Posted on 04/02/2014 7:15:14 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Whatever objections anyone might have to various details in Rep. Paul Ryan's bold new plan to cut $5 trillion of government waste, one fact trumps all else: Unlike Democrats, he offers solutions, not denial.
The one thing that stands out in the long-term budget plan unveiled Tuesday by House Budget Committee Chairman Ryan, R-Wis., is his acceptance of a fact Democrats want to hide:
You can't squeeze enough extra money out of the rich to pay for our endlessly expanding entitlement programs of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.
Tax revenue over many decades has been relatively unchanging . And it will slam straight into the steep mountain of growing entitlements, with the crash and burn taking place in the late 2020s. Deny that and you might as well deny the law of gravity, too.
On Medicare, for instance, the Ryan plan points out what you never hear Democrats admit:
"Without reform, the program will end up causing exactly what it was created to avoid: millions of America's seniors without adequate health security and a younger working generation saddled with enormous debts to pay for spending levels that cannot be sustained."
Ryan's "Path to Prosperity" provides the parachute Democrats insist the country doesn't need.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
You are correct, ballplayer. And, probably even more that I missed.
That’s why it was easier for the founders to write that enumerated powers clause, rather than create a list of what fedgov can’t do.
Here we go again. Ryan’s stupid “10 year plans”. This time it’s the old carnival barker treatment...from WASTE!!
I wish I had a nickel for every politician who promised me they’d cut “waste, fraud and abuse” and save millions if not billions (and now trillions) but never cut ONE DAMN PENNY FROM ANY BUDGET!
Zero based budgeting for sure. We don’t even get a rundown on the general overhead of agencies and programs. In my opinion, any of these with operating costs over 30-35% need to go. And I’ll bet there are many.
Balanced Budget Amendment? Not so sure. From history and watching I find balancing budgets because of “the law” are full of holes for things like “emergencies”, etc. Like here in TN.
And our useless politicians ALWAYS create the spending side first with their “projections” and THEN try to shove more taxes down our throats to “balance” the budget.
It happened here in TN under Republican Gov. Don “The Tax Terrorist” Sundquist. Look up Phil Valentine’s book on this tax fight we had. It’s interesting. We protested on legislative plaza and at one point they send armed State Troopers to confront us for “yelling at them” and they were “worried there might be violence”.
Sound familiar?
Bingo.
I have an idea. How about NO growth and maybe some true CUTS and eliminating usless agencies?
There is provision in most of the BBA texts I’ve seen that allows for deficits, but all require a super majority in both houses of the Congress for passage.
Replacing the Income Tax (including repeal of the 16th Amendment) with a consumption tax model, administered at the State level would eliminate the IRS, and at least bring new light to the attempts to foist new taxes on us to accommodate the whims of the elitists.
The truth is we have to make some very difficult decisions in the coming months and years, if we are to salvage this grand experiment. It will not be easy. It will likely be messy; maybe even bloody. But, it must be done.
Thanks, Fledermaus. Stay safe, and stay FRee.
RE: but never cut ONE DAMN PENNY FROM ANY BUDGET!
This man had a plan for that — it’s called the PENNY PLAN. Unfortunately Connie Mack lost the elections in Florida last 2012.
But see here:
http://www.freedomworks.org/content/top-10-reasons-support-rep-connie-macks-penny-plan
Essentially the plan is to Cut Federal Spending By One Percent for Six Consecutive Fiscal Years.
It Would Cap Overall Spending at 18 Percent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Starting in Fiscal Year 2018.
It Would Reduce Overall Federal Spending by $7.5 trillion over the Next Ten Years and Would Balance the Federal Budget by 2019.
The fact that Florida voted for Bill Nelson over Connie Mack just shows where the state’s voters priorities are....
I’ve heard of it. Seems a little slow for my taste but it’s better than what we get now.
RE: Seems a little slow for my taste but it’s better than what we get now.
I agree with you, but in a political climate like we have where 47 Mil. people are on food stamps, slowly getting there is the least painful way of doing it versus a big bang cut 10% immediately approach.
The only problem I have with Mack’s proposal is this — how sure are you that a future congress won’t gut your plan after it is implemented?
Sequester was working for over a year and the deficit went DOWN. Look what’s happened to it since...
They could have pushed the “look at the silly things they are closing that are silly and mean” but instead whined about Ted Cruz doing a filibuster.
I'm sick of them all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.