Johnson City, Tennessee - Speak to members of the Occupy movement in Tennessee and other part of the country and you will find a large number of Ron Paul supporters in the crowd who see him as the answer to this nation’s problems. This is a little confusing knowing how the Occupy movement got started and the chief complaints of most members in this area and across the county.
Most Occupy members in Tennessee and across the nation are angry that there is Americans getting kicked out of their homes and being forced to choose between groceries and rent as Wall Street profits rise. Some Americans are being denied or not getting quality medical care. Across the nation, Americans are suffering from environmental pollution. Americans are working long hours for little pay and no rights, if they’re working at all. Members of Occupy say they are getting nothing while the other 1 percent is getting everything. With these complaints coming from Occupy members, why do some see Ron Paul as the answer?
Congressman Ron Paul in his run for the Presidency proposed a new budget plan that would cut $1 trillion from the federal government his first year in office. A cut to spending is not a bad thing but how he plans to do it is the big question that Occupy members need to be concerned about. It would include immediately cutting funding to five agencies: the Departments of Education, Commerce, Energy, Interior, and Housing and Urban Development, putting the burden of solving our nation’s budget problems on the backs of the middle and lower income people and schools.
In December of 2010, the House voted to pass the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. The Act passed 264-157. Ron Paul voted against the Act.
In July of 2010 the House voted on the Restoration of Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act. The Act passed 270-153. Ron Paul voted against the Act.
Under a Ron Paul Presidency, corporations would save money by paying workers as little as they wish, since Ron Paul would abolish the Davis-Bacon Act. Corporations would be free to monopolize markets, since Ron Paul opposes federal anti-trust legislation. Employees would no longer be required to pay into Social Security and this would ultimately end Social Security for the elderly and future retired and disabled.
It’s understandable that some in the Occupy movement are concerned about the national debt and see Congressman Paul as a man to solve this problem but are Occupy members willing to see their own condition worsen as a Paul Presidency shifts the nations debt troubles onto the backs of the middle class, seniors, disabled and poor? Is this not a gift to Wall Street and a slap in the face to the 99 percent?
It’s also understandable that some in the Occupy movement see Congressman Paul as a man who believes in freedom and less intrusive government. Yes, he does believe in less government but at what cost? Big government can be intrusive and a burden but NO government can sometimes be worse on people who fall through the crack at no fault of their own and are left there by an uncaring government with no safety nets for its people.
A Ron Paul Presidency might be a less intrusive administration or it might not. It might find its self unable to change existing laws on the books, look at previous administrations and you will see the point. One thing you can be assured of is that a Ron Paul Presidency would not bring the change that Occupy has been seeking and would most likely create an even worse crisis for Tennessee and the 99 percent.
Some information for this article was obtained from the links provided above.
If you like this article, please click on the free subscribe button above.
