Robert Parry: Republicans Embrace 'Greedy Geezers'

[marmar]

from Consortium News:




Republicans Embrace 'Greedy Geezers'

By Robert Parry
April 25, 2011


The Republicans are making a cynical bet that Americans over 55 really are the “greedy geezers” of conservative ideology, people who care only for themselves and not for their children and subsequent generations.

That calculation is at the center of Rep. Paul Ryan’s proposal to replace Medicare with a voucher system, but only for those reaching retirement age in a decade.

Ryan and the Republicans have sought to dilute the political toxicity of their radical plan by grandfathering in people who are currently within the Medicare system and those who are now 55 or older.

Senior citizens vote in higher percentages than other demographic groups and thus could overturn the GOP’s House majority if they felt threatened by the transformation of Medicare. ..............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.consortiumnews.com/2011/042511.html

[Bok_Tukalo]

1. Seniors are being offered 30 pieces of silver

I don't think they will take it.

[LiberalLoner]

2. I disagree, I think they will take it. I think they will be all in favor of this. n/t

[LiberalLoner]

3. I don't think they will necessarily understand what it is they are in favor of, but

most of them will be in favor of whatever FOX noise tells them to be in favor of.

[Bozvotros]

4. As someone grandfathered into this plan by virtue of my age.....

Which I EARNED by living three years longer than those 55 year old deadbeats who just want a handout, I must say I approve of Representative Ryan's plan. We had to draw the line somewhere and there are hard choices to make. As long as I am exempt from the pain, I don't see why I should have to worry about those who aren't. This emphasis on fairness and justice just reaks of socialism.

So, no, I don't have a problem with it. In fact, I think for consistency sake we should lower the eligibility age for full social security benefits to age 55 and over as well. This could free up more jobs for those lazy folks under age 55 who say they can't find employment. Yes, there is a possibility that desperately unemployed younger people with families and fewer chronic health problems might get preference over older workers but that is just the free market at work. Especially if those younger workers concede to large wage and benefit cuts in order to avoid losing the homes they are underwater with. We all know that older workers are overpaid and are the main reason why the US economy is in decline.

However I do resent the characterization of myself as a greedy geezer.

[Zoeisright]

5. Did you forget the sarcasm tag?

Or is that post for real? Because if it's for real, I feel very sorry for you.

[marmar]

6. Please tell me you forgot the sarcasm tag and you aren't really that clueless.

nt

[Roy Ellefson]

7. sarcasm

if a sarcasm icon is needed for that post, all hope is lost.

[pscot]

9. Resent it? You represent it.

Unless that's some awesome snark. Consider this: the under 55's you're willing to put out on the ice will be panting for revenge about the time you're looking for a nursing home or hospice care. What comes around goes around, my friend. As you sow, so shall you reap.

[Uncle Joe]

8. Divide and conquer by only selling out the younger baby boomers and succeeding generations

in the hopes of retaining political support from the older ones.

Ryan's true concern is with protecting the interests of the mega-wealthy and for profit "health" insurance corporations while the middle and lower income class; those most vulnerable are sacrificed.

Thanks for the thread, marmar.