Paul Ryan's budget proposal

• jhay78

  

  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42420995/ns/politics-capitol_hill
  
  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/05/gop-unveil-budget-plan-cutting-6t-decade/
  
  This was something I've been waiting for the past few months. In the midst of the 2011 budget/continuing resolution/possible government shutdown debate, finally someone with some stones (and intellect) has put himself and his party out there to be possible political targets.
  
  IMO this is a much-needed start, and sets up the debate for 2012: Are we going to side with the politics-as-usual train that's barreling ever closer to the edge of the cliff, or are we going to wake up and make tough decisions and hold our elected officials accountable to make equally tough decisions?
  
  A predictable response:
  
  "Paul Ryan made clear that the Republican budget will protect Big Oil companies subsidies over seniors health care," Jesse Ferguson, spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in a statement over the weekend. "It's already becoming clear who will be the priority in the House Republican budget -- special interests, not middle-class families."
• stlouiedipalma

  Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis) introduced his budget proposal today and, as expected, it features hefty cuts and revamping of many programs. I, for one, am sick of the "same-old-same-old" crap that we routinely get from Congress. As a result of my frustration, I have decided to support this proposal. For a long time I have criticized Republicans as not having a plan. Well this is quite a plan, to say the least. Since no one else has anything remotely close to a realistic plan in place I figure we may as well give it a chance. If it blows things up, so be it (in the immortal words of John Boehner). If it works, Ryan will be hailed as a genius. For lack of a better idea (or any idea, for that matter), I am all for this. We've got to do something, and this plan, ambitious and controversial as can be, is all I see right now. What say my fellow OC posters?
  
  
  http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/153993-an-analysis-of-ryans-budget
• believer

  

  Well they can't say the Repubs don't have a plan anymore at the very least....but as can be easily predicted the leftist media and Dem politicians are crying foul, playing the class warfare game, and concocting bizarre math to discredit it.
  
  From what I'm able to discern, Ryan's plan is a start but it's doomed to hell IMHO. By the time it's all said and done it will be demonized to the point it will go nowhere.
  
  Too bad really....this country needs something like this.
• Belly35

  

  Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis) has just moved closer to 2012
  This is a very good plan ... simple and to the point and direct as to where the GOP stands.
  We the People now have a clear and direct view of the parties agenda ...... the line in the sand has been drawn
  
  
  http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2011/04/ryan_budget_forces_dems_hands.html
• fish82

  

  stlouiedipalma;733650 wrote:Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis) introduced his budget proposal today and, as expected, it features hefty cuts and revamping of many programs. I, for one, am sick of the "same-old-same-old" crap that we routinely get from Congress. As a result of my frustration, I have decided to support this proposal. For a long time I have criticized Republicans as not having a plan. Well this is quite a plan, to say the least. Since no one else has anything remotely close to a realistic plan in place I figure we may as well give it a chance. If it blows things up, so be it (in the immortal words of John Boehner). If it works, Ryan will be hailed as a genius. For lack of a better idea (or any idea, for that matter), I am all for this. We've got to do something, and this plan, ambitious and controversial as can be, is all I see right now. What say my fellow OC posters?
  
  
  http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/153993-an-analysis-of-ryans-budget

  Agree. It's not perfect, but it's the best/only thing on the table. We don't have time to waste with anymore dicking around...let's give it a shot.
• derek bomar

  

  I'd like this better if he put the Pentagon on the chopping block...but I still like it because it's the only thing like it out there. It could be better, but it's a start.
• Thread Bomber

  

  I agree with the "number".
  
  How we get there will be the largest dispute.
• I Wear Pants

  Really surprising that he doesn't make any worthwhile cuts to defense.
  
  What's funny is cuts to entitlements will hurt red states more than blue states contrary to what people generally think.
  
  
• Writerbuckeye

  

  I'd agree that some cuts to defense -- and a strong adjustment to Social Security (which he apparently didn't touch) should also be included in the plan. Among other things, make it illegal for Congress to tap the Social Security funding going forward, and make other adjustments to secure the system long-term.
  
  He's right about one thing though: it will be healthcare that brings down the federal government first and foremost, and his plan certainly addresses that issue.
• QuakerOats

  Good start! And he did indeed say yesterday on TV that his plan does make defense cuts and addresses SS issues; I just don't have those specifics at hand.
• sleeper

  

  Love it, but defense needs to be cut. The democrats are going to play politics on this as usual and the masses won't like it. Most don't understand/care about 30 years from now when this country will experience financial Armageddon, they want their entitlements and handouts now.
• majorspark

  

  I Wear Pants;734242 wrote:Really surprising that he doesn't make any worthwhile cuts to defense.

