Paul Ryan's budget proposal

• majorspark

  

  I had hopes the midterm elections had fixed a solid pair of balls onto the GOP, specifically those in the house. I was wrong. God save the republic.
• stlouiedipalma

  C'mon, major, didn't you know that the number one priority of all members of Congress is to get re-elected? None of them give a rat's ass about anything else, and they start the re-election fundraising as soon as they are sworn in (or skip the swearing-in ceremony for a fundraiser, like those two ding-dongs did this year).
  
  
  http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2011/01/oops-gop-reps-skip-swearing-in-violate-constitution-screw-up-votes/21591/
• I Wear Pants

  I guess "sustain or continue" would have been more appropriate than "increase". Though I do think any new tax cuts are the same as spending increases because as much as Republicans want to pretend it isn't true if you take less in you're going to increase the deficit.
• stlouiedipalma

  Wrong again, Mr. Pants. Haven't you heard? By lowering the tax burden on the wealthy we will all be working, have a chicken in every pot, etc. Those folks simply take that "found money" and create millions of jobs with it. Isn't that what happened when W cut them to begin with?
• tk421

  

  Why do people keep talking about the Bush "tax cuts", especially in the media? They've been in effect for a decade, they aren't tax cuts anymore. It's not like they've just been enacted, this has been the law for a long while now.
• I Wear Pants

  The point was they didn't even create jobs when they were first enacted so what makes people think that further cuts will do that?
• Hip Hop/Logicbomb

  

  I'll post this once again!!
  
  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT0OJEFlq7A&feature=related
• tk421

  

  I Wear Pants;740688 wrote:The point was they didn't even create jobs when they were first enacted so what makes people think that further cuts will do that?

  
  We don't need further cuts. Unless you're completely overhauling the tax code and simplifying it, leave it alone. Cut spending to a balanced budget than raise levels a little to make 100/200B a year that can be paid against the debt.
• I Wear Pants

  I'm fine with that.
• tk421

  

  Anyone know how long it would take us to completely pay off the debt if in some miracle they actually had a balanced budget amendment and raised taxes a little to raise 200B/year against the debt? I know if we had 15T in debt and without interest, it'd take 75 years to pay that off, don't know how the interest would work.
• believer

  

  I Wear Pants;740688 wrote:The point was they didn't even create jobs when they were first enacted so what makes people think that further cuts will do that?

  Not many think further cuts are the answer. What would be a mistake is raising taxes in a down economy. T
  
  he ANSWER - and I'm dumbfounded why the lefties keep harping on the tax cutting issue - is we have a SPENDING problem, not a tax problem.
  
  Cut the spending and balance the budget.
• I Wear Pants

  Cut spending + raise taxes where and when it makes sense. That could be as simple as getting rid of tax cuts that are in effect that don't make sense.
• Thread Bomber

  

  
• I Wear Pants

  Haha.
• tk421

  

  OK, why are SS and Medicare part of the mandatory spending on the budget? Don't they get funded by FICA? The budget would be significantly lower if they took those out of the general spending fund and kept their mitts off the revenue from those taxes.
• I Wear Pants

  I don't know.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Budget cuts + tax increases + tax reform + cuts in Medicare + cuts in SS + reforming the Defense acquisition process are really the quickest way to balance everything.
  It won't happen due to the system we are in.
  
  I've come to the point of basically of accepting that 1. The current political class does not have the cuts to enact any plans. 2. No politician will honestly reform the tax system or SS. and 3. The future is so hard to predict that any budget or debt calculations make no sense. It is like being in the 1970s and trying to gauge the country's future in 2010. Too much can happen.
• believer

  

  ptown_trojans_1;740748 wrote:Budget cuts....

  Agreed
  

  ptown_trojans_1;740748 wrote:...tax increases....

  The problem with tax increases is that once they go into effect, they rarely go away. The politicians slobber over it and find ways to squander it. Show me a short-term, fair to everyone, going to expire temporary tax increase in better economic times and I'm willing to listen.
  

  ptown_trojans_1;740748 wrote:...tax reform...

  Agreed. Flat tax.
  

  ptown_trojans_1;740748 wrote:...cuts in Medicare + cuts in SS...

  Agreed on Medicare. SS....dangerous ground. First make it illegal for the Feds to dip into our FICA withholdings...then let's discuss a graduated cut with tax incentives to businesses and individuals to save for their own retirement. Otherwise.......
  

  ptown_trojans_1;740748 wrote:... reforming the Defense acquisition process ....

  Without a doubt. This is by far the biggest sham and fraudulent activity conducted by the fine folks on Capitol Hill and their pals in the military industrial complex.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Believer, why can't we just got back to the Clinton tax rate in the 90s for (people making over x amount of dollars)?
  Last I remember, the 1990s were a good time, were taxes that high for people?
  Everyone, and I everyone is going to have to suffer for this.
  
