-
Real Immigration Reform Requires Free Markets
May 24, 2013 | 80 comments
-
McCain-Feingold Gave Us the IRS Scandal
May 21, 2013 | 122 comments
-
It’s.The.Law
May 20, 2013 | 20 comments
-
The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
May 13, 2013 | 150 comments
-
Farrell’s Fallacies
May 9, 2013 | 25 comments
Special Report
Now That’s Leadership!
Paul Ryan’s courageous budget is a challenge not only to Democrats to get our collapsing fiscal house in order but also to nervous Republicans.
(Page 2 of 2)
These massive tax hikes, if allowed to take effect, would decimate the economy and capital markets — as even many Democrats recognize. It is no surprise that congressional Democrats have been nearly silent in reaction to the Obama budget, reminiscent of the Senate’s 97-0 rejection of the president’s last budget proposal.
The goal of the Ryan budget is to put the nation on a path to reducing our federal deficit and national debt. Over the next decade, it cuts spending by more than $5 trillion compared to Obama’s budget, and offers more than $3 trillion in lower aggregate deficits.
CBO scoring of the Ryan budget “estimates that this budget will balance and begin to produce annual surpluses by 2040, and will start paying down the national debt after that.” It also reduces the share of GDP spent on Medicare, Medicaid, and discretionary spending versus current law. Since the CBO uses “static modeling,” which ignores the pro-growth aspects of reducing taxes and regulation as well as the growth-stifling impact of Obama’s many tax hikes, the beneficial impact of the Ryan budget will likely be greater — and sooner — than CBO estimates.
According to the House Budget Committee, the Obama budget is a “path to a debt-fueled economic crisis and permanent decline,” with our massive debt (now 100% of GDP) “having real effects today” including injecting uncertainty about “the government’s unsustainable future” into the economy. The Committee also notes “clear evidence that stimulus spending did not achieve its promised results” because “it contributed to deficits soaring above $1 trillion a year.”
On our current path and under its extension in the Obama budget, it is a matter of when, not if, we have a financial crisis in the country. This would harm households, business, and government revenue, leading to “painful fiscal adjustments” as we’ve recently seen implemented of Greece, with more to come across Europe’s social welfare states.
Paul Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity” is a bold challenge to the Obama administration, a team that has fewer good economic ideas than any bunch since Herbert Hoover and Messrs. Smoot and Hawley abandoned free-markets and tipped the nation into a Great Depression. When Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner was challenged on the administration’s failure to make even small strides towards dealing with the nation’s fiscal woes, his response was, “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to our long-term problem. What we do know is we don’t like yours.” It’s not just in foreign policy that the Obama administration “leads from behind.”
In an interview on CNBC on Tuesday, Gene Sperling, director of the Obama administration’s National Economic Council, went to the usual Democrat well, blaming deficits on the Bush tax cuts (despite data disproving this claim), calling for “shared sacrifice” (because the top 1 percent paying more federal income tax than the bottom 90 percent is not “fair” enough), and suggesting that the Ryan plan would offer “extremely harsh cuts in Medicaid.” (Cue next commercial of Paul Ryan pushing a wheel chair bound grandma off a cliff.) With this sort of thinking, the Obama economic team will, in less than one full term, have presided over a stunning 47 percent increase in the national debt with no end in sight.
In addition to being a bold challenge to President Obama and Senate Democrats, and a solid starting point for national fiscal sanity, the House budget accomplishes other equally valuable tasks: Harking back to James Carville’s “It’s the economy, stupid,” Ryan returns the national political discussion to the key issue of the size, scope, and cost of the government — and how by any measure the nation cannot afford another four years of Barack Obama.
It simultaneously pushes Republican politicians candidates toward solid pro-growth economic plans while giving them political cover to do just that. No longer will Republican candidates be able to look courageous with plans that tinker around the edges, that keep an overly complicated system in place, or that add distortions to favor interest groups.
In that sense, Republican candidates and members of Congress might not like the Ryan budget showing them to be less aggressively pro-growth than they should be. Their reaction to the Ryan plan will be more interesting and instructive than Democrats’ predictable “sky is falling” paroxysms. Initial reactions from some Republicans already show a desperate need for vertebral transplants.
But perhaps the most valuable contribution of Paul Ryan’s budget is to show the nation what leadership looks like. Targeting “political cowardice,” which Ryan names as a key factor in our entitlement programs’ descent into bankruptcy, is too rare an occurrence among congressional leaders, as is stating specific principles on which policy proposals are based and making a moral argument to support them.
The contrast between Paul Ryan’s vision and political courage not only highlights the failures, cynicism, and cowardice of the Obama administration, but also serves as a cautionary reminder that “every country has the government it deserves.” Entitlement thinking has saddled our children with over $15.5 trillion in national debt and $118 trillion in unfunded liabilities. So in addition to forcing politicians into a serious economic discussion, Paul Ryan’s bold proposal compels angry and fearful American voters to take a long hard look in the mirror.
About the Author
Ross Kaminsky is a self-employed trader and investor and is a senior fellow of the Heartland Institute. He is the host of The Ross Kaminsky Show on Denver’s NewsRadio 850 KOA at 11 AM on most Sundays. You can reach Ross by e-mail at rossputin(at)rossputin(dot)com.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (157) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Ross Kaminsky
More Articles From Special Report
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/03/21/now-thats-leadership
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Timothy L. Pennell| 3.21.12 @ 6:58AM
I like Paul Ryan a lot. If you ask me, he's the smartest, most honest man, in Washington, and the Brightest Light in the Republican Party. It's too bad he's surrounded by cowards.
A while ago, maybe 2010, the The New York Post had a story on their Editorial Page, of The Muslim berating the fact that: "Nothing gets done on the Entitlements Crises, because whenever anyone comes up with ANYTHING, they are Attacked and Vilified. This has to stop, if we're ever gonna fix the problems we have."
As in his Pleas for "Civility", after the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, they were JUST WORDS. Kinda like "Shovel Ready" and "Compromise". Even when he gets one right - "Do Nothing Congress" - he gets it wrong, (we have a Do Nothing SENATE) and he doesn't mean it. Everything is a Political calculation. Every word is Focus Group tested. Everything he does is for the benefit of HIM, and the Country be Damned.
The last time that Paul Ryan put out a Plan, it was to SAVE Medicare. It was instantly pounced upon by President "This has to stop, if we're ever gonna fix the problems we have" and the "Quick, let's get a picture of ourselves standing around a statue of FDR" Democrats. And, because the Press is the Democrat's panting Whore, they assume the position, and with their painted lips, and dutifully mouth the words that they are told by their Trick. "I'm a filthy Whore. I'm a dirty Slut. The Republicans want to Kill Medicare and throw Grandma off a cliff in a wheelchair."
The Democrats have no intention of "Fixing" anything. They don't do that. They NEED the Problem. For going on 60 YEARS, they've been running on the exact same things: JOBS - EDUCATION - SOCIAL SECURITY - MEDICARE - RACISM - and their C*nt, Tw*t, MILF, Slut, Whore, B*tches (Hat Tip Bill Maher) in the main stream Media know it, so they bend over (like Alan) and slavishly take one for the team, on their Editorial Pages.
But, they weren't the only problem, last go around. I remember quite a few Republicans, Political Pundits, and so-called "Experts" who went after Mr. Ryan for having the temerity to actually try and SOLVE a Problem. They complained that "He should have waited". "He should have held back and let the Democrats go first." THIS is why things don't get done.
Ryan's Plan was Solid. His Numbers were Solid. His Allies, were anything but. He had given them the Keys to the Kingdom, but they were too scared to open the Gates. They felt safer in their Happy Place. "Fixing things is hard."
The "Mistake" was never the Plan. It was the Timidity (is that a word?) of its Proponents. We are a Nation of Drive Thru Restaurants. ATMs, Kids in School, Little League, Soccer, after school activities, life in general. You can't propose something "SCARY" in a manner that mimics the Paperboy's throwing of your paper. Especially, when you have the other side doing everything in their power, to hold on to the Status Quot.
This has to be EXPLAINED. The Pros need to be put out there. The inevitability of Medicare's implosion, needs to be stressed. The REASONS for doing this are as simple to explain, as it is to convince people to pick up and leave when the Volcano starts erupting.
We don't have a Do Nothing Congress. We have a Do Nothing DEMOCRAT PARTY. We have passed Bills. We have passed Budgets, and Reforms, and offered ways to get Spending and Debt under control. We just don't seem to wanna talk about it.
Like Golda Meir once famously said: "If I am not for me? Who will be for me?"
Indeed.
Put out your Plans, then stand behind them, and challenge the other side, to PUT UP their own Solution, or STF UP.
And as far as HIS OWN PEOPLE going after him?
Stop Pissing in the wind. The Republicans hold all the Cards. OBAMA is raiding Medicare. $500 BILLION to pay for his Cuban Style Socialist Health Care Plan. Billions more CUT, in the Deficit Reduction Joke.
It's OBAMA'S antics that are driving up the COSTS of Health Care. It's OBAMA'S Mandates on Insurance Companies and Employers, that are driving the Cost of Health Care UP. It is OBAMA who has a $900 Billion Soviet Style Health Care Plan that REALLY Costs $1.7 TRILLION, and will be a Millstone around the necks of all of our Children and their Children, and will serve as the final nail in this Country's Economic Casket.