  Ryan's proposal basically leaves the pentagon's 2011 defense budget intact. A budget in which secratary of defense Gates already shaved nearly 80 billion. Word is this years defense budget will be the "ceiling" in working toward futher defense cuts.
  

  I Wear Pants;734242 wrote:What's funny is cuts to entitlements will hurt red states more than blue states contrary to what people generally think.

  Perhaps they are just willing to sacrafice for the well being and finacial stability of the nation? Or maybe they are just sick of being on the federal teet. Federal dollars come with strings attached. Dependency on federal dollars thwarts these states and their local governments from governing as they see fit.
• derek bomar

  

  QuakerOats;734352 wrote:Good start! And he did indeed say yesterday on TV that his plan does make defense cuts and addresses SS issues; I just don't have those specifics at hand.

  
  if you read it, the defense cuts are minimal to the point they are non existent.
  "Security: $78 billion in defense savings, holding spending growth to inflation (identical to President's request). No savings from other security agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs."
  
  and for SS...he does nothing...he just punts
  "Social Security: Propose a process in which the President and Congress, in conjunction with the Social Security trustees, must put forward plans to restore Social Security solvency if the program is projected to be insolvent."
  
  http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/153993-an-analysis-of-ryans-budget
• BGFalcons82

  

  sleeper;734360 wrote:Love it, but defense needs to be cut. The democrats are going to play politics on this as usual and the masses won't like it. Most don't understand/care about 30 years from now when this country will experience financial Armageddon, they want their entitlements and handouts now.

  
  Some economists have opined that if we don't get our over-spending shit together within the next 2 years, we will feel the wrath of a financial meltdown. Paul Ryan is addressing this very issue.
  
  The fact that social security has been punted is disheartening, however it is not insolvent yet...if they can keep their bloody fingers out of it. NO MORE DAMN IOU's should be in Ryan's proposal. Medicare/Medicaid will be upside down very soon as ObamaKare takes effect. So, in essence, he's triaging the most important fiscal items now.
• fish82

  

  derek bomar;734404 wrote:if you read it, the defense cuts are minimal to the point they are non existent.
  "Security: $78 billion in defense savings, holding spending growth to inflation (identical to President's request). No savings from other security agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs."
  
  and for SS...he does nothing...he just punts
  "Social Security: Propose a process in which the President and Congress, in conjunction with the Social Security trustees, must put forward plans to restore Social Security solvency if the program is projected to be insolvent."
  
  http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-a-budget/153993-an-analysis-of-ryans-budget

  Is that $78 billion total, or yearly? The article seems a little unclear.
  
  Assuming it's total, I agree that we could do a little better, but it's better than nothing since we're fighting 3 wars at the moment. If it's 78 billion annually, then it's actually real money.
• sleeper

  

  BGFalcons82;734429 wrote:Some economists have opined that if we don't get our over-spending shit together within the next 2 years, we will feel the wrath of a financial meltdown. Paul Ryan is addressing this very issue.

  
  Well yeah. It could happen anytime up until then, all it takes is the US not being able to sell its debt, then KABOOM, game over.
• derek bomar

  

  fish82;734450 wrote:Is that $78 billion total, or yearly? The article seems a little unclear.
  
  Assuming it's total, I agree that we could do a little better, but it's better than nothing since we're fighting 3 wars at the moment. If it's 78 billion annually, then it's actually real money.

  
  I'm going to go out on a limb and say it is not annual, because they didn't say annual.
• stlouiedipalma

  Writerbuckeye;734348 wrote:I'd agree that some cuts to defense -- and a strong adjustment to Social Security (which he apparently didn't touch) should also be included in the plan. Among other things, make it illegal for Congress to tap the Social Security funding going forward, and make other adjustments to secure the system long-term.
  
  He's right about one thing though: it will be health care that brings down the federal government first and foremost, and his plan certainly addresses that issue.

