Why Ron Paul's Massive Cuts to Social Programs Wouldn't Be An Economic DisasterSubmitted by principle_first on Fri, 06/22/2012 - 15:15
Implementing Ron Paul's plan to "Restore America" would require massive cuts to various social programs across the board. Such things as food stamp programs would see over a 50 percent reduction in funding. Whenever a politician - other than Ron Paul - is asked about cutting 1 trillion dollars from the federal budget in just 1 year, they say it would be economic suicide or disastrous to do so. Even Mitt Romney is on the record for saying such things. There are others who say that those who depend on these programs would end up homeless and would starve as they are forced to fend for themselves.
Hearing such critiques of Paul's economic plan might turn away the average, casual listener of the news. One could see how the repetition of the words - disastrous, homeless, and starving - on televised news stations could make a plan sound impractical even though it remains the only detailed planned provided by any politician to address our economic crisis. Millions of people who watch Fox News everyday have just acquired their ammunition to shoot down a plan that could "Restore America." Their talking point becomes, "Cutting 1 trillion dollars from the federal budget in 1 year would cause millions to starve." Simple, yet reasonable enough to no longer consider it a valid option. Just what Fox News - or any other outlet for that matter - wants you to think.
It is this ideology that I have a major problem with. Many people believe that government is needed to prevent starvation, homelessness, or even economic crisis. Besides the agreed upon exception of national defense, I believe government should have a very limited role in the day-to-day aspects of our society. To the casual viewer of televised news media, I probably sound inhumane, racist, or any one of the other labels given to those who believe in true freedom and liberty.
To those casual viewers, I would like to share some information with you that might provide some insight on what a truly free society might look like. One where government is not needed to regulate or control a situation. The casual viewer might ask, "well if government does not help the starving and homeless, who will? Wouldn't they end up dying!" Here's a link to a news story that I'm sure millions of casual viewers already know about:
This story comes straight from Fox News which millions watch/read/listen to every day. A feel good story if there ever was one. This lady was not starving nor was she homeless. Yet for withstanding a slew of verbal assaults from middle school students on a bus ride, she now has a trip to Disneyland and over 500,000 dollars in donations from average citizens which that amount continues to climb as I write this. Now don't get me wrong - no one should have to experience such belittlement - but answer this. Will millions of Americans die of starvation because Ron Paul's plan to "Restore America" cuts over 50 percent of funding for food stamps? You decide.