The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee just released a new web video targeting Congressman Paul Ryan’s proposed budget plan backed by the GOP.
Text on the screen reads, “seniors will have to find $12,500 for Health Care because Republicans voted to end Medicare. How will you pay?”
The video shows an elderly man doing odd jobs, like working a lemonade stand, mowing lawns — with a walker — and even stripping at a bachelorette party to make ends meet.
Leave a Comment:
Great ad, finally some fighting words.
It seems like more of the same thing, fear mongering with a twist. why would anyone want to harness their kids with more debt? Why don’t we quite giving our tax money to our enemies and pay down our national debt, getting rid of it would be the best thing one could do for this country.
Ask your Republican friends why we shouild harness our kids with thiis debt. Their the ones that gave the wealthy a big tax cut and now want more. I wonder if that Tea Party lady still has that sign that said "government, keep your hands off my medicare."
No, $65,000 is not considered wealthy, nor does it come close to falling within the top 2% of incomes. Usually this figure is listed at $250,000 annually, although the conversation often refers to only those making $1million or more annually. This information is pretty easy to find if you Google it, and space is limited here, but I’ll try.
To begin, you need to distinguish between wealth and income. Generally speaking the wealthiest also will have the highest income, but not all income comes from salaries and wages. For example, in 2008, only 19% of the income reported by the 13,480 individuals or families making over $10 million came from wages and salaries. Remember also that Medicare and Social Security taxes are payroll taxes. Medicare is paid on 100% of your wages/salary, while Social Security caps out at a little under $107,000 annual salary.
If you look at the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans, about 400 people, their tax rates fell by 13% from 1995 to 2007. During the same period their incomes rose 16.9%. I don’t know about you, but my tax rate has certainly not dropped 13%. Ryan’s plan wants to drop that tax rate yet another 10%, for a total of a 23% cut.
And this doesn’t even begin to look at the subsidies for large corporations. Why are those ‘off the table’? Why is defense ‘off the table’? A look at Ryan’s report from CBO is also helpful, because the claims made for his plan do not fit the CBO findings.
Hopefully these links will post. If not, they are easily Googled.
http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/04/20/changes-in-u-s-income-inequality-and-tax-rates/
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/121xx/doc12128/04-05-Ryan_Letter.pdf
G., define "fun money" please. what a person has left over after taxes and living expenses is not what one uses to define wealth. i am sure there are many people who would LOVE to have 21,000.00 left after taxes and all living expenses were met. many of the elderly in our country live at or below the poverty level, cannot meet their living expenses, and have to choose between their medications and heat or food, and surely do not have "fun money". as for paying down the debt, 99.9% of the republican party doesn't really mean it when they say everything is on the table. taking the tax rate back to the clinton era level is NOT on the table. its OK for the elderly and poor and mentally ill, the vulnerable, to give up "entitlements", which in many cases will leave them destitute. but the republicans don't want the rich to give up anything, the rich who will always be OK.
this tells us who the republicans are as a whole. it appears that to the republicans, "equality" (meeting only basic needs, health care included) has nothing to do with life in general because inequality has always existed, and it always will, and there is nothing they can do about it. they could do something about it, by not putting a large part of the debt on the backs of the people who truly cannot afford it. but, to the republicans, the poor, the elderly and the vulnerable do not matter. we see it time and again by the way they vote on issues related to how they think it will affect their political lives.
this is the true debate over "death panels", but we don't hear from republicans how taking health care from the most vulnerable in our society will affect them personally. only people who can afford health care should have it, according to the republicans.
also, the two income levels you mentioned above, will not be affected by tax increases. if EVERYTHING is on the table, the republicans should play fair.
My Democrats need to make it clear that Social Security WHICH IS NOT IN TROUBLE, and Medicare which our seniors need desperately need is OFF THE TABLE! Period, not raise the age, not reduce benefits. And tell the Repubs to wipe their behinds with the "vouchers" they want to replace Medicare.
Mr Odonnell, I've been wondering for sometime why no public figure has been willing to address the hate and racism concerning the so called birther issue of our president ,and the utmost disrespect shown toward him. The individuals that follow this path, have no reasons for their dispictable behaviour and will continue to show their hateful and ignorant ways no matter what's prooved to be true concerning our president. I think that it is trully unamerican to disrespect a sitting president the way these ignorant people have done President Obama. Thank you for calling it what it is{re:donald trump--no capitals earned}. RE: MSNBC SHOW 04/20/2011
G Thomas, If healthcare cost were not out of control, which no Republican is truly trying to address this issue, your uncle's cost would not have been such a burden. Get the taxes right...AND PAID, I think that a lot of things would not be such a burden. There sure seems like a lot of things that can and would be taken care of IF the 2%ers paid the % that they did when things went so well not so very long ago. That seems like part of the system that is broken and in need of fixing.
As for your response to another poster concerning what is wealthy. What do you consider wealthy, or poor for that matter? I know that someone making 250K a yr has a helluva lot more wiggle room than someone making under 50k. Just Sayin'
Don't give your money to the DCCC. (Or the DSCC or the DNC, for that matter.) Give it directly to the candidate of your choice. It's easy enough to give to them online and it's plenty easy to find out who is doing a good job.
They will take your money and give it around to candidates that you don't agree with. Instead, you can target your money to exactly those candidates that are working the hardest for you.
In the 21st century, you don't need to use 19th century means. Use the Google or the Bing or whatever, and do a little research. Then send that cash to the candidate that will give you the most in return. I personally use the ActBlue, but I'm sure there are other means. Heck, if you really want to preserve a little 19th century, write them a check. Pretend you're a lobbyist.
Because, when you contribute to a candidate, quite frankly, that's what you are.
This ad is demeaning and stupid and a waste of time and money. It depicts older people doing stupid demeaning things. Frankly, many old people aren't even capable of performing these silly antics. Old guy dancing with young girls at a party - this is how you choose to show the plight of seniors? Stop - it's almost like the DCCC is going out of its way to turn out horrible ads and get negative feedback.
Shark, I liked the ad. While, sure, I might have used something different, but the overall message is very clear. Now that clear message has been missing from the dccc a longtime. You are 100% correct in saying many older folks cannot do these things, THAT IS THE POINT.