Skip to comments.Paul Ryan's Budget Exposes Democrats' Bankruptcy Of Ideas
Posted on 04/02/2014 7:15:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Whatever objections anyone might have to various details in Rep. Paul Ryan's bold new plan to cut $5 trillion of government waste, one fact trumps all else: Unlike Democrats, he offers solutions, not denial.
The one thing that stands out in the long-term budget plan unveiled Tuesday by House Budget Committee Chairman Ryan, R-Wis., is his acceptance of a fact Democrats want to hide:
You can't squeeze enough extra money out of the rich to pay for our endlessly expanding entitlement programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
Tax revenue over many decades has been relatively unchanging . And it will slam straight into the steep mountain of growing entitlements, with the crash and burn taking place in the late 2020s. Deny that and you might as well deny the law of gravity, too.
On Medicare, for instance, the Ryan plan points out what you never hear Democrats admit:
"Without reform, the program will end up causing exactly what it was created to avoid: millions of America's seniors without adequate health security and a younger working generation saddled with enormous debts to pay for spending levels that cannot be sustained."
Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" provides the parachute Democrats insist the country doesn't need.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
That 5 trillion is over 10 years.
Which would be fine if Congress would take the next 10 years off.
The problem is they will be back next year with another 10 year plan.
At least the oligarchs in The Soviet Union had the decency to keep their "plans" to 5 years.
Cutting $5T (presumably over 10 years) is a good start. I’d prefer to see more of the cuts sooner, as well as much bigger cuts. Still, Ryan’s budget is better than anything else on the table in DC.
Any budget they do should not have any debt limit increases in it.
The failure of the GOP in congress for reasonable budgets the last couple years should have prevented any debt increase needed.
Zero-based budgeting. Force every fedgov pogrom to justify it’s existence without libtard sleight of hand economics.
Balanced Budget Amendment. Deficit spending to require 75% majority in the House and Senate.
Replace SS with Private retirement plans, ala 401k and others, and keep the gubmint away from them. Taper down SS so no one loses out.
Dump 0bamacare. Get the gubmint out of the Dr’s office.
Scrap Dept of Education, HHS, Energy, Agriculture, and Commerce.
Push all welfare programs to the States. They are closer to the problems, anyway. Ideally, all should be even more local (county, parish, municipality).
Rebuild the military.
Secure the borders.
Scrap the Income Tax in favor of the Fair Tax and abolish the IRS.
Ryan’s budget AIN”T new, locks in supposedly one time bail out money again, GROWS the budget, and is just another joke from the lying liar
Are your sure they're actual cuts, and not mere reductions in the projected growth of spending?
You forgot the EPA
Any budget they do should be presented when they actually have a majoriry and can actually do something besides talk about it.
True to ryan’s nature it is loaded with numerous intervertnt mistakes that will be corrected later just like they were for the vets and how well that worked out.
> Whatever objections anyone might have to various details in Rep. Paul Ryan’s bold new plan to cut $5 trillion of government waste, one fact trumps all else: Unlike Democrats, he offers solutions, not denial.
Raising the budget in the short term with claimed savings coming only years out is a scam, it’s not a solution.
What an excellent start!
Ryan’s playing the shell game, per the usual Washington game, by claiming savings in the future—but not cutting in the budget congress actually has control over.
He already did that by backing the trimming of the sequester, too.
Not one dime’s worth of difference in Liberal Ryan’s plan. He’s dumber than Patty Murray.
Regarding Marshall's clarification, given the remote possibiilty that some freepers and lurkers are not aware of Marshall's statement, he had indicated that Congress is prohibited from laying taxes in the name of state power issues, essentially any issue which Congress cannot justify under its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers.
Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States. Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Not only should Justice Marshall's clarification of Congress's limited power to lay taxes be amended to the Constitution imo, but here's a roughly estimated federal budget based on his statement.
Given that the plurality of clauses in Congress's Article I, Section 8-limited powers are defense related, and given that the Department of Defense (DoD) budget for 2013 was $500+ billion, I will generously round the DoD annual budget up to $1 trillion, but probably much less, to estimate how much taxpayers should be paying Congress annually in order for Congress to perform its Section 8 duties.
In other words, we shouldn't be hearing about multi-trillion annual federal budgets that the corrupt media, including Obama guard dog Fx News, is reporting without mention of Justice Marshall's clarification of Congress's limited power to lay taxes.
I'm sure they're reductions in projected growth, which is part of the reason I'm comfortable with cutting much more aggressively.
Perhaps, inadvertent and perhaps on purpose....either way you are right when you say the correction will never come or will be worse
“Still, Ryans budget is better than anything else on the table in DC.”
