Mitt Romney apparently raised some hackles with his observation that those not paying income tax probably wouldn’t be moved by the prospect of a tax reduction. This was interpreted, mainly because of some clumsy language on the part of Romney himself, conflating that cohort with those receiving government benefits, as meaning that he didn’t care about either.
Although he probably does care, it doesn’t really matter because he isn’t talking about extending any new bennies. However, if people care about protecting existing programs, they would be well advised to vote for Romney rather than Barack Obama.
The government depends on the private economy for its income because it doesn’t have any money of its own, so the health of the economy comes before everything else.
Oh, government can borrow money, which it has done, but the lenders are drying up and our children and theirs are being left with a mountain of debt. Or it can print money, which it has done and is now doing, but that makes all the money, ours and the government’s, less valuable.
So the question becomes: Which candidate is better equipped to revive the economy?
Obama has proved, over almost four years, that he isn’t that candidate.