« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Paul Ryan’s Budget: In No Way Extreme, Despite Democrat Histrionics

By: Lori Ziganto (Diary)  |  April 5th, 2011 at 05:18 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Paul Ryan, House Budget Committee Chairman, released his FY 2012 Budget proposal today. The comprehensive proposal includes plans for the way forward over the next decade. You can read an excellent and full analysis of it here.

Former Speaker (I love saying that) Nancy Pelosi of course immediately set to whining and wringing hands over how the Ryan plan will cause people TO DIE!!!!1111

NancyPelosi: The #GOP Ryan budget is a path to poverty for America’s seniors & children and a road to riches for big oil #GOPvalues

Why do evil Republicans hate old people and children? Sigh. Her lines are as old and tired as Larry King. To be fair, she likely hasn’t even looked at the proposal. I mean, why read stuff before it is passed?

Geoff over at Ace of Spades puts the plan into proper perspective. He even has a nifty graph that makes it easy for those of us (by us, I mean President Obama) who aren’t great at math and such. Math is hard.

This is what the President and his crackerjack economic team have wrought. A one-year deficit that is so large that it can only be paid back if everything goes exactly right. And if everything goes exactly right, we’re still looking at decades before we can get back to the debt level we had only 6 months ago.

But, on the bright side, perhaps as early as 2023 we can start working on paying off the FY10 deficit.

So when the Dems start their caterwauling about how “extreme” the GOP’s suggestions are, just remind them that these “extreme” suggestions may not succeed in paying back even 1 year of Obama’s spending.

Extreme? Not so much. What is extreme is the Democrat agenda that has gotten us where we are, and their obstinate refusal to deal with reality.

—

cross-posted at That’s What She Said

Tags: , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • writeblock

    Send out the word immediately to its constituencies that the Dem plan is to lie about hurting seniors and children. It needs to get the word out to independents as well. Advertise, advertise, advertise. We can’t wait on this. It must be relentless as well as targeted.

  • uncledan

    Too late, writeblock! I just saw some Republicans drag an old lady out of her house down the street and throw her in the snow!

  • writeblock

    The budget plan is a good one. For once I even like Ryan’s arguments. He’s usually wimpish playing defense. He’s sounding stronger lately. Even Boehner is sounding like he’s grown a spine.

  • gamechange11two

    Granny’s SS check will arrive on the first, even if DC is still in a shut down. With the exception of the WSJ, the LSM did nothing to clarify this point in ’95. Republicans can rest assured, more people will get more accurate information today than was ever thought possible 16 years ago.

    Still, I anticipate Obama’s announcement that he will personally move heaven and earth to get entitlement checks out to the people. But this time somebody might be heard when they point out that it’s not his job. “Don’t worry, Mr. President. Entitlements are on autopilot, and all the checks will go out on schedule. You can return to your golfing now.”

  • Finrod

    It looks like the debt stops growing in 2014 or 2015 or so, at least as a percentage of the country’s GDP. If the debt isn’t growing, that means that the *deficit* is 0.

    That’s what we should be touting: Ryan’s plan will balance the budget in 5 (or whatever the exact figure is) years. Obama’s budget will *never* balance.

    • Diogenes314

      It totally ignores any tax revenue increases due to job growth. So realistically go ahead and knock a couple years off the turn around point.

    • YnotNOW

      Remmber, this chart is showing debt as a percentage of GDP. So if the debt as a percentage of GDP is not growing, that means that it is still growing at the same rate as GDP (thus the same percentage). So that does NOT mean a balanced budget (zero deficit).

      Remember, all we need to do to get the Debt to reduce, is to make it grow slower than GDP, we do not actually have to “pay it off.” Though it would be extremely valuable to the economy to pay the actual dollars down (run a budget surplus for a few years) so that the interest on the Debt is to a more manageable level.

      • Finrod

        If the debt is declining at at least the same rate that the GDP is increasing, that would be a balanced budget (or a tiny surplus) then.

        • YnotNOW

          If the budget is exactly balanced (Zero deficit), then no $$ would be added to the Debt. But this Debt in relation to the GDP would deline exactly the same amount that the GDP grows.

          That is assuming that the current Debt dollar amount is sustainable, which it technically is, but it is a significant drag on the economy when the government needs to collect taxes just to pay interest on the debt. That’s why I would prefer to work toward a budget surplus for a while, to reduce the $$$ amount of debt and make the interest payment less of a drag.

          • Diogenes314

            With an improved economic environment, job growth and increased revenue we will meet the targets well ahead of the CBO estimates.

            Without it we are screwed economically and probably in the 2012 election as well.

            At which point the lamps start going down all over America. For good.

          • YnotNOW

            to cut spending.
            We do not have a taxing problem, we have a spending problem.

            When the overspending (and overregulation) are resolved, the economy is more free to grow (not guaranteed, but much more likely), which will increase tax revenues. In the long run, much more sustainable than trying to raise revenues via tax increases.

          • Diogenes314

            It is the over-regulation that is the prime cause of the economic distress, not overspending. Cutting alone isn’t enough, The first priority needs to be regulatory reform, then tax reform (lowering rates-especially capital gains, enacting small business incentives) to increase revenues.

            Which is why the EPA and obamacare riders in the 2011 budget are worth more than whatever piddling dollar amounts are being discussed.

          • YnotNOW

            First priority – cut spending (yes, the $6B being aruged right now is piddling, but it sets the stage for real spending reform in 2012 budget. And yes, it is overshadowed by almost anything until it approaches a balanced budget – then it becomes the single most important aspect of change in governance)

            Second – cut regulation and free up the economy – although I totally agree that this cannot wait until priority 1 is “done”, and they go hand-in-hand. Defund the EPA’s efforts, as well as outlaw their carbon regulation. Free up drilling. etc. have major impact on #1. But again, if we cut Government, we are by definition cutting their ability to interfere with the economy.

            Third – tax reform. While this is a major factor on freeing up the economy, I just don’t see it being politically feasible to do major revisions until the deficit is under control, and people are not so fearful of “causing” deficits by reducing tax rates and closing loopholes. Though if we could get a “package deal” to cut spending and reform taxes together, that would make me happier than a pig in….

  • billinsuwanee

    Ryan’s plan is nothing more than Republicans throwing up their hands and surrendering to the Socialists Democrat Party. Ryan brags aboiut revising the social safety net established in the 1960′s by the Great Society.

    Paul Ryan needs to be primaried and defeated in 2012. He is a Socialist.

    • edingerb

      He, and a few others, have a budget plan that will fix a lot of the mess in 5 years.

      I hope that he gets some more support.

  • Pingback: NEW STOP SMOKING PILL » 5 steps easy way to stop smoking habit

  • Pingback: An Easy Way To Stop Smoking? :: NEW STOP SMOKING PILL