How much ammunition do they need?
On the lighter side, I heard a great joke from an Entertainer, who's name will remain Anonymous, and who doesn't have to Apologize because Comics and Entertainers have Extra Freedoms of Speech:
It seems that Michelle Obama went to Harlem to buy a bunch of Leopard Skin Leotards, Doo Rags, 6 inch Heels and Hair Straightener, to update her Black Slut B*tches and Hoes look, and that while she was buying Watermelons, her daughter was given Crack and Raped by Bobby Brown.
I don't know the Comedian's name, but he sounds hilarious. Who knows, maybe the 1st Lady will go on his Show?
In fact, I just heard that he's giving $1 Million to whichever Republican gets the nomination.
True story.
benny havens| 3.21.12 @ 7:31AM
The problem is that the message is not getting out. We may get a little commentary about the facts from the FNC but the MSM only shows snippets of the complaints, half-truths, lies, innuendo and misinformation from some democrat flapping his gums.
Goldwaterite| 3.21.12 @ 7:01PM
You've hit the nail upon its head. The Administration's media organs are ready to mobilize the OWS goons. Just start by reading editorials in today's WaPo & NYT. They've drowned themselves in a tsunami of liberal cliches: "balancing budgets on the backs of the poor; "starve your neighbor and we'll give you a tax cut". Whether it be out of economic ignorance or ideology, it is as hard to discern as Obama's mindset.
In the name of a phony compassion and emotional diatribes the Left will bankrupt us all; then only poverty will be widely redistributed. Of course, for all of the above they will still blame George Bush.
Cincinnatius| 3.21.12 @ 9:53PM
Spot on! Your assertion that Ryan is surrounded by cowards is soooo right it should be on the front page of every newspaper in America, the lead in on every talk radio show, news cast, etc, etc, etc! Sadly, even that would not put any backbone in them.
florin| 3.21.12 @ 11:14PM
Remember that Gingrich called Ryan's last budget proposal right wing social engineering as bas as left wing social engineering...Ryan is a very honest and courageous man...a rare thing in Washington.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 5:48AM
Huh? "courageous' for putting off balancing the budget until the 22nd century? That isn't courageous it's Heritage Foundation BS.
Occam's Tool| 3.21.12 @ 11:02PM
Ryan is awesome.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 5:51AM
Ok, so you think a guy that thinks its cool to put off a balanced budget until 30 years from today is awesome. What about balancing the budget in three years, and cutting ONE TRILLION in spending in year 2013! http://www.ronpaul2012.com/the.....e-america/
Indy| 3.21.12 @ 7:45AM
Paul Ryan is trying to solve our huge debt problem, thankfully, there are a few grownups in DC.
One item that still concerns me is why he does not take anything out of the baseline now? Isn't the stimulus spending embedded in the baseline? Why not go back to 2008 discretionary spending levels as a starting point? Why is it that Ryan's plan gets much more attention than the Senate Plan proposed by Rand Paul, Lee, DeMint? Both plans have merit and should be discussed.
Reid will never bring Obama's plan to the floor for a vote and the Senate Dems won't propose a budget but what happened before Ryan's plan was printed...attacks from the Left. We are facing the most predictable financial crisis and what does the Left do...attack anyone who proposes a solution, disgraceful.
florin| 3.21.12 @ 11:16PM
I'm not sure I understand where Reid gets all the power? Can he just dictate what can or can't be done and everyone has to submit to him?
Dick Nome| 3.21.12 @ 8:43AM
Democrats don't want a budget. As long as they can keep on spending by demagoging the spineless Republicans so-called leadership, they will be happy with continuing resolutions.
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 11:37AM
Let's not forget that the Senate won't do a single thing until after the election. Afterall, if they did and something actually got done how could Obama run against a do-nothing Congress? Doesn't matter how many bills the house passes, in the dim U.S. public eye, if the Senate kills it, they are all responsible for doing nothing.
Anthony| 3.21.12 @ 12:23PM
Yep, If this was a R president, the LSM would have a daily day count for each day America is operating without a budget, you know, with a counting clock, days, minutes, seconds, similar to what they did with the daily death toll in Iraq.
But since the LSM is in Obozo's pocket, not a word.
America needs a serious flushing out of its systems, starting in November 2012.
Derek Leaberry| 3.21.12 @ 8:51AM
George W. Bush's last budget was at about $ 2.8 trillion and that was exorbitant. The Ryan budget does not get anywhere close to to the $ 2.8 trillion pigs' trough budget of Bush. Essentially the Ryan budget institutionalizes the gigantic budget increases of the Obama Era.
A true budget-cutter would abolish agencies, fire hundreds of thousands of bureaucrats, bleed DC, and cut many of the programs beloved of big government conservatives- NASA, highways, foreign aid and military.
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 9:51AM
Under Bush federal spending doubled.
He came in with a budget roughly 1.6 trillion, and in 8 years, left office with a budget roughly 3.2 trillion.
You might be looking at PROPOSED spending by the Bush crew, but actual spending was much higher.
Derek Leaberry| 3.21.12 @ 10:20AM
I agree that the dishonest "off budgeting" of Iraq and Afghanistan had the budget much higher than $ 2.8 trillion. Just goes to show that Republicans are about as much liars as the Democrats. Also goes to show that Bush must rank with the worst American presidents- Obama, Carter, Nixon, Johnson, Grant, Buchanan.
skip| 3.21.12 @ 12:26PM
"Under Bush federal spending doubled. He came in with a budget roughly 1.6 trillion, and in 8 years, left office with a budget roughly 3.2 trillion."
first Bush budget (with republican House) 2002:
federal spending $2.010894 trillion (deficit $0.157758 trillion)
sixth Bush budget (last with republican House) 2007:
federal spending $2.728686 trillion (deficit $0.160701 trillion)
seventh Bush budget (first with democrat House) 2008:
federal spending $2.982544 trillion (deficit $0.458553 trillion)
eighth and last Bush budget (with democrat House) 2009:
federal spending $3.517677 trillion (deficit $1.412688 trillion)
Democrat Obama with democrat House and with democrat Senate added Obamastimulus (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009) to the eighth and last Bush budget.
Jim | 3.21.12 @ 12:50PM
Bush's problem was forgetting he was a Republican (prescription drug support, etc.).
Conservatives love foreign aid and NASA?
As for the military, we "learn" this lesson again and again. Cutting the military ALWAYS redounds to our harm. If you mean stop the "buccaneering" to achieve regime change, I agree 100%.
Mike Hawk| 3.21.12 @ 8:47PM
Bush 43 isn't President anymore, Obama is in the WH now doing more damage than we can tolerate.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 5:52AM
That's more like it!
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 8:55AM
The Obama regime, the liberal progressive cabal and the GOP RINO's are NOT timid. They are confiscating private property for themselves. They aim to establish a permenant ruling class.
Sub-prime, Agenda21 "Sustainable Development" scam and the Foreclosure bills are designed to collapse your property values. If successful, the ruling class will decide where you live and work, what you eat and drink, and when you will die.
But you are a fool if you do not understand that the oil and gas, gold and copper, harvests and fisheries will still be there. It will belong to the ruling class. And you will not be allowed on THEIR property. And you will comply, or you will not eat.
The Founding Fathers understood that pure democracy would steal the wealth through the vote. The socialist understand that they can use the greed of the people to steal the wealth from those who have it, and then control the anarchy with force. When the wealthy are deprived of their property, low-income homeowners at the mercy of Fannie and Freddie; both the property owners and the poor will be enslaved. That's what happens if they keep on spending. So why should they stop if they do not need to stop?
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 11:47AM
Jr:
As you note so many have their own agenda which doesn't match with the desperate needs of the country. Nonetheless, the GOP as a whole is so fearful of possibly offending someone, that it fails to stand for anything. Why should voters consider the GOP as viable if they cannot discern just what principles guide the party? There is the distinction between the GOP and the Conservative Movement.
The times demand a great deal of courage and the necessity for action will require that many will be unhappy as their "entitlements" are removed. Too many believe that the government grants "rights" but the sad thing is the government grants privileges not rights. The rights we hold come from our nature and our creator as the founding documents state. Government exists to protect those rights, not to grant "bennies" to select groups.
The citizens must step up and force hard decisions. We must find amonst us those who will make those decisions even at the cost of the personal confort and security. They need to stop the spending and we must either force them to do so or find others who will. This is the crisis of our time. Tom Paine had it right. Are we today a match for the demands of history?
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 12:40PM
Spot on Al.
I just wonder if the GOP is really afraid of offending, or just trying to keep it to a minimum who get it expecting others will not figure it out, or don't have the cajones to stand up for themselves.
darcy| 3.22.12 @ 12:58AM
Great post, Al Adab, one of your best.
"Are we today a match for the demands of history?" A rallying cry if ever I heard one.
Jim | 3.21.12 @ 12:58PM
Please stop with the conspiracy / evil cabal nonsense. We LET those people screw us, plain and simple, by refusing to let go of our emotions, study the problems, and convey to our representatives at various govt levels what they MUST do to keep our support. We are in control, if we want to be, but sadly, too many of us want to play either the "kill all the rich guys" or "rich guys are all angels" game, and the politicians play this kind of stupidity like a well practiced instrument. We are in control, if we want to be, but most of us are too focused on who won the game and who in Hollywood is screwing who to care. It's to our credit or blame what happens in America.
