Charlie Rose

LeslieDF  02/02/2011 11:27 AM Report

An intelligent, well versed man who talks much too fast and speaks as a politician, not as a public servant. He neglects to focus on needs, focuses instead on wants. He's doing "campaign debating" with Charlie rather than explaining his views and uses slogans and buzz words rather than common terms.

Lost credibility when he spoke of his family's Social Security experience - a widow draws her husband's benefit, if it is more than her own AND also benefits for children. His mother did not draw her own benefit because no one, married or not, draws benefits from multiple accounts. If she continued working and earned higher benefits, then she draws from her account and additional benefits for children until a certain age.

The Social Security rate is not as high for an employee as he quoted. He doesn't understand or want us to understand what Social Security is and what it does.

He is so concerned about "uncertainty" but he proposes taking all needed risks out of capitalism - makes it into "entrepreneurial socialism."

The biggest disconnect? He voted for TARP in 2008, now wants a government freeze and spending at pre-TARP levels. Voodoo economics.

jbh  11/19/2010 06:28 PM Report

regarding dfon0's comment:

1) facism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.

which party is most interested in consoldating power in the form of our fed. government? which party recently edited a scientific finding to support their own agenda? etc

bernie madoff was last registered as a democrat

2) under the bush tax cuts tax receipts increased significantly faster than the gdp - tax rates down, receipts up - its historical - go to treasury.org

3) clear simple regs - LOL - both houses approval ratings - practically speaking - are bout as low as they can go - they have no interest in writing clear simple regs - look at the healthcare reform bill

4) spending controls - dont disagree but your list needs to include npr, acorn, across board reductions in all entitlements

winter  11/18/2010 08:53 PM Report

Go ahead and shame America in the eyes of the world. Give billionaires a tax break while putting working people out on the street by the hundreds of thousands due to refusing to extend unemployment compensation and make what socialists have criticized America aoubt all along right. Call it not increasing taxes for "everyone" to obfuscate it, call people who work at sendng out resumes and applications daily lazy and don't want to work like the lying dogs that you are then pass out the lobbyists checks to your fellow whores right there on the floor of the peoples house that you pretend to represent. Fly around to exotic locales on your pimps jets who's nest you've been feathering -- golf, eat and drink with them and laugh at how its the little people who pay the taxes. And don't forget, hire thug cops who have no other way to earn a living and who can't wait to express their authority fantasies on drivers they pull over ("BECAUSE I SAID SO"), to hold the line on your gated estates invasion.

don0  11/18/2010 08:04 PM Report

Representative Ryan's fascist-plutocrats' receipe for MORE money to the ghouls:

1. Lower taxes. WTF! What an idiot! The Bush administration's horse-manure premise was that lowering the tax rates would rev up the economy that his unpaid-for wars had already started to trash and once the economy was all revved up (10 years out), then those tax rates would come back to Clinton-era levels. THAT was the deal. But instead, those tax rates didn't do jack, NOW DID THEY? Why doesn't Rose EVER ask these asshats the real questions?

2. Sound money. That means the sound of even more money pouring into the already-overstuffed piggy banks of Ryan's plutocrat shadow government. (Like Barney Frank's quip about Republican family values - the value of being born into the right family. Ha-ha)

3. Clear, simple regulations. How about, you cheat, lie and steal the taxpayers' money and line your own pockets with it, you go directly to jail. Bernie Madoff will slide over and let you have a seat on his bench in the laundry room. You mean like the regulation that methane detectors in your coal mine should be working at all times? That you can't put a deepwater off-shore oil well into production with the a BOP you bought on eBay from Gasprom? That creating mortgage-backed securities with underlying mortgages based on fraudulent loans documented with fraudulent paperwork gets you that seat next to Madoff!

4. Spending controls - like no fighter jet engines the Secretary of Defense and the Chair of the Joint Chiefs say they DON'T want. Or like no more of that "Star Wars" crap Ronald Rayguns pulled out of his rear-end (or was it Nancy's astrologer's vagina?)

And how long, Mr. Brillcream Haridoo, are all these "game of Monopoly" rules going to take to put into place and then to kick into effect. You all gave Obama a scant two years. Your clock is ticking, SIR!

And hey, by the way, Mr. Smarty-pants Wisconsin Nazi - where are all those millions of jobs your party promised all those retired teabaggers down on the fat farms? It's been over two weeks already. C'mon!

