Catholibertarian

Posted in Catholic, Catholic Social Teaching, Catholicism, Christian, Conservatism, Economics, Economy, Morality, Politics, Presidential election, Religion, U.S. government | Tagged debt, Federal Budget, medicare, Mitt Romney, morality, poverty, preferential option for the poor and vulnerable, prudential judgment, Raymond Arroyo, reform, Rep. Paul Ryan, safety net, Social Magisterium, social security, solidarity, subsidiarity, The Path to Prosperity, welfare | 5 Comments

5 Responses

1. on August 13, 2012 at 12:44 am | Reply Noel Williams (prhayz) www.prhayz.com

   I am slanted toward the Democratic Party, but I pay attention to the facts, and I couldn’t disagree with Paul Ryan more. Aside from extraordinarily obsess with cutting taxes for the top 1%, and giving the bag to the poor; one of the GOP’s biggest aims is to dismantle the social safety net—privatize Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security. And every time they tried; they use a different tactic. The new tactic they are using to substantiate their obsession is the deficit. They are claiming that if they do not cut the above mentioned programs, the national debt will spin out of control. We know this argument does not hold water because when they were at the reins, they wiped out a budget surplus and run up a deficit. Plus Paul Ryan had voted for all the programs that help to run up the deficit under president George Bush.

   
   
   • on August 13, 2012 at 5:14 am | Reply Teresa Rice

     Noel,

     The problem with that logic is that that is basically saying two wrongs make a right. We did experience 9/11 under Bush and because of 9/11 their were economic woes that dealt a big blow to the United States. Do you know when the biggest rise in spending happened under Bush? It was when the Democrats controlled Congress. Do you know why we even had a budget surplus under Clinton? In large part due to welfare reform which Clinton only signed after the 3rd time it landed on his desk and due to a Republican-controlled Congress.

     The GOP is not about just cutting taxes for the 1%, they are for cutting taxes for everyone so it benefits everyone. That is a meme brought about by the Democratic Party. Did you know pretty much every time in our history that a progressive politician has promised to only raise taxes on the 1% that politician has ended up raising taxes on everyone? That is one of the problem with Democrats is they are a bunch of lying users of the poor. The other problem is they believe in tyranny and not liberty – example HHS mandate. Democrats/Socialists have pretty much always been the ones to threaten religious freedom and that holds true today in America. At least with the GOP I don’t have to worry about my right to religious liberty being threatened. I could never vote for a big government Party like the Democrats who think that government is the panacea to all that ails us. Most often government is the problem.

     You do realize that when Obama took Office the national debt was at about $9 Trillion and now it is at at least $15 Trillion? Actually by doing nothing the Democratic Party is dismantling the social safety net. The GOP actually wants to give grandma more choices leading to more affordability. The GOP actually wants to save medicare, social security as well as other programs. Noel, I am urging you man to please go outside of your Democrat bubble and do some research on the subjects above. I have done research in a number of areas going out of my bubble so I encourage you to stop believing the Democrats falsehoods hook, line, and sinker.

     
     
2. on August 13, 2012 at 5:26 am | Reply Teresa Rice

   Tax cuts help everyone, especially the poor Noel.

   “According to US Treasury statistics, for example, the 1982 tax act increased revenues by $130 billion in its first four years – after tax rates were cut dramatically. The 1984 Deficit Reduction Act increased tax collections by $72 billion in the four years after taxes were cut again. The bulk of these revenue increases came from the wealthiest Americans. This should not have been a surprise.

   Across-the-board tax cuts had been implemented in the 1920s as the Mellon tax cuts, and in the 1960s as the Kennedy tax cuts. In both cases the reduction of high marginal tax rates actually increased tax payments by “the rich,” and also increased their share of total individual income taxes paid. According to the IRS in 1981 the top 1 percent of income earners paid 17.6 percent of all personal income taxes, but by 1988 their share had jumped to 27.5 percent – after the top tax rate had been cut from 69.13% in 1981 to 28% in 1988.

   The broad-based income tax cuts that President Reagan implemented in the 1980’s set off an entrepreneurial boom that propelled the growth of the economy for the next 20 years. Certainly the Clinton Presidency benefited from the tax cuts, and to Clinton’s credit, he even added his own cut by reducing the Capital Gains Tax.

   Reagan’s detractors point to his lack of sensitivity for social issues and the legacy of his deficit spending- yet the legacy is a positive one. In the seven years following the Reagan tax cuts almost 20 million good paying jobs were created (US Dept. of Labor).

   According to Joint Economic Committee for the US Congress report (1996) the share of the income tax burden borne by the top 10 percent of taxpayers increased from 48 percent in 1981 to 57.2 percent in 1988. Meanwhile, the share of income taxes paid by the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers dropped from 7.5 percent in 1981 to 5.7 percent in 1988.

   The middle class also benefited, middle class being defined as those between the 50th percentile and the 95th percentile for income. Between 1981 and 1988, the income tax burden of the middle class declined from 57.5 percent in 1981 to 48.7 percent in 1988. This 8.8 percentage point decline in middle class tax burden is entirely accounted for by the increase borne by the top one percent.

   According to the Bureau of Labor statistics inflation, measured by the consumer price index, increased by 49.5% between 1977 and 1981. Between 1982 and 1986 inflation was 19.1% – much lower than prior to the tax cuts.”

   http://www.carverfinancialservices.com/blog/?p=180

   
   
3. on August 13, 2012 at 4:19 pm | Reply lighthousecatholicgirl

   People shouldn’t be staying on these government programs indefinitely, but with them, there is no incentive to work.

   
   
   • on August 13, 2012 at 8:45 pm | Reply Teresa Rice

     I agree, at least for the most part. There are those who are physically and/or mentally handicapped who truly are unable to work or if they do work part-time they still need some help from the government. The other people who abuse the system need to stop getting handouts from the government (taxpayers) and go back to work. It gives a person a sense of pride to work. God Bless.