Easy.. by cutting 40% of every federal program except Medicare, social security and defence ..
Consider what the Romney campaign, then, is saying: If Romney is elected, then by his third year in office, every single federal program that is not Medicare, Social Security, or defense, will be cut, on average, by 40 percent. That means Medicaid, infrastructure, education, food safety, road safety, the postal service, basic research, foreign aid, housing subsidies, food stamps, the Census, Pell grants, the Patent and Trademark Office, the FDA — all of it has to be cut by, on average, 40 percent. If Romney tried to protect any particular priority, it would mean all the others have to be cut by more than 40 percent.
That’s not even remotely plausible. The consequences would be catastrophic. The outcry would be deafening. And Romney has shown no stomach for selling such severe cuts.
Easy.. by cutting 40% of every federal program except Medicare, social security and defence ..
Consider what the Romney campaign, then, is saying: If Romney is elected, then by his third year in office, every single federal program that is not Medicare, Social Security, or defense, will be cut, on average, by 40 percent. That means Medicaid, infrastructure, education, food safety, road safety, the postal service, basic research, foreign aid, housing subsidies, food stamps, the Census, Pell grants, the Patent and Trademark Office, the FDA — all of it has to be cut by, on average, 40 percent. If Romney tried to protect any particular priority, it would mean all the others have to be cut by more than 40 percent.
That’s not even remotely plausible. The consequences would be catastrophic. The outcry would be deafening. And Romney has shown no stomach for selling such severe cuts.
My friend, don’t you know the absurdity of that statement?
Don’t you know there is no such thing as a permanent rich or average or poor category?
Didn’t Einstein teach us about relativity? (Albeit in the realm of physics as opposed to sociology)
Rich by who’s definition. Poor according to whom.
Is an American welfare recipient (with his or her free (taxpayer funded) cell phone, subsidized housing, EBT card, which, most of the time is used to buy lottery tickets and booze) poor compared to a Nigerian factory worker or an Ivory Coast wholesaler?
Is a $100,000 salaried technician rich compared to a $5 million a year professional athlete who’s performance might be mediocre at best compared to his peers?
Don’t you understand that prosperity, or lack thereof is a continually evolving phenomenon mostly (but not entirely) contingent upon effort, talent and luck?
Don’t you know that today’s winning streak is tomorrow’s losing streak?
Don’t you know that low income people of today are prosperous and comfortable folks 25 years from now?
Don’t you know that the top Forbes businesses of today are the potential bankruptcy filers of tomorrow?
Is a person on a 35,000 a year salary who has saved over his lifetime and has retired with 100,000 in savings “rich”?
More importantly, don’t you know that you don’t know?
My friend, don’t you know the absurdity of that statement?
Don’t you know there is no such thing as a permanent rich or average or poor category?
Didn’t Einstein teach us about relativity? (Albeit in the realm of physics as opposed to sociology)
Rich by who’s definition. Poor according to whom.
Is an American welfare recipient (with his or her free (taxpayer funded) cell phone, subsidized housing, EBT card, which, most of the time is used to buy lottery tickets and booze) poor compared to a Nigerian factory worker or an Ivory Coast wholesaler?
Is a $100,000 salaried technician rich compared to a $5 million a year professional athlete who’s performance might be mediocre at best compared to his peers?
Don’t you understand that prosperity, or lack thereof is a continually evolving phenomenon mostly (but not entirely) contingent upon effort, talent and luck?
Don’t you know that today’s winning streak is tomorrow’s losing streak?
Don’t you know that low income people of today are prosperous and comfortable folks 25 years from now?
Don’t you know that the top Forbes businesses of today are the potential bankruptcy filers of tomorrow?
Is a person on a 35,000 a year salary who has saved over his lifetime and has retired with 100,000 in savings “rich”?
More importantly, don’t you know that you don’t know?
Easy.. by cutting 40% of every federal program except Medicare, social security and defence ..
Consider what the Romney campaign, then, is saying: If Romney is elected, then by his third year in office, every single federal program that is not Medicare, Social Security, or defense, will be cut, on average, by 40 percent. That means Medicaid, infrastructure, education, food safety, road safety, the postal service, basic research, foreign aid, housing subsidies, food stamps, the Census, Pell grants, the Patent and Trademark Office, the FDA — all of it has to be cut by, on average, 40 percent. If Romney tried to protect any particular priority, it would mean all the others have to be cut by more than 40 percent.
That’s not even remotely plausible. The consequences would be catastrophic. The outcry would be deafening. And Romney has shown no stomach for selling such severe cuts.
Easy.. by cutting 40% of every federal program except Medicare, social security and defence ..
Consider what the Romney campaign, then, is saying: If Romney is elected, then by his third year in office, every single federal program that is not Medicare, Social Security, or defense, will be cut, on average, by 40 percent. That means Medicaid, infrastructure, education, food safety, road safety, the postal service, basic research, foreign aid, housing subsidies, food stamps, the Census, Pell grants, the Patent and Trademark Office, the FDA — all of it has to be cut by, on average, 40 percent. If Romney tried to protect any particular priority, it would mean all the others have to be cut by more than 40 percent.
That’s not even remotely plausible. The consequences would be catastrophic. The outcry would be deafening. And Romney has shown no stomach for selling such severe cuts.
My friend, don’t you know the absurdity of that statement?
Don’t you know there is no such thing as a permanent rich or average or poor category?
Didn’t Einstein teach us about relativity? (Albeit in the realm of physics as opposed to sociology)
Rich by who’s definition. Poor according to whom.
Is an American welfare recipient (with his or her free (taxpayer funded) cell phone, subsidized housing, EBT card, which, most of the time is used to buy lottery tickets and booze) poor compared to a Nigerian factory worker or an Ivory Coast wholesaler?
Is a $100,000 salaried technician rich compared to a $5 million a year professional athlete who’s performance might be mediocre at best compared to his peers?
Don’t you understand that prosperity, or lack thereof is a continually evolving phenomenon mostly (but not entirely) contingent upon effort, talent and luck?
Don’t you know that today’s winning streak is tomorrow’s losing streak?
Don’t you know that low income people of today are prosperous and comfortable folks 25 years from now?
Don’t you know that the top Forbes businesses of today are the potential bankruptcy filers of tomorrow?
Is a person on a 35,000 a year salary who has saved over his lifetime and has retired with 100,000 in savings “rich”?
More importantly, don’t you know that you don’t know?
My friend, don’t you know the absurdity of that statement?
Don’t you know there is no such thing as a permanent rich or average or poor category?
Didn’t Einstein teach us about relativity? (Albeit in the realm of physics as opposed to sociology)
Rich by who’s definition. Poor according to whom.
Is an American welfare recipient (with his or her free (taxpayer funded) cell phone, subsidized housing, EBT card, which, most of the time is used to buy lottery tickets and booze) poor compared to a Nigerian factory worker or an Ivory Coast wholesaler?
Is a $100,000 salaried technician rich compared to a $5 million a year professional athlete who’s performance might be mediocre at best compared to his peers?
Don’t you understand that prosperity, or lack thereof is a continually evolving phenomenon mostly (but not entirely) contingent upon effort, talent and luck?
Don’t you know that today’s winning streak is tomorrow’s losing streak?
Don’t you know that low income people of today are prosperous and comfortable folks 25 years from now?
Don’t you know that the top Forbes businesses of today are the potential bankruptcy filers of tomorrow?
Is a person on a 35,000 a year salary who has saved over his lifetime and has retired with 100,000 in savings “rich”?
More importantly, don’t you know that you don’t know?
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so. It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly. Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality. Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it. As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.