Oh, you're too busy ginning up repeal of "Obamacare?" Or were you just engagin in "Ryan-Lyin'?"

machngunjoe  11/18/2010 05:58 PM Report

I don't think he is dangerous, but his rhetoric doesn't make me feel better about getting shit done in this country.

doodah  11/18/2010 07:56 AM Report

What it comes down to, should we trust the scholars to run economic policy?, or the politicians?.

Have the scholars been corrupted too?

So we have to balance the power between two evils, and nothing gets done.

Something about this guy (Paul Ryan) gives me the heebys.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 05:57 AM Report

The crazy idea that debt and deficit is always no good was proved false after WW II when our federal debt to GNP ratio was like twice what it is today.

The debt is denominated in our own fiat money. We have no appreciable debt in FOREIGN MONEY. If we do not re-employ our manufacturing teams of capital and labor we will go under and become a banana oligarchy.

Ryan is an idiot. He is a dangerous idiot. Rose and Obama are not much better. Obama has the power to bomb the world to hell. But he has not got the guts to team up with Bernanke and put every American to work who wants a good job. When the history of this era is written, the idiocy of so many will be explained. It started with the 80th Congress that passed Taft Hartley and began to diminish the bargaining power of workers that capital has since destroyed (except for the last 12 percent of us).

The wages of the middle class and the minimum wage must be raised until we regain our senses. Simultaneously, we must protect small business to do the trillions of jobs that socialism leaves undone. Lastly, we do not need to tax the rich for one cent of their productive capital. Big business and many of the super rich need all their money to finance the likes of General Electric and General Motors to do jobs under government contract and to supply market demand.

The money to guarantee a very rich middle class with the best of all they deserve, as well as full support of all who want into the middle class from their current circumstance, is sitting in Bernanke's central bank which we the people established and control by our law. We must stop voting for the likes of Ryan and others who do not get behind the workers and their families and recognize who dies to defend this nation and who works to supply it.

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 05:36 AM Report

http://www.ustaxreform.us/ntw-ic.htm

This will show the IMPORT CERTIFICATE solution YOU must know by heart. (It links in teh title to the original as well.)

JohnGelles  11/18/2010 05:30 AM Report

The annual deficit and cumulative federal debt are part of a money system that BOTH Obama and Ryan fully misunderstand. The system never runs out of MONEY. The money is created by the central and subordinate banks against central policy and borrowers collateral (or prospects) as same is acceptable to subordinate banks.

Never running out of money, the debt can never be a problem. The only problem can be our loss of resources and skills if we outsource work to Asia (and elsewhere) and lose so much of our productive manufacturing skills that we are compelled to import necessities and have no exports with which to pay for them in FOREIGN money.

Most of our comments here seem to understand the above. Many do not. Ryan does NOT. Obama does NOT. Rose does NOT.

Ryan, Obama and Rose need to be FIRED. They talk nothing but nonsense.

We must reclaim our manufacturing heritage and advantages.

We must obey Warren Buffet and demand IMPORT CERTIFICATES for every import. These cannot be issued except to match EXPORTS.

The above Buffet policy, prescribed in his article in Fortune a few years ago, (which I will give you links to in my next message) is step one. Re-employment of our hands-on manufacturing teams comes next. Fiat money in Krugman-like recommended amounts must be spent and lent either by Congress or the team of Obama and Bernanke to implement all the above.

There is no excuse for unemployment today. We have the money and the unmet critical tasks to be done. We need Obama to lead or be replaced as our candidate in 2012.

SirD  11/17/2010 02:01 PM Report

I consider myself left-wing and this man makes a great deal of sense. The problem with both the red and blue corporate parties today is their inability to address monetary spending. Bernanke, like his predecessor, is seriously risking inflationary problems down the line. Its transparent that a weak dollar is what their after, which is perilous in the long term. Paul Ryan seems to be one of the few realists in Washington. The rest appear like bobble-headed sheep.

tonytrupp  11/17/2010 02:09 AM Report

Ryan says that he's never seen a country devalue its way to properity, but China is an obvious example of a country that is doing just this. It's keeping its currency artificially low in order to makes its goods cheaper internationally, and its enjoying huge exports as a result. On the other hand, the US is overvalued compared to most other countries, and that makes the cost of labor here to high. As a consequence our jobs are being exported.

