Paul: jobless aid ‘weakens’ U.S.

[ProSense]

Paul: jobless aid ‘weakens’ U.S.

By Steve Benen

A couple of weeks ago, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) reemphasized his opposition to extended emergency unemployment benefits in a rather startling way. To continue to provide assistance to these jobless Americans, the Republican senator said, would be to “do a disservice to these workers.” He repeated the line a week later...for Rand Paul, cutting off aid to those struggling to find work during a period of high unemployment is actually doing those folks a favor.

He continues to believe this.

Paul, who’s openly considering a bid for president in 2016, said in a Friday interview with NBC News that extending unemployment benefits past 26 weeks will hurt workers – and that paying for it without raising taxes weakens America.

“Does it make sense for our country to borrow money from China to give it to the unemployed in America? That is weakening us as a country,” Paul told NBC News.

It’s important to understand how misguided his argument really is. For one thing, China owns only a small percentage of U.S. debt. For another, there’s no reason policymakers necessarily have to borrow the funds needed to help the unemployed (though borrowing costs are low and it makes perfect economic sense to do so).

But the notion that helping the unemployed “is weakening us as a country” is plainly ridiculous. Will the nation be stronger on Sunday when 1.3 million Americans lose their purchasing power, costing the country as many as 300,000 jobs in 2014?

Indeed, it’s not unreasonable to consider this a binary choice. Under which scenario is the United States better off: helping these 1.3 million jobless or cutting them off? Paul believes the latter, but every shred of evidence points in the opposite direction.

- more -

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/paul-jobless-aid-weakens-us

Ad targets Republicans over 1.3 million Americans on the brink of losing unemployment aid
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024231250

[JaneyVee]

1. Millions of newly homeless families dying on the streets = Good for America.

Healthcare for all = Bad for America.

Republican logic.

[DinahMoeHum]

2. Says the quack doctor. . .

. . .what a tool.

[hobbit709]

3. It's long past time that twit tried to find new employment.

[nyquil_man]

4. Did it weaken our country to borrow it for tax cuts and wars?

Gee, I wonder.

Oh, to hell with it... Fuck Rand Paul.

On second thought... Fuck Rand Paul's toupee and the horse's ass it rode in on.

[G_j]

5. Clue: weakening the citizens

weakens the country. DUH!

[blkmusclmachine]

6. Pretty sure Paul is a Christian Dominionist of the 7 Mountains/New Apostolic Reformation Theology.

[reACTIONary]

28. Worse...

...he's an aquaBuddha

[dawg]

7. Rand Paul is either ...

functionally innumerate or a heartless liar.

[Cha]

12. See post #10..

[Iggo]

8. No. Joblessness weakens the US.

Whaddaya doin' about it, Pauley Boy?

[Brigid]

9. Dear Rand Paul:

If you abandon people to fend for themselves as best they might, you may not like how they do it. Just sayin'.

Love,
Brigid

[Demoiselle]

17. Exactly, Brigid.

Right Wing theories have no connection with reality. I can't help thinking that this kind of philosophy is as aimless and unfocused as a typical "suburban" subdivision. No crossroads, no "main streets," no focus, just endless circles and dead ends. Does that metaphor make sense to anybody else?

[Cha]

10. "So that's my advice"..

[ProSense]

29. Maybe the squirrel is squeezing too hard

Nut!

[MADem]

11. I SMH that people on this board actually support that asshole, and believe his bullshit.

He and his "deddy" are a bunch of nutty, nasty, racist shits.

What weakens us as a country is that shitheel getting any airtime to tout his warped, 'Randian' views.

Fuck Rand Paul.

[freshwest]

31. Shit happens... I don't want to believe people listen to this shithead either, but I can read. n/t

[The Blue Flower]

13. Are there no workhouses?

Actually, no, because that would be a government program.

[sheshe2]

14. Douche of the day!

Seriously, thanks for your OP, ProSense.