Example? I live in Minnesota, and a plan to increase fishing license fees caused a near riot at the capitol building, but a plan to raise taxes to build millionaire team owners new stadiums,caused nary a peep. We've found the enemy, and he is us.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:39PM
You're right - they are not timid - they have learned and copied the right-wing's tactics and did them better. It must really grate on the nerves, huh?
"If successful, the ruling class ..." - what do you mean "If"? The ruling class does control everything - have you not been paying attention? Or just watching Fox News?
Corporations/Lobbyists and the Corporate-Political Complex has already figured out how to steal all the wealth. The people be damned.
Now, who supports the Corporations? the Big Oil Companies?the Wealthy? Who wants to reduce the taxes on the rich and the corporations. Ruh-roh, you've been supporting the wrong side, Chuckles - but you won't believe me, im sure. You'll have to find it out for yourself, like I did years ago. Have a nice day!
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 2:01PM
Maybe the ruling class rules you, but apparently you need a master. Not much gets on my nerves, Perp. I have been doing just fine. I laugh hysterically at you trolls since you are such unhappy people. Your social justice is very unsocial.
I don't watch much FOX News since they cancelled Beck and Judge Napolitano. I listen to the business news and read Austrian Economics. The business news tells investors the facts, and history teaches those who can learn from the original sources.
Your corporations that are seeking economic rents are GE, GS, Solyndra, Ener1, Berkshire and Lightsquared. Oil companies pay something like 41% tax compared to ZERO at GE. Did you know who sits at the head of Obama's economic council? Have you checked into the sweetheart deals Buffet got at BOA and GS?
You are a wealth of misinformation. You must make your handlers proud, comrade!
DRed| 3.21.12 @ 2:42PM
All corporations are seeking economic rents. Why wouldn't they? You think there are six corporations in America lobbying Congress for deals?
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 3:13PM
BIG corporations that can afford LOBBYIST seek economic rents. The small businesses and those out of favor cannot.
Here you seem to rationalize and make excuses for GE, GS, Berkshire and the "Animal Farm" windmill look-a-likes. Where is the "fairness" in buying influence? Have we abandoned our principle since it is our child that misbehaved?
DRed| 3.21.12 @ 3:22PM
It's not fair at all. It's one of the main reasons Congress is so corrupt. You seem to think this is a problem with Democrats only-that's what I don't understand. From what I gather from some of your other posts, you think this is a problem because the 'fascist' Democrats are in power.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 8:28PM
The democrat establishment is the worse of two weasels, I mean evils.
Fascism is not necessarily derogatory, but desciptive. If you read about fascism in Mises "Socialism," it is socialism without the public means of production, but rather public control. So it de facto the same thing. Nazi was "National Socialist," not National Capitalist. It was just a derivation of socialism, as is Marxism.
I am NOT praising the GOP or Democrat establishments. Unlike Perpy, you seem to be able to understand that this is not simply partisan rancor.
DRed| 3.21.12 @ 10:08PM
In a fascist system, to the extent that the party controls the economy, it's the party that decides what private companies will do. It's not like America now, where private companies essentially bribe the government to help rig a market in their favor. It's certainly not good, but it's not fascism. Words matter, Von. You have a solid argument when you're complaining about the negative influence of corporations using the government to distort the operation of the market, but when you start calling people fascists they're going to stop listening to you.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.22.12 @ 6:48AM
Like GM getting $50B in tax breaks and building Chevy Volts nobody wants? And GE who paid no taxes on $14.2B last year orders Chevy Volts from their government?
Wake up,DRed. There is no banking market outside the money-go-round between the Fed, Treasury and the 5 major banks. The Fed prints money, gives it to banks for 1/4 at the Discount Window and they buy T-Bills at 2-3%. Guaranteed money for funding the Treasury is the banks idea? Obama and the Congress are VICTIMS???
DRed| 3.22.12 @ 8:53AM
You're putting words in my mouth again. I don't know why you think I'm saying Congress is a victim.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:12PM
What a nice diatribe, but your talking points skirts are showing. Just take a look at what corporations have the largest profits - now isn't that interesting. Ever see a bank or insurance company without a huge glass and steel building with thousands of employees and oodles of money? Wonder why again? Who are they getting all that money from? Hmmm?
You have your selected targets, sure, but ALL corporations and the corporate-political complex is the problem left, right and center - we have the best government that corporations can buy ... it's so simple even you should understand it. Take a look at who is supporting the Romneys, Gingriches and Santorectums.
The little guy hasn't a chance against corporate money, and yet you are happy to swallow what the right-wing media tells you to believe, aren't you? Well, that's your problem to solve, and one day you might wake up.
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:18PM
You socialist POS, corporation exist to MAKE MONEY/PROFITS. Why? Because we're a CAPITALISTIC NATION, not a SOCIALISTIC one that preferable by you and yo boy @1600. Oh and those corporations are staffed/employed/filled with well-paid employees that support themselves and their families, pay taxes that funds yo welfare queens of government too!!!!!!!!
ErmaL| 3.21.12 @ 4:27PM
"yo boy at 1600"
Gosh. Doesn't that just speak volumes.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 8:30PM
Perp, Have you ever heard Clapton "Have you ever had a woman?" You should try it,and perhaps you would not be so angry.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:51PM
Have YOU ever heard Pink Floyd's "Comfortably Numb" ... that describes your brain to a T.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 10:20PM
That's what I mean Perp. You can't hide your anger. It must be horrible being so angry?
Backatcha| 3.21.12 @ 9:33PM
Perp...
I hope one day you'll wake up, get off your Daddy's couch and get a job...
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:52PM
I'll bet 10, 000 bucks I make more than you do po' boy
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:21PM
'Steal the wealth'? What a joke from a stupid POS! They EARN PROFITS/PAYCHECKS etc and are forced to pay taxes that funds WLEFARE TO YOU AND YOURS! Go get a job, you dirtbag instead of being a OWS piece of human garbage!!!!!
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:53PM
You're as dumb as you sound ... but Old Farte isnt' good enough - Turd Blossom would be better you stupid red neck sorry a** boy lover.
Von Mises Jr.| 3.21.12 @ 10:10PM
my, my, you are an angry young man....Perpy.
Did your daddy beat you? Wait, do you know who your daddy is? Does your momma know who your daddy is? If anybody knows who your daddy is, they should call him to wash out your dirty mouth..
From the Desk of Media Matters| 3.23.12 @ 2:23AM
Pierre Punk "Poop" Putz-Femme Pansy-Jacques Gai-Paree Schultz-Pelosi,
Stop discrediting us.
MM staff still waiting for your response to our reply using the official website of Obama www link of:
whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2012/assets/hist.pdf
that we used as an argument to definitively prove what a stupid lying idiot you are below in this thread on behalf of the big guy's request in response to your request below in this thread where you argued the following:
"No argument, just nasty epithets - are you 12?"
where you were given the same sourced offical information from the official website of Obama again same as in 2.12 & 1.12 & 12.11 & 11.11 & 10.11 & 9.11 & 8.11 & 7.11 & 6.11 & 5.11 & 4.11 & 3.11 & 2.11 & 1.11 & 12.10 & 11.10 & 10.10 & 9.10 & 8.10 & 7.10 & 6.10 & 5.10 & 4.10 & 3.10 and even you the stupid lying idiot should get the idea by now.
MM staff ironically has now received 781 letters from 12 year old grade schoolers who have used AmSpec articles to complete a civics assignment due before spring break and wanted us to know what a 'stupid assboy turd blossom lover' they think you are whatever that means which MM staff suspects is a nasty epithet.
MM staff waiting for a response to our argument based on the link to the official website of Obama that definitively proves all 20 combined years of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II deficits combined total less than the 3 years of Obama deficits as definitively proven by the official website of Obama who has already totalled more in deficits in 3 years than all 20 years combined of Reagan, Bush I and Bush II according to the official website of Obama.
MM staff waiting for 4.12 where you will stupidly lie like the idiot you are same as 3.12 & 2.12 & 1.12 & 12.11 & 11.11 & 10.11 & 9.11 & 8.11 & 7.11 & 6.11 & 5.11 & 4.11 & 3.11 & 2.11 & 1.11 & 12.10 & 11.10 & 10.10 & 9.10 & 8.10 & 7.10 & 6.10 & 5.10 & 4.10 & 3.10 and even you the stupid lying idiot should get the idea by now with a little assistance from 12 years if there are any who won't kick your ass.
MM staff can think of 781 reasons to watch over their shoulder if they were you the stupid lying idiot.
Stop discrediting us.
You stupid lying idiot.
- MM staff
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 5:56AM
"The Founding Fathers understood that pure democracy would steal the wealth through the vote."
Democracy is ruining America. The majority of the people have been led to believe that we were formed as a "democracy." Jefferson, adams, Madison, Washingotn,Hamilton aet al understood that "democracy" is the worse form of government.
Article IV, section Four of the US constitution "guarantees to every state in the Union a republican form of government."
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 9:10AM
Let's be realistic about a few things. First this bill will not pass the Seante. So its DOA.
Second, the growing markets for American corporations are not in the United States, they are overseas. The market in the United States is declining. I'm okay with lowering the corporate tax rates, but to also give corporations a pass on their overseas profits is nothing but theivery from the treasury. Profits, not matter where they come from should be taxed, at a fair rate. Having this in the bill is only going to give the Democrats a legitimate gripe.