Although I disagree with Ryan's philosophy, hopefully Ryan's right about Keynesian being wrong, because if the republicans really do slash government spending back to 2006-2008 levels, it'll mean that over a trillion dollars of spending will be taken out of economy, a huge anti-stimulus. If he's wrong and Paul Krugman's right (which he tends to be), then this will force another recession.

doodah  11/17/2010 12:31 AM Report

I just watched the Simpson and Bowles interview on TV, and they're big on this 'rising young star'. I still don't get it though. I mean, if it were the 80s or 90s, I'd be falling for the whole concept. On the surface everything sounds so responsibly sound and wholly conservative (a counter balance to the pie in the sky liberals). But behind the scenes they'll be (republicans) taking bribes from the Goldman Sachs through their strategically placed (EVERYWHERE) Lobbyists to print more dollars backed by hot-air so they can stuff in their coffers to prolong the recession while they look for better deals outside the USA (that's what 'conservative' deregulation of the financial industry does for us). And it's really working for them.

PiaProgressive  11/16/2010 11:20 PM Report

Paul Ryan said that the GOP supports small business. Dunno, most of the small business that I've seen vanish or last a brief time has been neglected by the GOP. He mentioned businesses of 50-250 employees. I perceive those as mostly supplier operations, gifted by corporations to increase flexibility and minimize procurement cost. They also come and go as the corporate winds blow hot and cold.

Referring to the vision of the founding fathers for the country and the constitution was just fluff intended to impress the viewer as validation for his mythical vision for the country. It makes no sense for most U.S. citizens to not have living wage and benefits when economic disparity has increased at the rate it has for the past 30-40 years.

If Paul Ryan's economic vision is enacted, he can join Grover Norquist as one of the wrecking crew of the U.S. working citizen. Rand Paul's vision will move the U.S. a few steps closer to the banana republics.

robdverity  11/16/2010 10:22 PM Report

You reckon this I've-got-mine-where's-yours, silver-spooned wise-guy ever had a hard-work blister on his hands?

winter  11/16/2010 08:22 PM Report

It occurs to me that beyond all the bromides and policies tossed out for resuscitating the economy, underneath it all

are our oligarchs fears operating the levers they've demonstrated they're perfectly willing to resort to. Those of us who can will recall the history.

When The President was first elected, the suffering economy was said by democrats to be an opportunity to do great things. Imagine the republican fears of obsolesence if Obama had succeeded in a single payer health care reform, giving effective impetus to alternative energy initiatives that began to reduce fossil fuel reliance and the clincher, brought us back from the abyss of our historical overreach then installed a failsafe plan of financial regulatory reform that insured, a "prudent enough" way of doing business would keep us from visiting this sort of crisis

anytime soon. I think the founding fathers would have been proud of those accomplishments.

But who got in the way of all the possibilities? Dick Armie and the Koch brothers, representing our oligarchs fears, instilling their marauding hordes of malcontents, rampaging over the astroturf, fueled by the daily post hypnotic suggestions of media Tokyo Roses inspiring them to advocate against their own interests. They believe civilization to be what Ted Nugent would make of it, survival of the fittest, thin out the herd as if America were an experiment done on the Island of Galapagos. When the music stops and there are no chairs, all thats left is the hope that your unemployment benefits will be extended or you could move to the Alaskan wilderness and hunt for your food -- all 10 percent of you. Heres hoping Obama does a Phoenix.

ANONYMOUS_PLEASE  11/16/2010 06:23 PM Report

Well!

What a breath of fresh air this was-----

Maybe NPR doesn't need to be defunded after all.

Paul Ryan-a conservative after this old granny's heart who does not want to see her grandchildren saddled with a growing thirteen (and growing) trillion dollar federal debt!

Anyone here know how much a trillion is?

One million seconds = 12 days

One billion seconds = 36 years

One trillion seconds = 31, 688 YEARS

Translate that into dollars and see what our descendants will be forced to work well into their 80's to pay off. Paying off a spending spree that occurred when they were in their 20's.

