Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

1 Bump

IYO, Is Paul Ryans plan right wing social engineering?

WASHINGTON -- Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich distanced himself on Sunday from a House GOP plan to make cuts to Medicare, calling it "too big a jump" for the American people.
"What you want to have is a system where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose it," he said on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I am against Obamacare imposing radical change, and I would be against a conservative imposing radical change."

The House GOP budget plan, proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), would effectively turn Medicare into a voucher system in which seniors were given money by the federal government to purchase private insurance, creating a radically different system than the current guaranteed benefit plan for seniors.

Gingrich said he would prefer a system that preserved the current Medicare program and also created a private alternative.

"I don't think right-wing social engineering is any more desirable than left-wing social engineering," he said. "I think we need a national conversation to get to a better Medicare solution for seniors."

Ryan, meanwhile, defended his budget plan on Sunday, saying on CNN's "State of the Union" that he is not backing down from his plan to restructure Medicare.

"We sincerely believe that our budget repairs the safety social net and repairs our economy," he said. "It is the right vision and we believe it is what Americans want."

Answer Question

Asked by sweet-a-kins at 9:24 AM on May. 16, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 34 (67,502 Credits)
Answers (15)
  • No, I think it is more like trying to save America's ass

    Answer by Carpy at 9:29 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • We shouldn't try to fix what isn't broken. What is broken is our priorities

    Answer by adnilm at 9:57 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • We shouldn't try to fix what isn't broken

    True, but that's another question. We are talking about medicare

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 10:18 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • It should be a crime for anyone to look America in the eyes and say we don't need to do anything about medicare and medicaid. (SS too)
    But then how many other lies have you heard from those in government?

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 10:24 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • Well, I think Newt had his chance to fix things long ago...long before they reached a crisis level. He failed to do so. He isn't offering up anything now but really don't give a rats behind what Newt thinks.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 10:28 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • Based on the copied and pasted article provided, I don't agree with Newt.

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 10:51 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • It's difficult (more like impossible) for people to migrate towards an option that isn't available. As long as people are forced to pay into Medicare and SS long before they need it, most aren't going to try and make another choice, or pay into two. Given the economy right now, no one HAS the extra money to do so.

    If they made both an option, with the understanding that if you don't pay in you can't claim benefits later, it would help. It's the only way that I see to clearing the way to fix either ~ aside from forcing the federal gov't. to put back all of the cash (plus interest) that it has removed.

    The other thing that should be done is to cap the costs on common medications. There is NO justification for charging hundreds of dollars a month for a small bottle of pills ... other than to cover the advertising costs. Make advertising illegal and set a reasonable cap!

    Answer by Farmlady09 at 10:51 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • I don't think his plan would work. So the Gov. gives seniors funds to purchase private insurance, what happens as premiums go up & up. It wouldn't be long before many seniors couldn't afford the premiums and there's no guarantee the voucher would even cover the initial cost.

    Another part of Ryan's plan calls for the elimination of the Capital Gains tax. That may sound like a good idea, but really the Capital Gains tax only affect the average American, maybe ONCE in their lifetime and then ONLY if they, say sold a house and made a profit over a certain amount (something like 500,000). Then again, if they purchase another home with those funds, which most do, they don't pay it. So who would eliminating the Capital Gains tax benefit? The VERY VERY wealthy who derive most of their income from Captial Gains, they wouldn't be paying any taxes on that income. So to answer the question about Social Engineering, his whole (cont

    Answer by meriana at 11:10 AM on May. 16, 2011

  • plan is about taking from the middle & lower income groups, while giving more to the very, very wealthy, keeping them very wealthy & making it more difficult for seniors to afford health care as time goes on. In an effort to cover the costs, many seniors who are now middle income will find themselves much lower on the scale as more of their available funds go to health care, leaving less for food, houseing, etc. Guess if you entire groups of people in those circumstances, one could consider it Social Engineering.

    Answer by meriana at 11:11 AM on May. 16, 2011


    Based on the copied and pasted article provided, I don't agree with Newt.

    Ill remember this when you dont comment on your girly circle c & typical and small of you


    Comment by sweet-a-kins (original poster) at 11:15 AM on May. 16, 2011

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.

Next question in Politics & Current Events
Just curious???

Next question overall
Dora or Deigo?