Obama "cares nothing about Kentucky and cares even less about Kentucky coal."

"We have a president who is forcing the EPA down our throats," Paul said. "Even without changing the rules, the EPA is stifling the permit process, and people (are) out of work here because of the president and his policies.

"With all due respect, Mr. President, you're wrong, and you need to stay out of Kentucky affairs. And you need to keep the EPA out of our affairs because we need jobs, and we're not going to get jobs with a busybody EPA that's in our way."

How can he say that Obama cares nothing about Kentucky or jobs in Kentucky. Clearly Obama wants to protect the lives of the coal workers in Kentucky and wants to help spur the growth of alternative energy providers that will take the economy of Kentucky into the 21st century. Rand Paul is really just supporting the interests of big business and disguising this with false rhetoric. His False Rhetoric is aimed at misleading the the people of Kentucky by scaring them into thinking that voting for him will lead to job security. That is not the case. It is false and voting for Rand Paul is a vote for big business not the good of the people.

The recent NY Times piece is titled, with no intended irony, "Welcome to the Recovery."

Geithner's story is essentially this: Don't believe what you experience in your own life; believe us. The economy is really a lot better than it looks (true on Wall Street, but not on Main Street.) Geithner had the bad timing to write this just before the economy lost another 131,000 jobs.

This is Geithner's variation on Marxist economics -- in this case Groucho, who famously said in the movie Duck Soup, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?"

Here are choice extracts from Geithner's op-ed:

• "Private job growth has returned -- not as fast as we would like, but at an earlier stage of this recovery than in the last two recoveries. Manufacturing has generated 136,000 new jobs in the past six months."

• "Businesses have repaired their balance sheets and are now in a strong financial position to reinvest and grow."

• "American families are saving more, paying down their debt and borrowing more responsibly. This has been a necessary adjustment because the borrow-and-spend path we were on wasn't sustainable."

• "The auto industry is coming back, and the Big Three -- Chrysler, Ford and General Motors -- are now leaner, generating profits despite lower annual sales."

• "Major banks, forced by the stress tests to raise capital and open their books, are stronger and more competitive. Now, as businesses expand again, our banks are better positioned to finance growth."

 

 

 

 

Basically the White House is saying, it's all good! But in reality it's very bad for the average Joe and Jane on the street. There is very little credit for them at the banks that they bailed out. There is risk that Social Security will be cut. Healthcare is still WAY too expensive and hard to get. There are still not enough jobs to get the economy going. Groucho was right people, "Believe your own eyes!"