Third, lowering the personal tax bracket of the wealthiest at a time that the country has still not fully recovered doesn't make much sense. The wealthiest Americans have had huge gains in their income compared to the other classes. The argument that they pay the majority of taxes in this country is getting old. It's similar to the racism card. Yeah they pay more, but they still pay a smaller percentage of the taxes than the percentage of American wealth they posess. Again, this bill is just giving the Democrats something else to loudly gripe about.
Fourth, it does not do nearly enough to cut th social payouts. It's time for someone to call a spade a spade and talk about all the fraud that goes on with these social programs and make drastic cuts that force the Democrats to adress it so that benefits for those truly in need of help get it, and there's nothing left for those that would commit fraud. Think about that when you're thinking about lowering the tax rate on the wealthiest Amnericans. Are they the ones who truly need help, or is the 75 yr old widow, the adult that was born with mental retardation, or the handicapped?
Americans want a cut in spending first, then after the financial house is in order look at lowering the personal tax rates.
It is politically ignorant at this time to be talking about lowering the personal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans. It is also politically ignorant to be letting corporations that make huge profits hide those profits overseas and not pay some tax on those profits.
With deficits this country has all of us, including American corporations need to help dig us out of this whole as quickly as possible. Our kids don't deserve the debt we created. We need to set the example right now.
truebluepatriot| 3.22.12 @ 8:46AM
"Third, lowering the personal tax bracket of the wealthiest at a time that the country has still not fully recovered doesn't make much sense. The wealthiest Americans have had huge gains in their income compared to the other classes. The argument that they pay the majority of taxes in this country is getting old. It's similar to the racism card. Yeah they pay more, but they still pay a smaller percentage of the taxes than the percentage of American wealth they posess."
So, what you're saying, is "to each according to his need, from each according to his ability" Karl Marx.
Is that what you REALLY meant to say?
billg| 3.22.12 @ 11:05PM
The top1% earn 22% of the income and pay 39% of income taxes at a 5 high tax rate. When Reagan became Prez in '81 the top rate was 70% andthe top 1% paid 17% in income taxes. Why do people still confuse this. Taxes paid is what we want and CLEARLY the lower tax RATES on the rich have lead to higher tax RECEIPTS paid by them.
The dirty little secret that Libs can't admit is that the Bush tax RATE reductions (not cuts since tax receipts still increased) skewed far more for the poor and middle class than the more affluent by a factor of 3. (2trillion vs. 700 billion) Maybe this is why the top 1,5, and 10% of income earners pay 40,60, and 70% of income taxes.And this is a bad thing for the SOCIALISTS? This is the progressive tax scheme Marx has dreamed about for God's sake. Take what you have and GTF home. Its more than enough already.
billg| 3.22.12 @ 11:23PM
35% tax rate
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 9:24AM
I am sure after all said and done..after we win the 2012 election ( 2010) style, All the good guys will come together..the Penny Plan, Paul Ryans " Path to Prosperity" and the Senate Rand Paul , De Mint Plan and begin to solve this fiscal CRISES!
Paul Ryan is one great American...what potential to lead! I hope he is chosen for V.P....a seat in the Senate Chamber, Visits of GOOD WILL to other nations, an advisor to the President...we could never ask for a better Conservative than he to speak on our behalf!
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 6:00AM
You place too much hope in a guy that has to go to the establishment think tank Heritage Foundation to get his budget plan.The HF is basically an establishment tank organized to misdirect conservatives in congress and keep them contained to the status quo;profligate spending and big government.
JimH| 3.21.12 @ 9:25AM
Is it to late for a Ryan draft?
JayDick| 3.21.12 @ 9:49AM
For President, yes. For VP, maybe not. Either Rubio or Ryan would add a lot to the Republican ticket. However, Ryan may be more valuable to the cause in the House.
George S| 3.21.12 @ 9:28AM
This is still kicking the can down the road -- only with the right foot instead of the left. We cannot, today, place an obligation on a future congress -- they'll never honor it because it won't buy them votes. Why would they abide by a ten... twenty... thirty year old budget forecast? Try telling voters who have yet to be born in 2050 that they are obliged to pay for a 2009 president's purchase of union votes.
We have a debt, which means we owe money. That is, we owe labor. If we do not engage in that labor -- in part or in whole -- in our lifetimes, then the next generation is on the hook.
Just to get rid of Obama's spending, each of the 140 million tax filers have to be hit with a $10,000 surcharge on top of whatever tax liability owed. And that does not include past liabilities or future unfunded liabilities.
Sure, Ryan's plan is great -- because we will not feel the pain of paying back what we borrowed. And isn't that what it's all about for all parties involved?
D Boone| 3.21.12 @ 1:19PM
Couldn't agree more. This is the same old hype we heard last summer in the GOP "hammering" a deal for the debt-ceiling, which actually didn't save any money, and imposed "draconian" cuts-on-future-spending-increases. All gimmickry.
Paul Ryan has never had a private job. He worked on the staff of Sen. Bob Kasten and then ran for congress. He is "institutionalized," and like the current GOP leadership, he does not see any need to make any real "cuts." This is gimmickry, where Ryan has promised "saving" the welfare programs of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the like. Why are we "saving" these?
What happened to bold dismantling of the federal welfare state? How about winding these "programs" (so tired of hearing this word, as though we all need a "program" to make it) to non-existence? Why not do it gradually?
So, in other words, all of these federal entitlements stay? Why can't we opt out completely from Social Security and Medicare?
WHAT DO THE REPUBLICANS STAND FOR IF THEY ARE SIMPLY DEMOCRAT-LITE?
martin j smith| 3.21.12 @ 9:41AM
This budget plan of course will be trashed by the Communists--of that there is no doubt. However I think one add or even bumper should be lead by the following: This of course is for the Republican nominee--as well as congressional and all local elections--Vote for us if you want Responsible economic Leadership or vote for them if you want irresponsible leadership( and we all know who them are )
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:33PM
Gee, since Reagan and the 2 Bushes ran up over 10 Trillion of the debt, more than 1/2 - I guess you mean the Democratic Party is the responsible side.
From the Desk of Media Matters| 3.21.12 @ 2:52PM
Jackpierre Brianputz Londonpurp Cutteridgepelosi,
Stop embarrassing us.
This is why even Soros backed organizations realize you are a stupid lying idiot completely lacking any integrity and and completely lacking any credibility.
Per request of the big guy himself, we found the following information posted to you over 100 days ago, citing from the Office of Management and Budget that is the official information of both the White House and the President:
"Reagan (1981-1989), Bush I (1989-1993), Bush II (2001-2009) combined 20 year budget deficit:
$4.277406 trillion deficit
Obama (2009-2011) 3 year deficit:
$4.351296 trillion deficit"
These numbers are from Obama's official website you stupid lying idiot.
Nobody but a stupid lying idiot without any integrity would bring this back up again.
Stop discrediting us.
You stupid lying idiot.
- MM staff
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:22PM
Prove it. The national debt was near 1 Trillion dollars when Reagan came into office. Now, by your calcs, we should have about 10 Trillion in Debt. The truth is:
Reagan - 1.8 T
Bush I - 2.2 T
Clinton - 1 T
Bush II - 5.7 T
Take a look at the truth and be ashamed, embarrassed and miserable about the Republicant party ... if you dare:
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 4:59PM
So how come you didn't put Obama's# up there?
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:54PM
Don't dispute the rest tho, did ya?
From the Desk of Media Matters| 3.21.12 @ 5:34PM
Pierrejack Putzbrian Purplondon Pelosicutteridge,
You stupid lying idiot.
Stop discrediting us.
"Prove it", you stupid lying idiot?
"zfacts", you stupid lying idiot?
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self the information provided by the Office of Management and Budget, you stupid lying idiot?
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self the Office of Management and Budget is the official website of the White House and the President, you stupid lying idiot?
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self the information provided by the Office of Management and Budget that shows Obama deficits surpassing all 20 years combined of "Reagan and the 2 Bushes" is from the official website of Obama himself, you stupid lying idiot?
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self all this in the past more than 100 days all by yourself, so as to avoid ridicule should this information provided to you more than 100 days ago be, in fact, correct, as every other bottom rung MM mindless parrot but you, Jackbrian, and your twin Putzurpledouche, whatever, know these numbers to be, in fact, correct, and that not even our own mainstream media can, in fact, hide from the public the nation's yearly budgets, you stupid lying idiot?
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid to determine for your stupid lying idiot self that the information from just more than 100 days ago included the specific details and specific sources cited along with the following information you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self, you stupid lying idiot?
"Reagan (1981-1989), Bush I (1989-1993), Bush II (2001-2009) combined 20 year budget deficit:
$4.277406 trillion deficit
Obama (2009-2011) 3 year deficit:
$4.351296 trillion deficit"
You voluntarily admit you are too stupid a lying idiot to determine for your stupid lying idiot self an unknown anonymous source with the name of "zfacts" will fail to counter as a source the official website of Obama himself, you stupid lying idiot?
"zfacts", you stupid lying idiot?
"Prove it", you stupid lying idiot?
Stop discrediting us.
You stupid lying idiot.
- MM staff
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:54PM
No argument, just nasty epithets - are you 12?
