By Jennifer Rubin
January 6, 2014
...If you recall he previously (click here) said that extending unemployment benefits would be a “disservice“ to the unemployed. You can debate that proposition (Does the availability of minimal benefits cause people to slow down their job search?), but it ostensibly was based on the desire to attend to the needs of the jobless. But no more of that, Rand Paul now says. It’s simply a matter of money — taxpayer money. He’s decided that if we “pay for it” (i.e. cut elsewhere) we can extend the benefits. Won’t the jobless then be disserved — or was his previous opposition based on phony sentiments about what is good for the poor?
January 6, 2014
...If you recall he previously (click here) said that extending unemployment benefits would be a “disservice“ to the unemployed. You can debate that proposition (Does the availability of minimal benefits cause people to slow down their job search?), but it ostensibly was based on the desire to attend to the needs of the jobless. But no more of that, Rand Paul now says. It’s simply a matter of money — taxpayer money. He’s decided that if we “pay for it” (i.e. cut elsewhere) we can extend the benefits. Won’t the jobless then be disserved — or was his previous opposition based on phony sentiments about what is good for the poor?
If he is really concerned about the cost of unemployment benefits (about $25 billion for three months), then he’s fighting over nickels in the couch. The debt is over $17 trillion. (This is akin to his obsession over foreign aid spending, which is about 1 percent of federal spending.) It is hard to know whether Rand Paul is an opportunist, uniformed or both....
Senator Paul and Rubio need to introduce policy based in FACT and not simply steam. Where are the studies that PROVE the unemployed in the year 2014 are lazy and willing to slow down job seeking to opt for receiving a government check? Where is the study saying that?
Senator Rubio wants a war on poverty. Fine. Based on what? Where are the studies he is calling to construct policies that will reduce income inequality.
It is typical of Republicans and not just Paul and Rubio to make grandstanding statements without any substance. Americans aren't listening to 'mottos' anymore. There is too much on the line; the future of the Middle Class, the American Economy, the American Dream and the ability to enjoy sunset years. Where are the plans based in solid research and 'known to work' facts to carry out a PROGRAM to end poverty or return all Americans back to work and regain their integrity? No one is listening to the empty ranting that simply comes down to politics.
Where is the substance that ACTUALLY has a proven track record. Not the liars and deceivers at the Heritage Foundation that through credentials behind some 'idea' or another. Where are the policies that actually have a proven track record? And to simply say "Reaganominics." NOT! There was record high homeless in the USA during his Presidency. And believe or not, the homeless are poor.
