Skip to comments.Paul Krugman on Ryan's Budget Plan : Ludicrous and Cruel
Posted on 04/08/2011 6:41:13 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Many commentators swooned earlier this week after House Republicans, led by the Budget Committee chairman, Paul Ryan, unveiled their budget proposals. They lavished praise on Mr. Ryan, asserting that his plan set a new standard of fiscal seriousness.
Well, they should have waited until people who know how to read budget numbers had a chance to study the proposal. For the G.O.P. plan turns out not to be serious at all. Instead, its simultaneously ridiculous and heartless.
How ridiculous is it? Let me count the ways or rather a few of the ways, because there are more howlers in the plan than I can cover in one column.
First, Republicans have once again gone all in for voodoo economics the claim, refuted by experience, that tax cuts pay for themselves.
Specifically, the Ryan proposal trumpets the results of an economic projection from the Heritage Foundation, which claims that the plans tax cuts would set off a gigantic boom. Indeed, the foundation initially predicted that the G.O.P. plan would bring the unemployment rate down to 2.8 percent a number we havent achieved since the Korean War. After widespread jeering, the unemployment projection vanished from the Heritage Foundations Web site, but voodoo still permeates the rest of the analysis.
In particular, the original voodoo proposition the claim that lower taxes mean higher revenue is still very much there. The Heritage Foundation projection has large tax cuts actually increasing revenue by almost $600 billion over the next 10 years.
A more sober assessment from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office tells a different story. It finds that a large part of the supposed savings from spending cuts would go, not to reduce the deficit, but to pay for tax cuts.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Shut up, Krugman, you ignoramus.
The Whigs are going after some of the Communists Slush Fund Spending. From now on I am referring to Republicans as Whigs and Democrats as Communists. I think the names more accurate.
So he is arguing that 10%GDP deficits are rational and kind.
Frau Pelosi’s Death Panels would be first in the cruel category, IMO.
Dear Pauly, the 2003 tax cuts increased revenue from $1.7 trillion in 2003 to $2.4 trillion by 2006. Don't let facts get in your way, jackwagon!!!
Tax cuts when combined with spending cuts produce economic booms.
Tax and spend versus tax cut and spend over a long enough period are equally as damaging.
Yo, Krugman. When was the last time you were right about anythiing?
It was ludicrous and cruel too. Ludicrous, that I let my self get into that position... and cruel, because my money was funny for a long time.
I paid it down then I paid it OFF.
See.... that's how you do it. Bite the bullet...like a grown up!!
Krugman makes the claim, refuted by experience, that if a 1% tax is good, a 100% tax is a hundred times as good.
This absurdity is based on the fatuous assumption that the demand for the approval of Paul Krugman - which he would call "the legitimacy of income" - is perfectly inelastic.
Prohibition worked so well . . .
The Democrats have the team of Evil and Ludicris.
Paul and other libs will soon be suffering from a spending binge hangover.
Well, they should have waited until people who know how to read budget numbers had a chance to study the proposal
You man like people who know how to read should have studied Obamacare before it was passed?
Sorry Krugman. We have to pass it to see what’s in it.
Cruel is the Democrat governments' amassed budget deficits.
Cruel is trying to deficit spend our way back to prosperity.
Cruel is refusing to pay the military to protect funds for an abortion factory.