From the Desk of Media Matters| 3.21.12 @ 11:32PM
Pierre Jacques Putzfemme Gaiparee Pelosi,
Stop discrediting us.
Even our other bottom rung MM mindless parrots know sourced facts have been provided to you over and over month after month.
You are discrediting us because there is no reader at this site who is fooled into believing you have a shred of credibility which is why we suspended your $5 per post payments.
You are discrediting us because we are getting letters from 12 year old grade schoolers completing civics class assignments using AmSpec articles who are disgusted by your stupidity and even though they are 12 years old they bothered to write and let us know these 12 year olds think you are stupid.
MM staff has been requested by the big guy himself to provide the information provided by our opponents here in order to document your abysmal performance.
MM staff has never been more humiliated than this moment having to provide the arguments of our opponents.
The link provided on pages 22 and 23 shows in the third column from the left labeled 'Surplus or Deficit' the budget surplus or deficit of each respective year.
MM staff feels it necessary to explain to you the stupid lying idiot that the first column from the left labeled 'Receipts' means total federal revenue for each respective year, and the second column from the left labeled 'Outlays' means total federal spending for each respective year.
Reagan was president 8 years from 1981 through 1988,
Bush I was president 4 years from 1989 through 1992,
Bush II was president 8 years from 2001 through 2008,
8 years plus 4 years plus 8 years is 20 years combined for budgets with a surplus or deficit for Reagan, Bush I and Bush II,
Obama has been president 3 years from 2009 through 2011,
3 years for budgets with a surplus or deficit for Obama.
MM staff feels it necessary to explain to you the stupid lying idiot that the 1981 deficit of -78,968 is in millions of dollars which is the same thing as -0.078968 trillion dollars.
Office of Management and Budget link:
www.whitehouse.gov/sites/defau.....s/hist.pdf
page 22:
(Reagan)
1981: -0.078968 trillion dollar deficit
1982: -0.127977 trillion dollar deficit
1983: -0.207802 trillion dollar deficit
1984: -0.185367 trillion dollar deficit
1985: -0.212308 trillion dollar deficit
1986: -0.221227 trillion dollar deficit
1987: -0.149730 trillion dollar deficit
1988: -0.155178 trillion dollar deficit
(Bush I)
1989: -0.152639 trillion dollar deficit
1990: -0.221036 trillion dollar deficit
1991: -0.269238 trillion dollar deficit
1992: -0.290321 trillion dollar deficit
(Bush II)
2001: +0.128236 trillion dollar surplus
2002: -0.157758 trillion dollar deficit
2003: -0.377585 trillion dollar deficit
2004: -0.412727 trillion dollar deficit
2005: -0.318346 trillion dollar deficit
2006: -0.248181 trillion dollar deficit
2007: -0.160701 trillion dollar deficit
2008: -0.458553 trillion dollar deficit
page 22 & 23:
(Obama)
2009: -1.412688 trillion dollar deficit
2010: -1.293489 trillion dollar deficit
2011: -1.645119 trillion dollar deficit
MM staff is not entirely sure you the stupid lying idiot is capable of correctly using a calculator but if you the stupid lying idiot was capable of correctly using a calculator it would be possible to determine:
Reagan (8 years from 1981 through 1988 total):
1.338557 trillion dollar deficit
Bush I (4 years from 1989 through 1992 total):
0.933234 trillion dollar deficit
Bush II (8 years from 2001 through 2008 total):
2.005615 trillion dollar deficit
Reagan, Bush I, Bush II (20 years combined total):
4.277406 trillion dollar deficit
Obama (3 years from 2009 through 2011 combined total):
4.351296 trillion dollar deficit
MM feels it necessary to explain to you the stupid lying idiot that the Obama 3 years of Obama total deficits of $4.351296 trillion is more than the Reagan, Bush I, Bush II 20 years of total deficits
of $4.277406 trillion you stupid lying idiot.
MM staff feels it necessary to explain to you the stupid lying idiot that deficits are different than debt which you stupidly idiotically lie about as if their is no difference between deficits and debt.
MM feels it necessary to explain to you the stupid lying idiot that this has all been explained to you over and over month after month and that you have responded to these posts which means you have read and were aware of these posts which is documented in AmSpec archives you stupid lying idiot.
Stop discrediting us.
You stupid lying idiot.
- MM staff
You stupid lying idiot.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 6:05AM
Bush 43 put the nation into debt with 3.4 Trillion up front for war, welfare and bureaucracy. When he signed the medicare Prescription Drug Program he put the unborn American into hock to the tune of $7 Trillions! s This unfunded debt of Bush 43 is going to cost the next generation their standard of living or their freedom or both.
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:14PM
Reagan and Bush ran up government debt building up the military and intelligence agencies that Carter and the domestic terrorists [so they could instead use the government's revenues to welfarically support their deadbeat welfare contituency] aka Democrats destroyed previously DA!!!!
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:25PM
Nice try - had they raised taxes to pay for it, fine - but they cut taxes and spent the money anyway - you call that responsible? Fiscally sound policy? Really? They spent what they wanted, damn the deficits and Republicants lie about it now.
http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
ErmaL| 3.21.12 @ 4:30PM
lol.... "It's only okay when the GOP does it!"
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 9:48AM
This isn't the first Paul Ryan to come along. Democrats have seen variants of Paul Ryan come and go, yet the state grows, the bureaucracy grows, the regulations grow, the regulatory and administrative state grows.
And the Democrats have always made short work of the Ryans of this world.
For all of Ryan's budgetary manipulations and machinations, for all of his efforts, what he offers isn't the answer to our problem.
Ryan tries to answer the question: "how are we going to pay for this?''
But he never gets to the question: "Where is the growth going to come from enabling us to shoulder and resolve this vast debt?"
Only Gingrich's plan gets this economy moving, puts Americans back to work, involves the return of American steel and rail, and uses America's vast natural resources to resolve our debt and resolve that debt inside a generation.
Ryan plays to caricature and stereotype for Democrats.
But Gingrich forces the Democrats onto the defensive.
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 10:04AM
I have to agree. No candidate has come even close to answering the question of how we get out from under thus debt except Gingrich. He is the only one that seems to really understand Americans. "Think Big", "Grand Ideas", "Bold Solutions", thats what made America what she is. Not "I'm the only one who's ever run a company". We've all seen what our current group of American CEO's think of how to run a company, and it isn't to the liking of most Americans.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 6:15AM
Gingrich? Oh you mean the guy that sat close to Nancy Pelosi on that couch lecturing us about global warming and pushing their Cap & Trade scheme?
"Gingrich" the guy that voted for the creation of the Dept of Education? This guy from the House GATT? In his testimony before the senate he said that GATT would be a "big transfer of power" to an international organization. He voted for it despite this hit America would take from GATT diminishing America's sovereignty. Out of GASTT came the WTO and the controlled and managed trade on behalf of world bank connected business. But nuts to the small businessman. Yea, that 's Newt all right- the one world promoting guy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02HX5v5Thpk
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 11:41AM
Agreed. And that is why my wife and I both voted for him yesterday, even knowing it was a futile gesture. Sometimes you just have to go with your conscience. Saying that, I will get behind whoever the nominee becomes becuase A.B.O is the first stepping stone to fixing our woes.
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 11:55AM
If Gingrich stays in it until Texas has its vote it will put a lot of heat on Romney to start making commitments to the voter base. It will also force him to actually tell us what the hell he plans to do. So far all he has done is talk and then try to pass himself as an outsider when he looks like an insider.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:31PM
The oil companies are making a killing and you think Professor Moonbeam is going to give anyone 2.50 a gal gas? Not a chance.
The combustion engine and coal plants is not the answer for the future and that's all he offers. Obama saved the Auto Industry and saved the economy - and HE has the most experience as Commander-in-Chief. Obama 2012 is assured.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 1:41PM
What about Newt, are you DEM'S AFRAID of???
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 2:02PM
Afraid? Of Newt? Hahahaha - Gingrich is a Big, Fat Joke. The Pillsbury Doughboy will never be President.
For the record, btw, I'm not a Democrat ... you're just so far right, I seem left.
ErmaL| 3.21.12 @ 4:31PM
How about his complete and total lack of anything resembling moral fiber or integrity?
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 2:32PM
Saved the auto industry? Not hardly, saved GM maybe, Ford did just fine on it's own. As for the oil companies making a killing. Get some new material. You do realize that our goverment makes more per gallon of gas in taxes then the oil companies make in profit don't you?
Please explain how you are going to make plastics without oil. Or run Semi-trailers and jets off algae? And what is your back up plan for solar panels on cloudy days and wind farms when the winds don't blow? You do realize they rely on coal power to back them up don't you?
Idiot
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:34PM
The Federal Government collects some 32 Billion/year in gas taxes. http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/0...../index.htm
Last I checked, Exxon alone collected 45 Billion in profits for the year. And that doesn't include the other oil companies.
And you call me an idiot? Go have another drink and hang out in your trailer park. Let the big boys handle this convo.
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 5:03PM
Your name calling is funny. Sorry but it doesn't even come close to getting under my skin. let's say your right, the goverment collects 32 billion from the oil company. How much did they spend?
And you haven't even tried to answer my other questions, just cherry picked the ones you think you can rebut wit info from a lefty site.
Try this on for size old man, then ask the nurse for your sponge bath.