It just ain't right.

jbtech2  11/16/2010 05:51 PM Report

The election of same-talking, party-line spouting pols could very well scare those who are familiar with similar propaganda spiels from the 1930s, but alas, it seems the general level of education in the USA has reached an astoundingly shallow level, and so few will be alarmed. Those who remember courses in civics and critical thinking are becoming fewer every day, a pity since so many more are required. This fellow Ryan is a voluble but totally mis-thinking pol. I hope the American electorate is now realizing their collective error in November.

John_W  11/16/2010 05:36 PM Report

see what's driving the deficit in the future at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities .. paste the following url into your browsers navigation bar:

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

..OR Google: Critics Still Wrong on What’s Driving Deficits in Coming Years

doodah  11/16/2010 05:31 PM Report

There must be something to this dude, Allen Greenspan expressed a concur to the positive regarding something this guy said about what we should do, on 'Meet the Press' last Sunday. But when I google 'Ryan and Greenspan', all I get is Paul Ryan criticizing Allan Greenspan. So I guess Allen Greenspan agrees with Ryan that Greenspan (himself) an incompetent. So if Greenspan is wrong, then Ryan must also be wrong, because if Greenspan (who admits incompetence) agrees with Ryan, then why should we think Ryan knows anything?.

John_W  11/16/2010 05:25 PM Report

REgarding the economy, more alternative universe bull from Mr. Ryan. He says we should be "bouncing out of this recession"..

Perhaps Mr. Ryan doesn't know this but ALL professional economists have said that when a recession is cause by a financial meltdown, with a collapse of credit - YOU DO NOT COME OUT OF THE DOWNTURN QUICKLY. This is in no small part because banks are still holding a lot of worthless, 'toxic', assets. This constrains their ability to lend money.

(BTW, I thought Mr. Rose might have brought this up for Mr. Ryan's edification or atleast to mention the prevailing position of economists in this regard.)

Mr. Ryan displays his stupidity regarding the economy when he proclaims we should be bouncing out of this recession.

John_W  11/16/2010 05:14 PM Report

When Ryan spins a fantasy that OBAMA has been the partisan attack campaigner it is almost too much to stand. He is working so hard on his alternate universe:

Ryan said about the President: "when he calls us "enemies," when he uses demagogic political rhetoric

in the campaigns ... it gives us the impression that we’re seen as enemies. He goes to our districts and says

Republicans want the economy to fail so he fails politically.

I mean, that kind of talk, all these straw men and counterfactual arguments does not make it easy to cooperate and come together on the big issues of the day."

In other words IT'S OBAMA WHO IS ATTACKING PEOPLE. IT'S OBAMA WHO IS MAKING COOPERATION 'DIFFICULT'. I struggle to keep from giving my honest reaction to this towering Bull-%@#$.

IT WAS BOEHNER WHO SAID: "WE WILL BE THE PARTY OF 'NO'!".

IT WAS REPUBLICANS WHO SAID: "WE'LL MAKE HCR OBAMA'S WATERLOO.'

IT WAS REPUBLICANS WHO FILIBUSTERED 80% OF MAJOR LEGISLATION IN OBAMA'S FIRST YEAR (see Joseph Beinart's article in Time magazine "Why Washington is tied up in Knots".

AND IT WAS REPUBLICANS WHO FILIBUSTERED THE SMALL BUSINESS AID BILL - FOR MONTHS - EVEN THOUGH IT WAS PAID FOR - IT WAS REVENUE NEUTRAL!!! NOTE THAT THE GOP USED CONCERN FOR THE DEFICIT AS AN RATIONALE FOR FIGHTING ALL ECONOMIC STIMULUS BILLS.

Ryan says the stimulus didn't work. THus he disagrees with the Congressional Budget Office (2.4 million jobs created/saved), and numerous private economic analysts.

Ryan smiles at Rose's mention of Krugman's assessment of the economic situation.. Ryan the possessor of a B.A. with a combined major in economics and poli-sci chortles at the mention of the opinion of a nobel laureate in economics and professor at Princeton.

Ryan say he's not a Keynesian. Is he still a 'trickle downer'? We can thank the Bush administration for ONE THING, INCONTROVERTIBLE EVIDENCE OF THE FAILURE OF TRICKLE-DOWN, SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMIC THEORY (so-called). THe Republican policies of shifting the tax burden onto the middle class and moving more wealth into fewer hands, along with anti-regulation policies ('the market will police itself') and needlessly expansionist monetary policies nearly brought about the The Great Depression II (but for the TARP and the ARRA).

