Romney picks Paul Ryan as running mate (Page 2)

The tax "rate" is really kind of a joke with 70,000 pages of loopholes, deductions and special interest incentives and the like.

Until the tax code is changed to an understandable format the tax rate argument is just more Repubs vs Dems one is evil the other is good, look over here while I slide this by you while you are distracted.

Even as a fiscal conservative I don't completely disagree with you about the national healthcare.  The problem is, the Obamacare plan is horrible and will do nothing but bankrupt us as a nation.  Watch the youtube link I referenced in my earlier post of Paul Ryan completely dismantling the financial aspects of Obamacare.  I'm not saying Romney/Ryan are going to put in a national healthcare plan, but if we as a nation do want national healthcare we have to put something in place that truly pays for itself versus put in a bloated POS that destroys the economy.

Because running a country is not the same thing as running a business. A country can't simply try to crush all competitors or absorb them into it's business. A country can't simply cut loose the weaker parts of it's "business" (the people). A business CAN do whatever legally it can to make as much profit as it wants. It can take a short term view ("If I make enough money in 5 years, I'll just cash out") if it wants. It can all over everyone that it wants in its quest to make money. 

The problem is that running a country requires having the skills to interact with and engage with the rest of the world. Unless you are North Korea. Then you can starve your people and isolate them with abandon.

Romney is clearly a very smart guy. He understands how markets and money work, and used it to his advantage. Good for him (and his family, who also benefit). But he is tone-deaf when it comes to engaging people. He went to countries that should have been "easy", and managed to say something offensive in each of them. His business practices have so PO'd the Italians, that it would be hard to imagine him trying to get anything done with them (e.g. trying to convince them to follow some economic practices that would help the euro-zone and not have ripples on our economy). And I am not even looking at the very wooden way he tries to "joke around" with people on his photo op trips ("I'm not sure about these cookies....", "I have some friends who are NASCAR owners", etc.). I understand he is trying to be "chummy", but he does it poorly. I can understand that people might alienated by Obama's style as well, but I don't think he says such insulting things about other countries. Biden, sure. That guy's a loose cannon! 

I'll see your Romney insult to the British and raise you 10.    (there's many more from other countries)

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/nilegardiner/100142971/barack-obamas-top-ten-insults-against-britain-2012-edition/
 

My 2 cents... 

The pick is going to energize the Republican base.  Ryan is pretty popular among real conservatives.  I'm looking forward to him debating Biden- they're polar opposites on the ideological spectrum.

The pick will likely energize the Democrat base.  Ryan wasn't afraid to take on their sacred cows with Social Security, welfare, etc.  

I'm excited about Ryan- the future of the Republican party.  He proves we're all not a bunch of Bible-thumping, uneducated, rednecks (which liberals have really done a good job portraying us as the last few years).

I'm a fireman & my wife is a teacher. A snowball has a better shot in hell, than Romney/Paul have of getting my vote. Their far right stance on public sector unions & Romney wanting to SEVERELY cut the pay of firefighters, teachers & cops......that directly affects our livelihood. ( And no, I'm not an Obama fan either)

So the question becomes  who to vote for. Some people say if you don't like either candidate, then don't bother voting. Others say if you don't vote, then you have no business "complaining" about what a crap job the leader of our country is doing. And there are even those that say if you vote for a third party canditate, it's just like voting for Obama.

How exactly is Romney going to cut your firefighter pay? Sorry, SEVERELY cut your pay? Seems to me in most cities police and FF are sacred cows... and even at that I don't think you get paid enough... but I have yet to see a politician run for office on the platform of severely cutting pay for first responders... Teachers are a different discussion.

There are plenty of citizens that rail at government for not doing what is necessary to fix this country's problems... when does it fall on the voters for not voting for politicians because it its going to effect their pocket? Every voter in this country is voting based on what they are going to get out of the deal.... and here we are.

As far as voting, I will no longer vote for a candidate that does not support my views. I'm perfectly fine staying home, won't change a thing...parties roll merrily along raising billions.

Things do not exist in isolation. If a locality receives federal money now, it has more of the local taxes available to pay for things like firefighters, cops, and teachers. If the president cuts the money that goes to the state, the state sends less money to localities. Which then have to cut services like fire, police, schools; as well as libraries, child programs, staff for elder services, investigators for child abuse, etc. 

Yes, in theory, the state or local tax rates could increase. Do you really think that people would tolerate it? Especially when the places that most need support are those places that can least afford it?

In a way, it is how the old Reagan idea of "trickle down" economics was supposed to work. Except that it really does work this way. 

The Federal government has more than a couple of things to with Firefighters, Cops and Teachers at the local and state level.  Education related Quality improvements State Grants amount to more than 2.5 billion dollars, Teach grants and a couple of other associated with this amount to over 25 million.  There are a lot of other grants and federal assistance programs to states that amount to a lot of dollars.  You have AFGP for firefigthers and  CPD for law enforcement and many other ways that the federal government funnels money into these areas.

In regards to the VP pick, it doesnt really make a difference to me.   I wasn't planning to vote for Romney and there was nothing he could do to earn my vote sort of transforming himself into a new person.

nah, .....he just says things like (don't have exact quote) "Iran is just a little country...they're not a threat"

Does anyone else see this as a problem?

The Federal Govt. takes money from the local govt. syphons off a percentage for administration then  if you do what the federal govt. wants we'll give it back to you.

Takes money from local govt.?  So what would be your idea, to abolish federal taxes and just pay state taxes?

Do you think the public sector unions have no fault in fiscal issues at the local and state level?

I personally don't feel Unions are appropriate in the public sector.  They seem to simply take away the power of elected officials through long term contracts.  Plus there is inherent corruption due to the fact that Unions invest heavily to influence who is elected. If we can't trust democratically elected bodies to treat public sector employees fairly then we as a country are in serious trouble.

I know locally here in Omaha we have police and firefighters that are retiring at 45 with 6 figure retirement packages with full benefits.  They are very important jobs and deserve to be compensated well, but there have to be limits.

State taxes should be to pay for State things, Federal taxes should be to pay for National things (defense, highways, etc...)

If a state gets X% of their budget from the Feds then the feds have control over the state.  It's what the feds do.  Make your speed limit 55 or we'll keep your highway money.

I personally think taxes should be shifted so the states have more control over the spending.  If a state is getting $10B from the feds every year then lower their fed tax by $10B and raise the state tax by $10B and call it good. (I know its not that simple)

We have the same thing from the corporate side too.  Until we get money out of politics we will always have corruption.  Look at how many become lobbyist when they retire from the house or senate? 

Yep. This is one reason why the Ryan plan won't work. He assumes that the budget will eventuallyj ust be Defense/SS/Medicare/Medicaid. Do you think all the corporations are just going to give up their preferential treatment that easily?

I view my third party voting as a chance to change the direction of this country.  If a third party candidate can get 5% of the popular vote, then that party becomes eligible for a slice of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.  And if a third party candidate can ever poll at 15%, then they get to participate at the nationally televised debates.

I realize when I vote for Gary Johnson this year, I won't be backing a winner.  But it's the small little bit I can contribute to ending this broken two-party system that's killing our country.

If you believe that unions are "inherently corrupt", then the same must be said about corporations, and the people who hire in general (which would include current political officials). And if both sides are corrupted, but working against one another, then there is balance.

The difference between the two budgets is almost minimal. Here are some examples via http://www.tableausoftware.com/public/gallery/spend-or-not-spend