Actually there is nothing in the statement that IS true, it’s the same lame talking points that the leftists use.
Start with ...
“Republicans want to spend $40 trillion over ten years.”
Spending is already AT $4 trillion, so the Republican plan, given inflation and population growth, will reduce total spending versus current spending. They make it sound as if the Republicans are big-spenders for proposing a plan that reduces Govt outlays by trillions less than the Democrat plan. Their failure to add that context is typical bogus talking-point.
Ryan plan not only is so reduced from the Democrat plans the Dems are spitting nails about old people out on the street, it doesnt raise taxes like the deficit commission or Dem plans, so the Dems are talking about how its ‘not balanced’.
“That averages a staggering $4 trillion per year. As recently as 2000, federal spending was only about $1.8 trillion.” .. a bogus stat that merely reflects that we have grown spending BEFORE the Ryan plan. Who cares about 10 years ago, what is it NOW? $4 trillion a year!
WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT. Obama and the Democrats have massively increased spending, and plan to keep the spending increasing more. The Ryan plan shaves about $6-7 trillion off the spending plan that Obama has. You cannot turn a big ship around on a dime, and LP talking points that pretend you can are dishonest and misleading.
“Or are you just saying that it is unlikely that it could be done?”
Unlikely?!? You even have to ask? They could blow unicorns out their a** before they could get that done.
And no, I dont think having the Fed Govt renege on commitments made to seniors is a good idea. People who paid into SocSec should get their retirement checks, and the LP pretending that they could or should cut them off is insane. Which is why the Rep Ryan plan does the best thing that can be done: leaves current seniors alone, but moves to a better system for the next generation.
Maybe if the LP stopped criticizing good plans and started explaining things in positive way, it would help convince more wrt small govt. ... but then Wes Benedict and crew are more about tearing down the GOP than advancing liberty. Beware their hidden agenda.
You know I can bat .800 and score 200 points in an NBA finals game, I just never got the chance to play ... but I can criticize even the winners as weaklings for not playing up to my game. Losertarians are the same kind - legends-in-their-own-minds who have zero capability to enact their promises.
So, it appears that you agree that what they said about spending levels and increasing the national debt by $6 trillion is true.
Saying that this is better than the D’s plan sounds vaguely like the “nominate McCain, Dole. etc.” because he’s electable” argument.
IBD has a nice graph showing how Ryan’s “plan” will eliminate the national debt in 40 years. Speaking of unicorns, does anybody really think that politicians will stick to any plan for 40 years that doesn’t involve lining their pockets or ensuring their reelection?
I also understand that the Ryan plan relies in part on a 2.8% unemployment rate in the out years... Another indication that the Rs aren’t serious. At best, if passed and it won’t be), Ryan might kick the can down the road a few more years - but maybe not. I don’t think the bond market is going to fund the massive increase in national debt he is proposing. The EU wants to borrow, too, and there is only so much savings to go around before the printing presses start making QE I and QE II look like monetary restraint.
As for SS, NOBODY PAID INTO ANYTHING. There is no lockbox or trust fund (unless you count the government writing IOUs to itself as a “trust fund”). SS is just a tax, and has never been anything other than just a tax - that is how the government represented it to the SCOTUS to avoid having it declared unconstitutional.
Of course, the government has lied to people by using language such as “trust fund”, “contributions”, “lockbox”, etc, but then the government lies about everything. Moreover, people have pointed out that SS is a ponzi scheme beginning in the 1930’s. No one has any excuse for claiming to be mislead.
SS is just intergenerational theft. I do agree that it won’t be repealed. Americans lack the character to do what is right, and, consequently, so do our politicians. The government will be forced to default on SS and Medicare because, as everyone should know, they are completely unsustainable. The only question is whether the defaults will be massive or incremental (so that it can be called “reform”).
The Ls may be fools on social issues and defense (the Beltway Rs aren’t much better), but they are far more honest than the Rs about fiscal matters.
“Actually there is nothing in the statement that IS true, it’s the same lame talking points that the leftists use.
Start with ...
“Republicans want to spend $40 trillion over ten years.”
Spending is already AT $4 trillion, so the Republican plan, given inflation and population growth, will reduce total spending versus current spending. They make it sound as if the Republicans are big-spenders for proposing a plan that reduces Govt outlays by trillions less than the Democrat plan. Their failure to add that context is typical bogus talking-point.
Ryan plan not only is so reduced from the Democrat plans the Dems are spitting nails about old people out on the street, it doesnt raise taxes like the deficit commission or Dem plans, so the Dems are talking about how its ‘not balanced’.
“That averages a staggering $4 trillion per year. As recently as 2000, federal spending was only about $1.8 trillion.” .. a bogus stat that merely reflects that we have grown spending BEFORE the Ryan plan. Who cares about 10 years ago, what is it NOW? $4 trillion a year!
WHICH IS THE WHOLE POINT. Obama and the Democrats have massively increased spending, and plan to keep the spending increasing more. The Ryan plan shaves about $6-7 trillion off the spending plan that Obama has. You cannot turn a big ship around on a dime, and LP talking points that pretend you can are dishonest and misleading.
“Or are you just saying that it is unlikely that it could be done?”
Unlikely?!? You even have to ask? They could blow unicorns out their a** before they could get that done.
And no, I dont think having the Fed Govt renege on commitments made to seniors is a good idea. People who paid into SocSec should get their retirement checks, and the LP pretending that they could or should cut them off is insane. Which is why the Rep Ryan plan does the best thing that can be done: leaves current seniors alone, but moves to a better system for the next generation.
Maybe if the LP stopped criticizing good plans and started explaining things in positive way, it would help convince more wrt small govt. ... but then Wes Benedict and crew are more about tearing down the GOP than advancing liberty. Beware their hidden agenda.
You know I can bat .800 and score 200 points in an NBA finals game, I just never got the chance to play ... but I can criticize even the winners as weaklings for not playing up to my game. Losertarians are the same kind - legends-in-their-own-minds who have zero capability to enact their promises.”
So, true.