http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/10/19/bloomberg_articlesLTAC6H0UQVI9.DTL
How would you respond to this criticism of Ron Paul's budget plan?
"
What's wrong with this? It doesn't take much work to paint a dystopian picture. Let's begin with a simple example. Without an Interior Department, there would be no agency to oversee national parks, federal lands and offshore drilling. Land would have to be auctioned off to the highest bidders, most likely oil-and-gas, coal and timber companies. The states would inherit Teddy Roosevelt's national parks, but imagine how Yosemite would fare if it suddenly became the ward of strapped California.
Or let's imagine another scene from Mr. Paul's America. Each state would have to become the regulator of its financial, manufacturing and health-care industries. A patchwork of rules would result. States might soon engage in a dangerous game of regulatory competition: Some would ease rules to attract businesses, forcing those seeking to protect the health and pocketbooks of residents to lower their standards -- or lose jobs. Illinois might choose, say, to let manufacturers dump waste in the Mississippi River. What recourse would downstream Missouri, Tennessee or Louisiana have if their drinking water became polluted?
Or let's simply consider what would happen if the under-30 crowd stopped contributing to Social Security: The pay-as-you-go system would dry up, depriving today's retirees of benefits. About 25 million elderly households now depend entirely on Social Security for income, leaving them unable to buy food or pay heating bills.
Low-income families would be hit the hardest. By converting Medicaid into a block grant, Paul would freeze what is now a $285 billion program at $186 billion from 2013 to 2016. He would do the same for food stamps, now a $58 billion program; it would be downsized to $30 billion four years in a row."
Translation: "We know better than you what to do with your own money, so shut up and pay up."
The keyboard is mightier than the gun.
Non parit potestas ipsius auctoritatem.
Voluntaryism Forum
Any time you try to tell liberals that their welfare programs are insolvent, they just say, "yeah but you can't cut it because people rely on it." Nice logic, bro.
Can we say special pleading and ad hoc hypotheses?
imagine how Yosemite would fare if it suddenly became the ward of strapped California
How is the Federal government magically nice when the states are evil? Lat time I checked California had big representation in Congress...
Some would ease rules to attract businesses
Sign me up. Any of libertarianism's large supply of critiques of regulation can be used here.
Illinois might choose, say, to let manufacturers dump waste in the Mississippi River
And guess what? The Constitution allows for citizens suing other states through the federal government! Gasp! Property rights would be much benefited. Polluting one's property is illegal.
Plus, if McDonalds starts dumping on the Mississippi, people can stop buying from it. Ostracize McDonals.
The pay-as-you-go system would dry up, depriving today's retirees of benefits
I do not know the specific of Ron Paul's plan, but I am quite sure he has already added that in.
Low-income families would be hit the hardest. By converting Medicaid into a block grant, Paul would freeze what is now a $285 billion program at $186 billion from 2013 to 2016. He would do the same for food stamps, now a $58 billion program; it would be downsized to $30 billion four years in a row.
Read as: we've gone too far, we can't go back!
Hey, if this guy thinks that this is such a big problem, why doesn't he contribute $1000 to such families? After all, he's the one who voted for the bad policies in the first place (likely wrong, actually, but he supports them).
Psh, talk about a gateway drug.