Ryan and TEa-Partiers do not represent any change at all. They want to go back to policies that nearly destroyed our economy. The Republicans decided before Obama was sworn into office that they were going to do everything they could to destroy him, and the Dems, politically. Obama has continued for over a year to plead for GOP cooperation, in the face of constant attacks from the GOP.

Now, Ryan raises the disinformation bar by saying OBAMA IS THE ONE WHO HAS ATTACKED REPUBLICANS AND IS CAUSING REPUBLICANS TO BE UNCOOPERATIVE - RETROACTIVELY (NOTE IN RYAN'S ALTERNATE UNIVERSE CAUSATION WORKS BACKWARDS THROUGH TIME)

charlizecourriers  11/16/2010 05:14 PM Report

I enjoyed Mr. Ryan's use of the term "social democrat" instead of the term "socialist." Tony Judt must be happy since he made that tactful suggestion in his last book, discussed on this very show(but probably not read by the host.) We all want the Most Helpful and Happy Life for All, but those of us who are not of that party, the socialist democrats, know it's not possible(except perhaps for the leaders and their fellow travelers/talk show hosts).171413

John_W  11/16/2010 04:43 PM Report

Just checking to see if I can put active links in comment for ease of reader:

But if you check with the SBA you'll see that 88% of small businesses reported GROSS RECEIPTS (a far cry from net income) NOT in excess of $250,000 in 2004:

check: <a href="http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs343tot.pdf#page=19">SBA report</a><p>

"Almost 88 percent of all small business tax returns filed

in 2004 had gross receipts of no more than $250,000."

Bush tax cuts were the major contributor to our deficit: Center for Budget and policy Priorities

<a href="http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036">Center for Budget and Policy Priorities</a><p>

John_W  11/16/2010 04:39 PM Report

Wow, there is a multi-verse ...and Paul Ryan has fabricated his own alternate universe, with his own rules of logic built on rhetorical legerdemain and conservative mythology.

Look, there is too much BS here to cover in one comment so, if I may, I will work a little bit at a time at it.

Regarding ending Bush tax cuts for wealthy (the major contributor to our Deficit) Mr. Ryan says:

"You understand, this tax increase, they say it only applies to two percent of the wealthiest of Americas. That’s of filers. It applies to 50 percent of small business income."

NOte that the clever reality-shifter is talking about averageing Warren Buffet in with 'Ma & Pa Grocery'. IT's very possible that the average OF ALL 'SMALL BUSINESS' INCOMES THE AVERAGE MAY COME OUT TO BE IN EXCESS OF $250,000. But if you check with the SBA you'll see that 88% of small businesses reported GROSS RECEIPTS (a far cry from net income) NOT in excess of $250,000 in 2004:

check: http://www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs343tot.pdf#page=19

"Almost 88 percent of all small business tax returns filed

in 2004 had gross receipts of no more than $250,000."

Bush tax cuts were the major contributor to our deficit: Center for Budget and policy Priorities

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3036

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/16/2010 03:55 PM Report

Paul is certainly fast-talking. Slowing him down a bit might make him address some holes in his argument.

CHARLIE ROSE: You know the argument being made by Paul Krugman and others, which is that, yes, indeed, the deficit is a big issue, but at the same time growth is a big issue. And how you can produce growth quickly may very well mean a stimulus that you’re not going to get that quickly from tax cuts and from --

PAUL RYAN: "If borrowing and spending -- taxing and spending and printing and spending works to grow prosperity, we’d already have it. We’ve been doing this for trillions of dollars. We put trillions of dollars through fiscal policy and monetary policy, and it’s not working and it’s --"

How would, how could we already have prosperity? Many experts say a crisis like this takes years to unwind--NOT JUST TWO YEARS! Congressman Ryan, will a premature fiscal austerity lead to a renewed economic slump. If you start cutting government employment where are these people going to work now? No, the system is still broken and rigged. The uncertainty is that trust has not been restored. The big banks make money by taking the bailout money we gave them and lending it back to the government with interest: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-may-13-2010/hoarders

"Let me get this straight, the only people who have recovered from the financial meltdown... are the people who caused this financial meltdown," Jon Stewart. Banks should be required to lend--not get bailout money, then zero interest and then invest risk free in government notes. Perhaps this video will help: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-january-12-2010/clusterf--k-to-the-poor-house---wall-street-bon uses

markpeach  11/16/2010 02:14 PM Report

Never once did the venerable Mr Ryan address the effect of all his claptrap on the poor. I came away from listening to him for the first time with the impression that the poor are an inconvenience to him; that any effort to help and support them are a no-no. How heartless can one be? There are chickens coming home to roost, Mr Ryan, those poor still get to vote on policies that are now out of step with the world, and that will not deliver the grtowth you want. You are shortly to find out that governing is much more than theory and shouting from the sidelines.

