Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bush Treasury Man Hank Paulson Supports Hillary... Because Trump Won't Promise To Cut Entitlements (Original Post) AzDar Jun 2016 OP
Your thread title implies HRC promised to cut Ilsa Jun 2016 #1
Of course not Rose Siding Jun 2016 #2
You don't think the OP insinuates that? NT Ilsa Jun 2016 #3
I do Rose Siding Jun 2016 #4
Insinuates!!??!!??!? OMG! ALERT, ALERT! rgbecker Jun 2016 #5
No, it doesn't imply that at all. Miles Archer Jun 2016 #11
I'm so grateful for this fun n serious Jun 2016 #6
lazy Trump jakeXT Jun 2016 #7
Rural America is existing on Social Security. Downwinder Jun 2016 #8
My take on this...that is exactly why they want to cut it (the R's and their paymasters). You see if insta8er Jun 2016 #10
I don't suppose Hankie proposed raising taxes on his rich, fat cat buddies? 2cannan Jun 2016 #9
k&r nt bananas Jun 2016 #12
It actually says it's because Trump has no intentions to negotiate at all. NCTraveler Jun 2016 #13
Henry Paulson Octafish Jun 2016 #14

Miles Archer

(18,837 posts)
11. No, it doesn't imply that at all.
Sat Jun 25, 2016, 12:37 AM
Jun 2016

I went to the link and read the article. Here's what Paulson wrote:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/when-it-comes-to-trump-a-republican-treasury-secretary-says-choose-country-over-party/2016/06/24/c7bdba34-3942-11e6-8f7c-d4c723a2becb_story.html

First, we need to maintain the United States’ fiscal strength by reforming entitlements. There’s no example of a nation continuing as a great power if its fiscal strength is lost. Anyone, whether Republican or Democrat, who has studied our entitlement programs and can do basic math knows they are unsustainable in their present form. If not fixed soon, they threaten our nation with a debt burden that would undermine the retirement security of young Americans and future generations. It doesn’t surprise me when a socialist such as Bernie Sanders sees no need to fix our entitlement programs. But I find it particularly appalling that Trump, a businessman, tells us he won’t touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.


So two things are happening here. One, he's against Trump for not "fixing" Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. That's not me making that up, that's me quoting Paulson in the paragraph above.

Second, he concludes with (same URL):

When it comes to the presidency, I will not vote for Donald Trump. I will not cast a write-in vote. I’ll be voting for Hillary Clinton, with the hope that she can bring Americans together to do the things necessary to strengthen our economy, our environment and our place in the world.


So no, no one said anything about Clinton touching Social Security or the "entitlement" programs Paulson refers to. As a matter of fact, if you go to her Website, this is what she says:

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/social-security-and-medicare/

“I won't cut Social Security. ... I'll defend it, and I'll expand it.”

Hillary Clinton, February 5, 2016

“Now, I will also defend Social Security and Medicare from the efforts of the Republicans to privatize both of them. When I was in the Senate, George Bush came up with a privatization plan. Some of you might remember that. It would have been a disaster. And we defeated it. As your president, I will defend it. I will not let anybody think that they can privatize it. But we're going to have to make sure that we shore it up so that it is there not just for those who are currently recipients but for generations to come.”

Hillary Clinton, October 28, 2015


OK, so now if you connect the dots to everything I shared here...all quotes, no analysis at all on my part...what you get is:

1). Paulson is not voting for Trump...in part...because he finds it "particularly appalling that Trump, a businessman, tells us he won’t touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid"

2). Hillary Clinton's statements on her Website that I shared here not only say that she won't privatize what Paulson calls "entitlement programs," she also slams Bush for his attempts to craft one

3). IN CONCLUSION...Paulson "hopes" that Clinton will "do the things necessary to strengthen our economy"...part of which, in his view, involves his view of "entitlement programs"...so he is hoping for something Clinton has already promised not to do.

It's no harm, no foul on her part. All that has happened here is that Paulson is delusional over the things he "hopes" for. But make no mistake about the fact that he is "implying" that she "will" do these things...why else would he "hope" she would?