The answer to the first question is that over the past 25 years, oil companies directly paid or remitted more than $2.2 trillion in taxes, after adjusting for inflation, to federal and state governments—including excise taxes, royalty payments and state and federal corporate income taxes. That amounts to more than three times what they earned in profits during the same period, according to the latest numbers from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and U.S. Department of Energy.
http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/1168.html
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:07PM
I answered one question and you turn the entire picture to what you want - a tired old right wing ploy. Sorry Chuckles I don't all for it. Good they pay that much in taxes - they use more of our resources than most companies or people.
billg| 3.22.12 @ 11:27PM
You ever heard of state governments sparky? They rake in a fair share as well genius.
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:10PM
The oil companies, fool? You no doubt mean the oil sheiks within the middle east who siphon off their profits to their fellow Arab Muslim terrorists as bribe money to keepfrom becoming overthrown, right? Oh wait they have been overthrown with the assistance of the domestic terrorists now running our government, right? Arab Spring perhaps? Where Murbarak or Omar these days? Oh and your boy Barry saved the country? What BS! He saved GM and Crysler for the automobile labor unions so they could shove political contributions up his rear end....that's all he's saved [at taxpayer expense dumbars!]!!!!!
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:52PM
Stop watching Fixed News and see the truth:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/.....story.html ...
And, what pray tell, is a labor union made up of? Workers, you idiot. Why don't you ask the Auto Industry and THEIR suppliers - some 3 million workers whether the President saved their industry you creep.
He saved this country from economic collapse and you are ungrateful because he's black. What other reason are you ungrateful? What a creep.
Backatcha| 3.21.12 @ 9:50PM
Ding. Ding. Ding. We finally see the true Perp for what he/she is... a dyed in the wool race baiter. We the "ungrateful" whitey don't agree with our glorious leaders divisive politics and as such we are racists. How pitiful can you get? Everywhere you look you see the division of color and class. We debate on merit and logic...
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:08PM
you are racist or you wouldn't take issue with it ... if you weren't you would know your aren't and wouldn't care what anyone said - your racist slip is showing ... tsk tsk
JayDick| 3.21.12 @ 9:53AM
It is true that this plan has no chance of being adopted, at least not this year. Still, publishing it is a very good idea for political reasons and as a starting point for the next Congress. However, Republicans and their friends need to vigorously support and defend it. Included in that defense must be a sharp contrast with the Democrats' approach, which is to do as little as possible and just demagogue the Republican plan.
One of the talking points must be "what is the Democrats' plan?"
Drek| 3.21.12 @ 9:54AM
One more thing, the American electorate is not going to turn out of office our supposedly wonderful first black president merely because he can't make his budget square.
So I'm all for an election that seeks an affirmative mandate, just not for making the election, as Ryan would have us, exclusively about the budget.
Ryan is way too absorbed with his numbers, {dire though they are}.
Gingrich strikes the right tone, that the answer to our problems can only be growth, ROBUST growth, and the proceeds from the use of our natural resources.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:26PM
Are you kidding? Professor Moonbeam? Child Labor King? no way.
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:04PM
Better than the......FOOD STAMP PRESIDENT!!!!
ErmaL| 3.21.12 @ 4:32PM
Old Fart - there were more people on food stamps under Bush. But you know this, right?
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:54PM
No, he doesn't - you won't hear the truth on Fixed News or Lush Loudmouth ... maybe he should vote for Rick Santorectorum - that's where his head is.
martin j smith| 3.21.12 @ 9:56AM
I think putting out something is a good idea but it should be defended and those who criticize should be forced to show their hand. That is the idea of putting out any plan like this one.
Bill| 3.21.12 @ 10:12AM
WI has become a "fertile" land for fiscal conservatism, and two prominent heroes: Gov. Scott Walker and Chairman Paul Ryan. It's also the birthplace of GOP.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:22PM
OMG - what planet have you been on?
Al Adab| 3.21.12 @ 1:31PM
Bill:
Electoral votes. WI will not deliver for the GOP. Neither for that matter will IL, so why should that state be selecting the nominee?
martin j smith| 3.21.12 @ 10:44AM
I think this election will come down to this: Is your life groovy under Obama or does it suck ? Those that are happy as is will vote for Obama those that are not will vote against not for anyone in particular.
I vote against Obama and urge those who feel likewise to do likewise.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:25PM
Maybe - but if the Republican Candidate is mean to dogs (Romney), mean to women (Santorum), or God help us, Speaker Moonbeam ... voting against Obama, who got Osama Bin Laden, ended the Iraq War, and saved the Auto Industry, not so much.
Mimi| 3.21.12 @ 1:50PM
It's not about only us and our interests....It is for those that have been destroyed by his dreadful policies...Those who have lost their house, wealth, Job. This whole country has been attacked from within...our Constitution, traditions, religious Liberties, institutions, our own bodies via our # one medical care being denied us...Oh , on and on...He has harmed the nation and MUST not be given another inch of POWER. !
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 2:05PM
the jobs were lost, the housing was lost before the man, Obama, was even elected. He has saved the nation and you're an ingrate if you don't appreciate that he saved your a**.
Blame Yo'self for voting for Dinny Dim Bush who found the Presidency fun, but oh so hard, started 2 wars, ran up debt for no reason, and almost killed the country.
Dr. Bombay| 3.21.12 @ 10:54AM
AmericanDocs4Truth.org says it all...Maybe Dr. Obama should take a pill himself to get over his need to tell other people how to live...Watch the commercial, its vindicating on so many levels...
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 11:29AM
Beautifully brilliant, Ross, as usual! However Ryan, you and numerous bloggers here in their equally super intelligent commentaries, need to DUMB DOWN YOUR ANALYSIS OF THIS PROBLEM, SINCE THE GENERAL ELECTORATE OF THIS COUNTRY IS [FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD]......STUPID! How else could this country have possibly elected Obama as POTUS or have been propagandized/manipulated into the Democratic Party socialism of the last half centry or more? The Democrats are simply adept at dumbing down or politically manipulating the voting populus sadly and Republicans and conservatives need to develop the art of same if we are to WIN. This issue of Ryan's/Republicans' budget versus Obama's/Democrats' is only a matter of govermental downsizing to reduce expenses [and taxpayers' costs] versus governmental welfare providance [in return for voting for the grantors of same....Democrats]. Sure governmental goodies are wanted by indigents and dumbarses of our society since they are too stupid, too lazy and too selfish to want to provide same from their own personal efforts within the meaning of the WORK ETHIC [which drives the rest of us daily]. They simply do not care and demand that taxpayers [income earners] have a moral obligation to give them more stuff, ie welfare. While we still have the opportunity [and before we taxpayers are marginalized by them into a political corner of being unable to do so], we must forcibly decrease governmental spending on this welfare, make it temporary [not eternal-limitless] and force these indigents to begin to WORK FOR THEIR FINANCIAL LIVING AND SURVIVAL INSTEAD OF HAVING THE GOVERNMENT SUPPORT THEM AND THEIR BASTARDLY PRODUCED OFFSPRINGS!!!!!!!!
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 11:49AM
Oldfarte get is it. The problem is the Republicans for the most part seem to be gutless. What is so wrong with talking about people who are lazy and then actually showing a video of some lazy liar spending welfare money? Whats wrong with talling black America that slavery is no longer a good excuse for sitting on your butt? Whats wrong with telling those that live in Apalachia to move to areas of the country where their are jobs and its wrong for people of any color to be on welfare from one generation to the next? Whats wrong with saying hey, the country is broke, so if you are single you need to move back in with mom or dad before you think about collecting welfare, this could apply to young couples with no children as well. Thats the personal side of it.
Whats wrong with telling those who manufacture our military equipment that we aren't going to pay 30 million dollars for one jet fighter when we already paid the majority of the cost for its development? Whats wrong with telling the wealthiest Americans to quit whining about the measly income taxes they pay. M
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 4:02PM
I'll agree with everything except the last sentence about supposedly '''''millionaires & billionaires''''' paying measly income tax amounts. In fact they pay 30% of the total amount collected by the IRS, while the welfare indigent class pay ''''''0''''''''' [just like with everything else in life, the freddie-the-freeloaders contribute nothing to the governmental coffers and alternatively suck the government bank accounts dry in the welfare paid to them in the forms of aid to dependent chilluns, food stamps, public school free meals/bus transportation, housing allowances etc]!!!!!
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 5:58PM
Oldefarte,
The millionaires and billionaires posess over 90% of the available money in the U.S.. Paying 30% shows just how rich they are and just how little they really pay. Compared to you and me, sure they pay a lot. But over the last 25 years their income has soared at an unbeleivable rate while our has stayed fairly stagnate. To me it comes down to, just how many millions does it take for one to be comfortable and feel they can do more for their country or their fellow man? A few of the uber wealthy are doing that, donating huge sums of money to charity. Although I wisht they would help pay down the debt. No matter how much they give to charity, the Dems are not going to lower the welfare payments.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:21PM
And, yet, Fixed News viewers are the least informed of the public and know the least about how government works. And some of them even have teeth!
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 2:35PM
And yet Fox has more viewers than all the other channels. Hmmm that math tells me there are more conservatives watching TV than liberals. Which also leads me to believe (and poll after poll backs this up) that more people consider themselves conservative than liberal. Gives me hope that even a liberal like yourself will one day grow up and act like a adult.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 4:06PM
What having children has to do with it, is in your own mind. I'm far passed that age, so do you really think all white, old people are conservative? Seriously?