  
  I believe that unless health care costs are brought under control, it will spell the end of the American middle class. Whether it's with Ryan's proposal or the Democrats' proposal or no changes at all, the cost of health care will rapidly escalate to the point where no one short of the wealthy will be able to afford it. That means a whole bunch of us will be facing economic ruin or death. That's not bullshit, either.
• I Wear Pants

  majorspark;734376 wrote:Ryan's proposal basically leaves the pentagon's 2011 defense budget intact. A budget in which secratary of defense Gates already shaved nearly 80 billion. Word is this years defense budget will be the "ceiling" in working toward futher defense cuts.
  
  
  
  Perhaps they are just willing to sacrafice for the well being and finacial stability of the nation? Or maybe they are just sick of being on the federal teet. Federal dollars come with strings attached. Dependency on federal dollars thwarts these states and their local governments from governing as they see fit.

  
  No, I wasn't trying to make a commentary on it. I just saw that chart and it surprised me because without ever having looked at the numbers I would have assumed it was the other way around.
  
  http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-april-5-2011/for-a-few-dollars-more?xrs=share_copy
  
  Lol @ Democrats concerted use of the word "extreme" as well as the Republicans saying they were offended with all the shit they say about how Democrats are trying to stomp bald eagles and rape Thomas Jefferson with a Koran and such.
  
  Another Lol @ Republicans "if you don't figure this out by then then this other thing we said becomes law". Not how the constitution works.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  This is a nice start....for next year.
  
  The reason why no one is really talking about or is saying it is awful is it's next year's budget, when there is not even a this year's budget.
  More than likely we are going to have a shutdown, given the House rules and I highly doubt someone is going to blink.
  My new job is in the defense industry and people from government and clients both have no faith in either party and are hedging for a shutdown.
  
  That said, when there is a shutdown, both sides are going to spend so much political capital for just 5 months of budget that Ryan's budget will have no support, none.
  
  By the time people get to Ryan's budget, it will be December going into January of next year, and guess what that is 2012 and election year, meaning no one will have the guts to make the cuts.
  
  My faith in the political system is at an all time low right now, for both sides and the President.
• I Wear Pants

  If there is a shutdown the Republicans are going to be in a huge hole politically. "Take your ball and go home" will not be taken well by people who disagree with the GOP position even a little bit.
  
  It really shouldn't be that difficult. Dems want $33 billion cut, Pubs $60 some billion. $45 is in the damned middle. But they'd all have to act like adults to do that.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  I Wear Pants;734880 wrote:If there is a shutdown the Republicans are going to be in a huge hole politically. "Take your ball and go home" will not be taken well by people who disagree with the GOP position even a little bit.
  
  It really shouldn't be that difficult. Dems want $33 billion cut, Pubs $60 some billion. $45 is in the damned middle. But they'd all have to act like adults to do that.

  
  The poll tonight on NBC clearly showed the public wants the Democrats to compromise more than the Republicans. Especially among independents, the vote was something like 70 percent in favor of Democrats compromising.
  
  We'll see if anyone is listening.
• majorspark

  

  derek bomar;734453 wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say it is not annual, because they didn't say annual.

  
  I believe it is over a 5yr period of time.
• Little Danny

  

  Writerbuckeye;734964 wrote:The poll tonight on NBC clearly showed the public wants the Democrats to compromise more than the Republicans. Especially among independents, the vote was something like 70 percent in favor of Democrats compromising.
  
  We'll see if anyone is listening.

  
  What's interesting is that is an NBC poll. I am sure the people in their survey are more progressive leaning than the average American. If their vote is 70%, that means it is actually higher than that.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Little Danny;735021 wrote:What's interesting is that is an NBC poll. I am sure the people in their survey are more progressive leaning than the average American. If their vote is 70%, that means it is actually higher than that.

  
  It's an NBC/WSJ poll, and given the two, it balances it out. (NBC leans left, WSJ leans right)
  
  That said, no one who really knows the impact really wants a shutdown. It actually costs more in the end from lost revenue and the fact that you have to back pay most of the people. Plus, now federal contractors are way more numerous than the 90s and their work will more than likely stop.
  So, think for example the procurement costs for one particular defense contract. Since the government will be shutdown, the contractor can't work on the project which leads to delays, which leads to higher costs, plus, the contractor can still bill the government for time lost as it is not their fault they are behind schedule.
  
  Oh, and since the shutdown comes mid pay period, military members won;t be able to get their latest paychecks, and it is unknown how long it will be till military members can get paid, according to he Cable. http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/
  Also, most Congress staff members would also be unpaid while working to try and find a solution, while members of Congress will still get paid.