Thats what scares me. “Well at least we have spam”.
We pay these morons $174,000 plus a year with healthcare and a primo retirement package. They should be able to balance the budget every year. Not in 10 years and not some pie in the sky BS which is what Ryan’s plan is. It stinks.
Its worthless. He still can’t bear to bring himself to name even one destructive, unecessary govt agency which could be shut down next year or the next year or in 10 years. I can name 4-5. Privatize the airport security and you get rid of 60,000 TSA/former Denney’s workers. Shut down the EPA and merge the Dept of Energy with the Dept of the Interior. Shut down the Dept of Educ and HUD. Break up and sell off Fannie and Freddie next year. Take the write down and get it over with. Take IBM up on its offer of free software to get rid of the 35% waste and fraud in Medicare. On and on I can name ways to save. So can every Freeper.
So no Paul Ryan’s plan is not good, its not even poor. It sucks. He wants to do it the easy way. He calls it “closing the loopholes”. Thats weasel speak for sticking it to Mr. and Mrs. America but leaving big govt behind so the republicans can take over and then they get the power. If left to the Paul Ryan’s of the world the US govt bureaucracy which is IMO the single worst obstacle to getting the constitutional republic and our capitalist economic system back will never shrink in any significant way.
It's hard to find someone willing to stand up for liberty and justice for all as a higher priority than redistributing other people's wealth, with goodies for insiders with connections. We know where to look, but too few of us have the courage to stand up to rabid attacks.
You are correct, ballplayer. And, probably even more that I missed.
That’s why it was easier for the founders to write that enumerated powers clause, rather than create a list of what fedgov can’t do.
Here we go again. Ryan’s stupid “10 year plans”. This time it’s the old carnival barker treatment...from WASTE!!
I wish I had a nickel for every politician who promised me they’d cut “waste, fraud and abuse” and save millions if not billions (and now trillions) but never cut ONE DAMN PENNY FROM ANY BUDGET!
Zero based budgeting for sure. We don’t even get a rundown on the general overhead of agencies and programs. In my opinion, any of these with operating costs over 30-35% need to go. And I’ll bet there are many.
Balanced Budget Amendment? Not so sure. From history and watching I find balancing budgets because of “the law” are full of holes for things like “emergencies”, etc. Like here in TN.
And our useless politicians ALWAYS create the spending side first with their “projections” and THEN try to shove more taxes down our throats to “balance” the budget.
It happened here in TN under Republican Gov. Don “The Tax Terrorist” Sundquist. Look up Phil Valentine’s book on this tax fight we had. It’s interesting. We protested on legislative plaza and at one point they send armed State Troopers to confront us for “yelling at them” and they were “worried there might be violence”.
I have an idea. How about NO growth and maybe some true CUTS and eliminating usless agencies?
There is provision in most of the BBA texts I’ve seen that allows for deficits, but all require a super majority in both houses of the Congress for passage.
Replacing the Income Tax (including repeal of the 16th Amendment) with a consumption tax model, administered at the State level would eliminate the IRS, and at least bring new light to the attempts to foist new taxes on us to accommodate the whims of the elitists.
The truth is we have to make some very difficult decisions in the coming months and years, if we are to salvage this grand experiment. It will not be easy. It will likely be messy; maybe even bloody. But, it must be done.
Thanks, Fledermaus. Stay safe, and stay FRee.
RE: but never cut ONE DAMN PENNY FROM ANY BUDGET!
This man had a plan for that — it’s called the PENNY PLAN. Unfortunately Connie Mack lost the elections in Florida last 2012.
But see here:
Essentially the plan is to Cut Federal Spending By One Percent for Six Consecutive Fiscal Years.
It Would Cap Overall Spending at 18 Percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Starting in Fiscal Year 2018.
It Would Reduce Overall Federal Spending by $7.5 trillion over the Next Ten Years and Would Balance the Federal Budget by 2019.
The fact that Florida voted for Bill Nelson over Connie Mack just shows where the state’s voters priorities are....
I’ve heard of it. Seems a little slow for my taste but it’s better than what we get now.
RE: Seems a little slow for my taste but its better than what we get now.
I agree with you, but in a political climate like we have where 47 Mil. people are on food stamps, slowly getting there is the least painful way of doing it versus a big bang cut 10% immediately approach.
The only problem I have with Mack’s proposal is this — how sure are you that a future congress won’t gut your plan after it is implemented?
Sequester was working for over a year and the deficit went DOWN. Look what’s happened to it since...
They could have pushed the “look at the silly things they are closing that are silly and mean” but instead whined about Ted Cruz doing a filibuster.
I'm sick of them all.