I've made the conscious decision to trust her for what is on her Website. It's pretty clear and unambiguous, and Paulson is a joke.

jakeXT

(10,575 posts)
7. lazy Trump
Fri Jun 24, 2016, 07:43 PM
Jun 2016
It doesn’t surprise me when a socialist such as Bernie Sanders sees no need to fix our entitlement programs. But I find it particularly appalling that Trump, a businessman, tells us he won’t touch Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Downwinder

(12,869 posts)
8. Rural America is existing on Social Security.
Fri Jun 24, 2016, 08:58 PM
Jun 2016

Not just the beneficiaries, the stores they shop in and the towns they live in. Cutting Social Security would kill 25% of the economy.

 

insta8er

(960 posts)
10. My take on this...that is exactly why they want to cut it (the R's and their paymasters). You see if
Fri Jun 24, 2016, 09:32 PM
Jun 2016

all you do is worry how to pay your next bill, you are going to hang on to that lousy job you have. It creates a dependency, removing any social safety net also reduces people to slaves. Keeping the minimum wage at a below poverty or at poverty level fits into the whole scheme of dependency and servitude that "they" feel they need to keep us in.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
13. It actually says it's because Trump has no intentions to negotiate at all.
Tue Jun 28, 2016, 09:21 AM
Jun 2016

I understand there is a select group out there that find that admirable in a politician. That group will forever be on the outside screaming as adults get things done. Fuck Trump.

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
14. Henry Paulson
Tue Jun 28, 2016, 10:09 AM
Jun 2016
Who is Henry Paulson?

By Tom Eley
World Socialist Web Site, 23 September 2008

The plan to rescue the US financial industry arrogates virtually unlimited money and power over the financial affairs of the state to the office of Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. Paulson is a figure with a long history of intimate connections to the political and financial elite.

In 1970, fresh from the Masters program of the Harvard Business School, Paulson entered the Nixon administration, working first as staff assistant to the assistant secretary of defense. In 1972-73, Paulson worked as office assistant to John Erlichman, assistant to the president for domestic affairs. Erlichman was one of the key figures involved in organizing President Richard Nixon’s notorious “plumbers” unit that carried out illegal covert operations against the president’s political opponents, including espionage, blackmail, and revenge. Ehlichman resigned in 1973, and in 1975 he was convicted of obstruction of justice, perjury, and conspiracy, and was imprisoned for 18 months.

Utilizing his connections, Paulson went to work for Goldman Sachs in 1974. In a 2007 feature, the British newspaper the Guardian wrote, “Not only was he well connected enough to get the job [in the Nixon White House], but well connected enough to resign in the thick of the Watergate scandal without ever getting caught up in the fallout. He went straight to Goldman back home in Illinois.”
Paulson rose through the ranks of Goldman Sachs, becoming a partner in 1982, co-head of investment banking in 1990, chief operating officer in 1994. In 1998 he forced out his co-chairman Jon Corzine “in what amounted to a coup,” according to New York Times economics correspondent Floyd Norris, and took over the post of CEO.

Goldman Sachs is perhaps the single best-connected Wall Street firm. Its executives routinely go in and out of top government posts. Corzine went on to become US senator from New Jersey and is now the state’s governor. Corzine’s predecessor, Stephen Friedman, served in the Bush administration as assistant to the president for economic policy and as chairman of the National Economic Council (NEC). Friedman’s predecessor as Goldman Sachs CEO, Robert Rubin, served as chairman of the NEC and later treasury secretary under Bill Clinton.

Agence France Press, in a 2006 article on Paulson’s appointment, “Has Goldman Sachs Taken Over the Bush Administration?” noted that, in addition to Paulson, “(t)he president’s chief of staff, Josh Bolten, and the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Jeffery Reuben, are Goldman alumni.”

SNIP...

Since taking office, Paulson has overseen the destruction of three of Goldman Sachs’ rivals. In March, Paulson helped arrange the fire sale of Bear Stearns to JPMorgan Chase. Then, a little more than a week ago, he allowed Lehman Brothers to collapse, while simultaneously organizing the absorption of Merrill Lynch by Bank of America. This left only Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley as major investment banks, both of which were converted on Sunday into bank holding companies, a move that effectively ended the existence of the investment bank as a distinct economic form.

CONTINUED...

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2008/09/paul-s23.html
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Bush Treasury Man Hank Pa...