[Dustlawyer]

15. Make him explain this "1984" bullshit! I mean really! When will we get us a good "media Snowden"

who will show us how we are being brainwashed (so that Bubba can get it too!)

[Mass]

16. I wished somebody asked him how these people are supposed to live without these benefits.

Also, what is the GOP proposing to find them jobs. Because there is one point where he is right: it is A LOT HARDER to find a job after a certain time. So, what specific actions will be made to help these people (and the same question applies to democrats).

[47of74]

18. Up yours Rand Paul

[grilled onions]

19. Asinine Logic

If you are out of work...don't give unemployment
If you are hungry...don't get food
If you are sick..don't get medical care
The Republican Tri F***A

[Jack Rabbit]

20. I wish you'd stop being so good to me, Cap'n

[center]

[/center]

[freshwest]

32. Rand is working hard to be promoted to overseer of the chain gang. Freedom, my ass! n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

36. You hit the nail the head

A right winger like Senator Paul may proclaim liberty or freedom at the top of his lung from a rooftop, but he seems to think it means the freedom to enslave others.

If anyone here sees the Senator, tell him I'll take socialism over that kind of freedom.

[chungking34]

21. Screw him and his batshit crazy daddy!

Thank god this arsehole isn't in charge of anything important in this country. He'd turn this country into the next Somalia in no time.

[Drunken Irishman]

22. STAND WITH RAND!

[Jamaal510]

34. I wonder if Madea

regrets standing with Rand now?

[Scalded Nun]

23. The GOP has become so fucking evil

Not bad
Not misunderstood
Not misguided
Not good intentions gone bad
Not lazy

They are unapologetically evil, and will bury this country if given the chance.

[cstanleytech]

24. I personally agree with Rand a bit on this.

But not for the same reason because imo the aid is just a bandaid fix when what we need is a major creation of jobs in this country say by the federal government spending the money thats needed to rebuild things the country needs like roads and bridges as well as schools rather than spending and wasting billions upon billions on "defense".

[Matariki]

25. I think what we need is a reasonable redistribution of resources

as in tax rates back to at least what there were when Reagan was President. Because otherwise money accumulates where there is already money and a smaller and smaller number of people control all the wealth.

When I was a kid in the 60's there was a promise that technology would create more leisure - but instead everyone is clamoring after more 'jobs' while families work twice as many hours or more than they did in the 60s.

I say, shorter work weeks, more leisure, better wealth distribution via a more fair tax code.

[ProSense]

26. You're taking a

"But not for the same reason because imo the aid is just a bandaid fix when what we need is a major creation of jobs in this country say by the federal government spending the money thats needed to rebuild things the country needs like roads and bridges as well as schools rather than spending and wasting billions upon billions on 'defense'."

...a premise and attributing it to Paul. The above has nothing to do with Paul's thinking. He's not only claiming that benefits "weaken" the U.S. (which is absolute BS), but also projecting his depravity by claiming that cutting aid to those who are jobless is good for them.

He has no interest in economic stimulus or infrastructure spending. Also, people are losing benefits next week.

[cstanleytech]

27. Oh I never said he would support my idea and that in all likelyhood he would oppose it

because lets face it...........he really is just that stupid.

[spanone]

30. the man is absolutely full of shit.

[ProSense]

38. Who votes for this moron? n/t

[Samantha]

33. Historically, when the economy took a downturn both Dems and Republicans united to support

unemployment benefits, food stamps, and other incentives to put money in the hands of those who would spend it. For every dollar invested, a larger return something like $1.76 would come back to the economy. So in the best interests of stimulating the economy these types of programs were not even debated, they were implemented by a bipartisan vote of approval by a majority of Dems and Republicans.

What exactly is Ryan's position on the history of Republicans approving these expenditures to stoke the economy in the past? And what exactly has changed that makes these programs harmful instead of helpful today?

Sam

[Jamaal510]

35. No, Dr (quack). Paul,

it is these libertarian wild-west fiscal policies your party is trying to push that are weakening the U.S. Thanks for playing, though.

[ProSense]

37. Good one. n/t