I am just amazed at the arrogance and inability of the rich (like Mr Ryan) to understand the world of the vulnerable, and the ease with which efforts to support them are demeaned. Since when has compassion, expressed in social democracy, become a swear word?

markpeach  11/16/2010 02:07 PM Report

This guy is all over the place. For instance, "we don't want to embrace social democracy" but later "essentiually we must do what Germany (a social democratic state) is doing because they're growing."

And has he ever begun to think that the nonsense began in the only free market economy in the world, and the effect of the crisis is still being felt most keenly in that same economy. Doesn't this occur to him?

Believe me, there is much less wrong with social democracy than Mr Ryan makes out. Look around the world.

REMant  11/16/2010 01:43 PM Report

I think the election was a repudiation of many Republicans, as well, something I suspect Sen McConnell has recently become well aware of.

I believe I said the last time he was on the show that he retains monetarist thinking that doesn't comport with the rhetoric about sound money and so forth. You can't maintain price stability without inflating, because the general rule is that as productivity increases, prices must fall, which would be true even without China, et al, and provides the virtuous cycle of the late 19th c, when factory production increased real earning power. The problem is any "growth" achieved Krugman's way will necessarily be in asset prices alone, and taken out of the majority of ppl's pockets. His view of the rate of return on Social Security is another indication. The real rate of return is same either way. It only appears higher for stock mkt investments, because the return is boosted by inflation, which historically has run around 3% annually, making the return on stocks 10% instead of an avg 7%. I don't see either how we can balance the budget and cut taxes. He needs to get his economics straight, but I liked most of what he said.

Suppose the Chinese did "let their currency appreciate," realistically, would it? I'm sure not, not until Chinese wages appreciated significantly, which seems a long way off.

You have to ask yourself why the Chinese economy is export-driven in the first place, and the answer has to be that they do it to acquire the skills and capital from abroad to improve their ppl. They export because that's the reason the foreign cos invest there. These importers look for cheaper labor as costs rise in their markets, and that generally goes hand-in-hand with an unwarranted increase in money and credit. The arrival of cheaper imports unfortunately increases debt in a vicious cycle, while it creates a virtuous cycle for the exporters.

Ricardo_Amaral  11/16/2010 01:36 PM Report

This generation already destroyed the economic foundations of this country in the last 25 years.

And now they want to spend up to the last dime and leave just a Everest sky high mountain of debt.

.

Ricardo_Amaral  11/16/2010 01:28 PM Report

The Tax cut that George W. Bush gave to Americans during his administration - was a very foolish thing to do.

What really happened was the US government borrowed from China

(and the debt is passed for future generations) for these fools to waste the money today buying stuff that they don't need.

And now that this scam is getting ready to expire - the fools want to continue with the gravy train at the expense of future American generations.

What a bunch of selfish, greedy, and worthless group of people.

.

SkyLarkJ  11/16/2010 12:41 PM Report

I could listen to him all day. He is one sign of hope in turning things around.

winter  11/16/2010 12:34 PM Report

He's not in favor of demand side economics. What more do you need understand to devine who Mr. Ryan has targeted for shouldering the burden of digging out of debt? That combined with, that tax breaks for +$250,000. are going to stay intact leaves no room for doubt trickle down is going to be tried yet again. Spending cuts or unemployment? You can't do both, esp. if defense is going to sacrifice that labor force. Until we admit that wealth redistribution happens before any tax is ever taken out of a paycheck the disparity of wealth will never normalize.

Alot of pundits think they know, but they DON'T know how the economy would have unfolded had any other plan but the stimulus been undertaken and many use that conjecture to divide and conquer. Obamas plan had the unique combination of vision and perspective what it needed was patience.