  I'm not a fair/ flat tax fan, just make it simpler, eliminate loopholes and simplify code.
• believer

  

  ptown_trojans_1;740765 wrote:Believer, why can't we just got back to the Clinton tax rate in the 90s for (people making over x amount of dollars)

  
  Obama said today the rich can afford to pay more. They don't deserve their money anyways.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  believer;740767 wrote:Obama said today the rich can afford to pay more. They don't deserve their money anyways.

  
  Their money is needed to pay down the debt. Profits in the private sector are soaring, higher than in previous years.
  Like I said, everyone takes a hit, everyone has to suffer. Everyone pays for the stupid politicians who got us into this.
• BGFalcons82

  

  ptown_trojans_1;740778 wrote:Their money is needed to pay down the debt. Profits in the private sector are soaring, higher than in previous years.
  Like I said, everyone takes a hit, everyone has to suffer. Everyone pays for the stupid politicians who got us into this.

  
  Ugh..."their money is needed to pay down the debt". Does this mean they were responsible for all the unwarranted, unnecessary, wasteful, and unholy spending over the past 40+ years? It is THE EVIL RICH'S FAULT? Huh? They got us into this deep hole and now it's up to them to pull everyone else out? Profits are soaring, so it's really money that belongs to "the people" and not those that were smart enough to figure out how to make money in a piss poor economy? Redistribute or die? Can you sew a flag with that on it? I never thought you the statist, ptown.
  
  Then you say it's up to everyone to take a hit and everyone has to suffer. Which is it...the evil rich fat cat's fault or everyone's?
  
  Finally...raising taxes to fix the debt is the worst lie of all time. As believer noted, no tax ever goes away. Don't believe me? Why do we still have a phone tax? Anybody using landlines these days? The idea of raising taxes is the "feel good" response and it makes everyone hold hands and sing kumbaya as the idea of everyone pitching more cash into the hole will solve it. Classic bullshit. Never happens. Ever. Just like Lucy promising that she won't pull the ball away from Charlie Brown's foot as he approaches. Everytime.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  ptown_trojans_1;740778 wrote:Their money is needed to pay down the debt. Profits in the private sector are soaring, higher than in previous years.
  Like I said, everyone takes a hit, everyone has to suffer. Everyone pays for the stupid politicians who got us into this.

  
  God, you're a class warfare monger just like all the liberals out there -- including the man running this country. How many times do we need to say this: WE DON'T HAVE A REVENUE PROBLEM WE HAVE A SPENDING PROBLEM.
  
  If you raise taxes in any way, shape or form THE IDIOTS WHO ARE IN CONGRESS AND THE IDIOT WHO IS PRESIDENT WILL JUST FIND WAYS TO SPEND IT.
  
  Oh and let me just add that I saw a quote on the news from Obama about his budget plan to "reduce" the deficit and he was ADAMANT that we will continue to spend on certain areas (green technology being one, education another) which only proves he IS an idiot and won't ever change.
  Again: the problem is SPENDING not revenue.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  ptown_trojans_1;740778 wrote:Their money is needed to pay down the debt. Profits in the private sector are soaring, higher than in previous years.
  Like I said, everyone takes a hit, everyone has to suffer. Everyone pays for the stupid politicians who got us into this.

  
  1) Profit is an accounting term, and not a barometer of the health of any company. Profits don't signal a roaring economy if they are a resort of a reduction in short-term liabilities (in other words, stagnant or negative wage growth) or shifts on balance sheets such as a bank reducing their loan loss reserve.
  
  2) Any substantial tax increase is very unlikely - then again as is any substantial reduction in spending.
  
  3) The talking heads in the Asian markets are saying that the increased liquidity due to Bernanke and the stimulus is starting to have a severe negative effect on the price of commodities (no duh to anyone that's purchased gas recently). The likely way out of this is for a long, systematic devaluation of the US$. That would be much better politically than a straight out default. One of the guys who runs a fund says they have a 40% cash position now - crazy.
  
  4) Unfortunately, that would result in shared suffering. Long-term inflation is going to result in a poorer standard of living for everyone and much reduced economic growth.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Also the "talking heads'" response to the speech (none of these guys are Americans, mostly British and Asian dudes).
  
  - Overly partisan, mostly just "red meat" to his base. Using words like "seniors losing healthcare" and "funding head start" and mentioning soaking the rich (i.e. Obama and Buffet) does nothing to sway anyone on the other side, he's back to campaign mode trying to stir his base.
  
  - Typically the budget isn't a Presidential issue, it's become one due to the enormous size of the deficits the last couple of years and the average American is starting to pay attention.
  
  - No real detail as to how any of this is getting done - which probably led to their concensus that nothing will get done and we'll just monetize our debt.