Mitt Romney and Rick Perry seemed to have a target on their backs. Most of the criticism from other candidates were aimed at them. However, there also seemed to be a mini duel between the two. Perry, debating for the first time, contradicted Romney's claims about creating jobs. Perry, governor of Texas claimed that he helped create 1 million jobs in 10 years. Romney refuted that saying Texans had no income tax, the oil and gas industry and fewer unions.
Are they spinning us here? Was it really a million jobs? And is Romney's challenge valid? I just feel very skeptical about everything these candidates say. I mean for one thing when Michele Bachmann said that she promised to completely repeal Obamacare, can she really promise that for sure? Well, of course she can't, but still, she said it too enthusiastically for me.
In addition, when Perry stated that Social Security is a lie, Romney challenged him, stating that millions of Americans live off of it, so obviously it's not a failure. I thought Perry was a little too harsh there saying Social Security is a failure. It may not be perfect, but I have to agree with Romney on that that we need to fix it and make it better and for sure keep it. What do you guys think? Is Social Security really that much of a failure?
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree with you - Perry did go a bit over the top by calling Social Security a "ponzi scheme" and a "failure". Romney was right in that it has obviously helped (and continues to help) millions of Americans since its genesis in the 30's. However, with all the baby boomers now leaving the workforce and entering retirement, Social Security is going and will go through a major rough patch, one that would indeed bring about the exigence to "fix" Social Security.
Another one of Perry's provocative comments he made during the debate that caught my attention was when he said that Obama has proven "once and for all that government spending will not create one job. Keynesian policy and Keynesian theory is now done. We'll never have to have that experiment on America again." Well what about the Great Depression, when it was FDR's very application of Keynesian economics that helped us get out of that crisis? I believe Perry made the mistake of not realizing that it's not Keynesian economics that's the problem - it was just the fact that Obama and the federal government didn't spend enough money that makes it look like Keynesian economics doesn't work. Tonight's debate was truly a captivating one.
Perry and some of these other candidates seem to think that any government program designed to help individuals, from which there is no monetary gain, is wrong. So that means social security, Medicaid, food stamps...The problem with politicians is that oftentimes they're looking at life from the perspective of a successful person; it seems to be hard for them to grasp the idea that hard work doesn't always pay off, and something that helps people survive every day is certainly not a failure in the eyes of most people. Perry's just using this inflamed rhetoric to try and simplify a complicated issue.
Post a Comment