And, actually, when you add them up, Fox is completely overwhelmed and has fewer viewers than the other stations combined - you know the real news channels. ABC, NBC, CBS combined have more viewers than Fox and that doesn't include CNN, MSNBC, CNBC, and Current TV so dream on. Only people who want to hear the lies and deceit that Fixed News portrays enjoy Fox. There are few and far between programs on Fox that aren't Fixed. But there are a few, I will admit.
People may say they are more conservative, but they don't vote that way, do they Sunshine?
Drunken Sailor| 3.21.12 @ 4:45PM
Who said anything about having children? Clenan your glasses. You may be older but not wiser. Really look at your math. Of course if you combine the audiences of CNN, MSNBC,CNBC, and current tv you may have more viewers. You just as much admitted they are all slanted together. And hate to burst your bubble but yes, for the most part they do vote that way. But then we have our lovely broken electoral college to screw things up. And of course, lets not even discuss that track record of Liberals running on one thing then doing another shall we? I mean didn't Obama rail at Bush for high gas, or the size of his deficit or crony capitalism, or the large # of lobbyist. Then didn't he turn around and do everything he screamed at Bush for but to a even larger extent?
See the thing about conservatives is we can understand the difference on Fox between a News program and a commentary program. Liberals apparently can't. Then again Liberals think getting their political views from Mahr and Stewart is the height of intellectual prowess.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 9:50PM
Really, then why don't you know that under Bush more people were on Food Stamps than Obama? Think Fixed News had anything to do with it. And, that is just one item .. there are lots of them - but do you own homework before you simply paint everyone the way you want to see them. The reason the other stations have more viewers is because there are more liberals than cons in the country. California alone has more liberals than almost the entire South has cons.
Aristotle| 3.21.12 @ 7:21PM
"Fox is completely overwhelmed and has fewer viewers than the other stations combined--- you know the real news channels." Huh? Can't you spin any better than that, Purp?
FN has more primetime viewers than the other 2 CABLE "news' outlets (CNN & MSNBC) combined.
The market share for ABC, NBC & CBS "real news :)" outlets (the former "Big Three") has been steadily declining for the past generation. The Big Three promulgated their monopolistic liberal slant far, far too long to our nation's detriment.
FOX News IS the balance!
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:11PM
Yeah, "Cable" .. you don't have s*** on regular broadcast TV - declining yes, but not because of Fixed News - and yet they still have more viewers than Bill O the Clown and that Faux News Murdoch propaganda machine. Balance that on your head.
florin| 3.21.12 @ 11:12PM
And don't forget that Fox News, unlike other news channels airs both sides of debate..they have liberals on regularly...
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 2:42PM
Purp,
It's pretty obvious you have no children, so you have no real skin in the game as of yet.
It's also obvious that freedom is something that scares the hell out of you.
By your comments is also obvious you have no hope for anything positive in America.
By the way, you give credit to Obama for the death of Bin Laden. How many times do people have to remind you that the information given for us to get Bin Laden came from the methods your President railed against when he ran for office? It was the policies of the Bush administration that helped us find and kill Bin Laden. Obama just happened to be sitting in the right chair at the time. Oh, and Biden was against sending in seal team 6.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:14PM
And yet, Bush Baby stopped looking for him - he said so on air. Policies? With his policies we'd have constant war, no economy, but the 1% would have 0 taxes.
Obama made THE decision, just as Bush decided to read "My Pet Goat" while America was under attack. I'll take the Bin Laden killing Commander-in-Chief over Goat lover Bush Boy.
idalily| 3.21.12 @ 3:01PM
Fixed News? I really wish you'd stop talking about MSNBC and the NYT that way! Really, Purp. No need to kick them when they're already down.
Oldefarte| 3.21.12 @ 3:56PM
Yeah, maybe Fox needs some of the homosexual anchorpersons like MS*&^ has, so that you and yours could watch and get that TINGLE UP YOUR LEG, huh????????
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 11:38AM
I'm going to have a littel fun on here. I'm going to paste a few quotes by a wise man, a Founding Father, and lets see if he would agree, based on his words, with our current dictator and our government.
“I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.”
“Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have. The course of history shows us that as a government grows, liberty decreases.”
“My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government.”
“Those who surrender freedom for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”
“The Democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not.”
And lastly...
“If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny.”
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:19PM
With these quotes in mind - whomever they came from, you don't want a Republican or Democratic Federal, State or Local government, do you?
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 2:43PM
Well tell us Perp, who do you want? What form of government do think is best for the United States?
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:16PM
The current corporate control of our government is definitely NOT what the Founders wanted. Britain had the mercantile system that they revolted against - and that is exactly where we are now. Commerce is in control of the government, not the people. But I'm sure you don't understand that do you?
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 2:58PM
You really don't know who made these statements??? Holy Crap!!! Well I guess I'll just tell you he was some old racist white guy who once scribbled some nonsense down and had a bounch of people believe he was pretty smart. We, the "bunch of people", sort of formed a nation around his, and a few of his contempraries, silly scribbles.
I do want a REPUBLICan! I do believe in government, as it was designed by the old racist white guys.
LarryK| 3.21.12 @ 11:39AM
To solve the nations problems will take an intelligent electorate. To achieve that goal the following three questions need to be answered in the negative for anyone to vote.
1. Are you on the public dole?
2. Are you an illegal alien?
3. Have you ever watched the Jersey Shore?
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 1:16PM
I would add to that list -
1. Do you watch Fox News?
2. Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh?
3. Do you need teeth?
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 3:00PM
Tell Al tell you to write that, you P. F.?
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 3:18PM
Did Al*
One if by land...| 3.21.12 @ 11:55AM
I can vote! I can vote! Larry, thanks for the burst of coffee through the nose!
martin j smith| 3.21.12 @ 12:58PM
The 2012 election is unique and at the same time
the most important election in our history. Which way do we go: Communism/Socialism or Free Market True Democracy based under our Constitution. ? This the question that has not been offered in all of the previous ones because the die is cast by Obama's policies. Our deficit is a prime example. But we also are fully aware that Romney and Establishment Republicans are about as reliable as Obama himself. So in my view we need to make a strategic move to vote Romney nor because we like or support him but because he will help get us to the first stage against the Communists/Socialists and that is to rid of Obama in the election of 2012. Period. After that--we shall see. The Ryan budget is a tool in the campaign that is all.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 12:59PM
If Defense Spending and Raising of Revenue not on the backs of the least able to pay were part of this plan - maybe I'd give it a look see in detail.
It's just another way to take advantage of the 30 years of Republicans trying to break the United States Budget so they can get rid of programs they don't like - Medicare, Social Security, Education, Healthcare, Unemployment Benefits.
Dmac | 3.21.12 @ 2:47PM
Now that is a truly ignorant staatement Perp. It was a democrat who introduced us to Social Security. It was a democrat who brought us the "Great Nation". It was a democrat who started the Dept. of Education, It was a democrat who brought us this nightmare of a national healthcare plan, who had to pass it before it could be read.
The Republicans have their share of blame, but you need to pin the Dems down too or you just look, well, ignorant.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:18PM
So all the good things the government has brought us comes from the Democrats - why thank you, I think so too. What ever did a Republican President give us? And don't bring Lincoln into this ... he's in a class with FDR and no one else.
idalily| 3.21.12 @ 3:11PM
Defense spending is a fraction of entitlement spending. Tax increases lead to LESS revenue. It's been proven again and again and again. There is a great discussion on this with documented sources at the WSJ today. Not that you'll pay any attention to facts.
I also notice that as you criticize Ryan, you provide no alternative that does not continue the failed leftist policies of the past, policies that reward the lazy and punish the hardworking entrepreneurs who actually HIRE people and PAY them. And in your view, who gets to decide who is "least able to pay"?
Defense, BTW, is a mandated responsibility of the Federal Government, per the Constitution. Medicare, SS, Education, Healthcare, Unemployment are not. Stick your leftist entitlements that were supposed to cure poverty and provide heath care for all up your butt. Oh, and keep your greedy. thieving hands away from my hard earned wages.
Purp| 3.21.12 @ 10:19PM
Your a sad case for a woman.
idalily| 3.22.12 @ 3:17PM
Why? Because I don't believe in government sponsored THEFT? I think you're a sad case, period, and I don't care which gender you are. I guess the sexist here is YOU.
junkyard infidel| 3.21.12 @ 3:17PM
perp...your display of profound ignorance and juvenile rhetoric is pathetic yet humorous. yeah, you're not the smartest peanut in the turd, eh? i believe the term "pseudo-intellectual" is used to describe peanuts like you. put down the red bull and cheeto's, step away from your soiled keyboard, and get out of mommy's basement and go play in traffic or something. the fresh air might do you some good ! to everyone else, sorry about the troll feeding !
Jim Swavely| 3.21.12 @ 1:21PM
It would be absolutely fantastic if such a plan as this was adopted. Too bad the entitlement class who thinks we can forever use a math where 1+1=5 (and they get the 5) will never go for it. They want their stuff, and real math be damned.
Goldwaterite| 3.21.12 @ 7:29PM
You are unfortunately correct: Try reading the entitlement class's comments in response to today's WaPo editorial denouncing the Ryan Plan.
WARNING: They may contain enough liberal cliches, lies & half-truths to cause you to lose your lunch.
darcy| 3.22.12 @ 2:33AM
Ryan's plan could be better if it restored mark-to-market accounting and required the government to get out of the student loan business.
But frankly, I think we're being played by both parties.
martin j smith| 3.21.12 @ 1:47PM
The Communist/Socialist Party supports no one. They are good a propaganda--thus purp. This crowd wants this country destroyed and actually want the majority to be poor while the wealth 1% who run this party ( Communist/Socialists ) are laughing to the bank. That is the truth..
Aristotla| 3.21.12 @ 7:44PM
If history is any guide: "Purp" would be one of the first Outer Party members liquidated by the Inner Party once absolute power was achieved.
Sadly, Purp dreams of himself as a party apparachik in the New Order but is functional (temporarily) only as what Lenin classified as a "Useful Idiot."
solidground| 3.21.12 @ 3:28PM
Carney, the carnival act, has tagged Ryan as "aggressively and deliberately ignorant" because his plan calls for scaling back the wasted government dollars (well, wasted for the taxpayers, but not for Obama's friends and bundlers) invested in embryonic technologies much better left to private development. I wonder if Carney, in uttering those words, understands exactly how pitiful and contemptible he appears ... and by extension, his ideologically dysfunctional boss as well. Yep, just another day on the Potomac, with the usual brand of rhetoric from the Dependency Party that is both totally vapid and unrelentingly demagogic.
Beppo| 3.21.12 @ 4:40PM
Ryan's budget is one of the longer suicide notes in history. Next week most Republican house members are going to have to vote for a plan that effectively ends Medicare and Medicaid and reduces discretionary spending including defense to 3.75% of GDP. Since defense consumes about 3.25% of GDP this leaves about 0.5% of GDP for such inessentials as the FDA, FBI and air traffic control. Even worse the Republican presidential nominee and senate candidates are going to have to embrace it. It's a pinata as big as Everest which the Dems are going to hang around the neck of every single one of them. Now whatever Mr Kaminsky and the like minded may believe this is not a recipe for electoral success because, guess what, most Americans don't want to scrap Medicare, air traffic control or the FDA.
giatny| 3.21.12 @ 5:32PM
"Leadership" are you kidding??? Suicide is a much
better description. It is a disgrace that anyone would suggest cutting veterans' benefits and disability payments! The GAO listed over $200 billion in waste and duplicative programs - start with those. His tax "reform" is a joke as he doesn't dare to list the tax "expenditures" that
would be eliminated. Congress has repeatedly
shown that it is too chicken to stand up to the
special interests who benefit from the loopholes.
Obama's budget is just as arrogantly stupid but
that is no excuse for Ryan to come out this
atrocity that solidifies EVERY talking point of
Obama's campaign. The American people deserve
better.
Bobby| 3.21.12 @ 7:18PM
Paul Ryan is an idiot, and so are you.
bigbenbt| 3.21.12 @ 7:19PM
Unfortunately, there is a huge problem here. In the CBO analysis is this paragraph
In the Chairman’s specifications, revenues are fixed at 19 percent of GDP starting in 2025. That amount is well below revenues projected under the baseline scenario and just slightly above revenues assumed under the alternative fiscal scenario.
Much like his last budget proposal, these projections are based on a pretty unrealistic projection of revenue collection. It's not the worst idea on the planet, and I applaud him for even trying, but basically the rosy outlook the analysis paints is rendered worthless by that statement.
Unless I am misreading the report, in which case I hope someone corrects me.
Rudy Gonzales| 3.21.12 @ 9:42PM
Paul Ryan has shown no leadership, but pure disdain for the middle class and poorest of American's while caring for the elite top 1% with additional tax breaks. He further demonstrates his carelessness for our Social Programs already in place assisting those who earned it. Under Ryan's plan, the rich would get richer, the poor would get poorer, more and more money would end up in fewer and fewer hands, while power would be further consolidated in less and less compassionate hands. Leadership is the president's as he has had his eye on the economy while battling the confrontational, contentious, arrogant and wrong-winged, fringed elitist! Bottom line is the TEA-GOP-Republican' want to satisfy their financial benefactors. President Obama won’t allow unrestricted drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The irony here is that these claims come just as events are confirming what everyone who did the math already knew, namely, that U.S. energy policy has very little effect either on oil prices or on overall U.S. employment. For the truth is that we’re already having a hydrocarbon boom, with U.S. oil and gas production rising and U.S. fuel imports dropping.
billg| 3.22.12 @ 11:43PM
Feed that line of garbage to the natural gas industry where prices have declined early 3fold due to increased domestic production
florin| 3.21.12 @ 11:11PM
March 21: I heard that Harry Reid has declared that he won't even allow a vote for the budget proposal to be brought up in the Senate. How does one man have so much power? And Reid continues to blame Repubs. for obstructing any budget proposals...why isn't the country up in arms about this? And Fact Check has pointed to outright lies Obama is telling on several issues...we better get Obama out before it's too late...
latex fetish shop | 3.22.12 @ 2:58AM
Esta es una tendencia ya evidente en las calles de París, donde cada segunda mujer lucía negro leggings de látex y los asesinos Catsuits talones.
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 3:39AM
“The House GOP’s budget proposal does not balance the budget until the year 2040, and it adds billions to our already exploding deficits. In fact, this budget doesn’t actually ‘cut’ any spending. It only reduces assumed increases in spending – essentially playing the same game the Washington establishment has played for years with our hard-earned money." ---Ron Paul
“This idea that we have to look 30 years out to balance the budget is not only unnecessary, but it’s improbable. We cannot continue to spend at our current rate for 10 more years, much less 20 or 30 more years.” ---Jim Demint,US senator
“If Republicans really want to win in November, they will have to draw a clear distinction between themselves and Obama’s disastrous agenda. And producing a budget that does not seriously address our nation’s debt crisis will not distinguish them at all in the eyes of the American people." ---- GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul of Texas
Paul says he will CUT $1 trillion in spending in one year!
The One trillion the first year is just the beginning for it will set the stage for more trimming and for real reform to so-called entitlements. At the same his plan will preserve benefits for seniors and the dependent.
There has to be the abolition of agencies, bureaus and departments! Paul wants to eliminate FIVE cabinet departments:Education, Energy, Housing and Urban developement, Commerce and Interior. He seeks seriously to reduce the corporate tax rate to 15 percent, make permanent the Bush-era tax cuts, and end taxes on individual savings and repatriated capital. Ron Paul's plan would balance the budget in only three years not in 30 years down the road like Ryan's Heritage Foundation approved joke of a plan!
Ron Paul says that "any proposal that doesn’t cut real spending and adds to the deficit isn’t one that will get us out of this mess and back on track."
His son Rand Paul and Senators Demint and others have a better proposal that Ryan:
http://thenewamerican.com/usne.....t-proposal
sikiş | 3.22.12 @ 5:35AM
Talking about real estate loving it Here’s some mildly amuzing stuff I found: Thought for the day? : Crime doesn’t pay… does that mean my job is a crime?
sirbourbon| 3.22.12 @ 5:44AM
Sorry but that didn't approach "mildly amusing."
Playrighter| 3.22.12 @ 10:48AM
For an administration that thrives on hot air, it's odd that they can't see that sometimes you have to jettison excess ballast to keep a balloon in the air -- and keep it from crashing into a huge ditch. Flying "ugly" beats crashing pretty.
Dave| 4.3.12 @ 9:56PM
Paul Ryan knows nothing about the reality of the marketplace, of employment or of a real job in the real world. Ironically, the man who professes to fix our economy and know about markets has never applied for, worked at, or held an acutal job in his life in the real world and the free market. He is a lifelong pol and policy wonk. I thought that was the Republican knock on Obama -- no real life experience and context? The fact is that there are no practicing conservatives in goverment. It is a ruse. No elected officials ever cut budgets of any kind. Look at the furor over "gutting" defense as Ryan, Newt and others contend. The defense budget in the last decade has grown by huge amounts. As have virtually all levels of government. At best, money gets redirected from one govt budget area to another. In my real job in the real marketplace, I have had to cut my budget 8% each of the last two years. The Fortune 500 company I work for met its financial target each of those years, and I earned a bonus. That is how the real world works. Whether GOP or Dem, politicians do not understand such realities, nor do they want to face such realities. Ryan wants to grow the parts of government he thinks are appropriate and try and cut those he dislikes. U.S. citizens are lazy and unengaged after decades of prosperity.
If Ryan really had guts he would call for:
1) Term limits of 4 years (two terms) in the House and 1 term in the Senate, with no crossover;
2) A balanced budget amendment with only declared war as the exception to exceed the budget;
3) Cut all U.S. budgets 1%, 2%, 3%, 4% and 5% across the board for each of the next 5 years
4) Initiate a a debt reduction plan that would have to include sacrifice from all Americans
5) Crunch the numbers and adjust age qualifications and benefits for SS and Medicare
Like everyone else in Washington, make no mistake, Paul Ryan's top priority, his job, is to get re-elected and continue to serve in government. He knows or wants nothing else. He will only leave if he loses an election (i.e. Santorum) or decides to peddle influence or peddle himself (Santorum, Newt, Palin, et al).
There is nothing courageous in what he does nor is he a bona fide leader. At best he is a taller midget in a large body of very short men and women.