AEIdeas

The public policy blog of the American Enterprise Institute

Subscribe to the blog

Discussion: (38 comments)

  1. And instead of shooting for balanced budgets, how about instead shifting the debt-to-GDP ratio off the stabilization path and over the next two decades getting it back to where it was, on average, from 1957-2007, about 37%.

    How about having principles? The current approach is doomed to failure. Let the Democrats keep winning, if that is what voters want, while arguing for limited government, low taxes, and low spending.

  2. 2hheels2

    The people that are 50 plus don’t have time to prepare or change possible retirement plans for medical issues. Ryan as a spoiled congressmen and others care nothing of the working person. This would devastate to many people. Just like the GOP target the ones least able to protect themselves for the protection of the 1% and corporations.
    The GOP are just Heartless bast@@ds

    1. The people that are 50 plus don’t have time to prepare or change possible retirement plans for medical issues.

      Why not? If you work until you are 50 you should have a nice sized retirement fund that should help you after you quit working.

      Ryan as a spoiled congressmen and others care nothing of the working person.

      True. But neither do the people who want to take such a huge percentage of a working person’s income so that money can be transferred to others. Taxation is theft. End of story.

      This would devastate to many people. Just like the GOP target the ones least able to protect themselves for the protection of the 1% and corporations.

      I think that the Democrats have probably done far more damage to working people and those least able to protect themselves than the GOP. It has been the Democrats who protected the unions from competition from lower priced labour and by doing so put up barriers to entry into the labour force. It was the Democrats who provided incentives for people who wanted to stay dependent for an entire lifetime and who robbed working people so that those dependents can be looked after. It was the Democrats even more than the Republicans who put up barriers to job creation and pushed corporations abroad.

      The GOP are just Heartless bast@@ds</b.

      No more than the jackasses on the other side of the isle. You guys elected the people in Congress and are getting exactly what you deserve.

  3. you can crunch Medicare but that’s not going to fix the problem that causing the Medicare problem and that’s health care costs in general.

    You can pretty much fix Medicare without destroying it by doing two things:

    1. – reinstate the 20% co-pay – no exceptions – no buying an Advantage plan – 20% all pay it.

    2. – Charge a reasonable means-tested premium. Right now, you can have 70K in retirement income and a million dollars in assets and pay 100.00 a month. that’s ridiculous.

    why not do that – as a start? That’s a lot more likely to pass Congress and get signed by the POTUS that the pie-in-sky proposals… that basically have no chance of passage?

    The basic problem with Ryan’s proposal is that it’s a back-of-the-envelope exercise as pretty much admitted by this post.

    What’s even more significant, this is the ONLY proposal coming from the GOP as none of them, including Mr. Ryan will actually deal with the problem – the deficit and the debt – that was created in one decade and now they’re saying it cannot be fixed in under two decades if at all.

    this is not fiscal conservatism – this is pure and simple anti-tax ideology – with no answers.

    1. the deficit and the debt – that was created in one decade and

      “What’s even more significant, this is the ONLY proposal coming from the GOP as none of them, including Mr. Ryan will actually deal with the problem –”

      I’ll take it over what Obama is offering.

      “now they’re saying it cannot be fixed in under two decades if at all.”

      And Obama is saying nothing at all. He has NO PLAN.

    2. roc scssrs

      Health care costs will always go up. Longer life is in big demand. The question is how much should the government be paying? All of it? Any of it?

      1. Health care costs will always go up.

        Not in a free market. Look at the decline in the cost of getting your eyes fixed. There is no reason why a free market in health care would not allow major improvements in productivity that would lower costs.

        1. Todd Mason

          One cannot extrapolate from elective surgeries, where the price can be zero. Roughly a quarter of Medicare expenditures come in the last months of the recipient’s life, when the alternative to more care is death. There is always something that can be for more comfort. Invariably, the family wants it even if the patient doesn’t.

          1. and the alternative to this is…..those nasty “death panels”….

            ;-)

          2. One cannot extrapolate from elective surgeries, where the price can be zero. Roughly a quarter of Medicare expenditures come in the last months of the recipient’s life, when the alternative to more care is death. There is always something that can be for more comfort. Invariably, the family wants it even if the patient doesn’t.

            Actually, there is no reason to think that the cost of procedures can’t go down if there is competition in a relatively free market. That is not the case with socialized medicine. And if a family wants to spend a lot of money on making a loved one as comfortable as possible that should have no bearing on the cost paid by other people for their own medical care.

        2. Todd Mason

          Read Time magazine’s “Bitter Pill” and we’ll talk. As hospitals consolidate and hire doctors, they are building monopolies. Lobbyists protect obvious conflicts of interest, such as doctor-owned diagnostic centers. As many as 80 percent of prostate surgeries are unnecessary. Few people argue with the doctors, and fewer still can figure out their bills.
          Again, the only question in elective surgery is “Is it worth it to ditch the glasses?” Cancer is a whole different ballgame.

          1. Read Time magazine’s “Bitter Pill” and we’ll talk. As hospitals consolidate and hire doctors, they are building monopolies….

            You can thank the regulatory environment for that. In a free market hospitals would have to compete on the basis of price and quality.

            Lobbyists protect obvious conflicts of interest, such as doctor-owned diagnostic centers.

            Yes they do. That is why the regulations need to go and the US needs a true free market in medicine. You probably have the most over-regulated health care system in the world. Which is why it is so expensive.

            As many as 80 percent of prostate surgeries are unnecessary. Few people argue with the doctors, and fewer still can figure out their bills.

            That is because they have little choice. Most people have no trouble deciding what TV to purchase and there are certainly plenty of different systems, brands, and quality levels to choose from on that front. They have no trouble picking out where to eat even though they are swimming in a sea of choices. When people have to spend their own money they tend to get more educated. In a competitive system many of the unnecessary procedures would never happen.

            Again, the only question in elective surgery is “Is it worth it to ditch the glasses?” Cancer is a whole different ballgame.

            Actually, it isn’t. All that is needed is knowledge and that knowledge is easier to get when there is incentive to do so.

          2. re: end of life costs

            why or how would the free market prevent someone from utilizing every benefit their insurance – they purchased from a provider – would provide?

            If the insurance says they will pay for up to 500K in medical costs – could they actually say: but not end of life costs?

            and if they did …what would keep their competitors from saying they would not have such limitations?

            I don’t think the “free market” fixes this …and if govt attempts to – we get the “death panels” argument.

            and make no mistake that opponents of universal health care in other countries – make the point – that cost-benefit determinations are made with respect to end of life treatments – and this is touted as an example of the “bad” stuff that comes from Universal Health Care.

          3. why or how would the free market prevent someone from utilizing every benefit their insurance – they purchased from a provider – would provide?

            It wouldn’t. But in a free market there would be many more insurance options with many different premium levels. Medicare and third party pay systems are not good at either providing choices or limiting spending increases.

            If the insurance says they will pay for up to 500K in medical costs – could they actually say: but not end of life costs?

            They could if the contract said that they could.

            and if they did …what would keep their competitors from saying they would not have such limitations?

            Nothing. In a free market there would be many choices. In a free market you can choose to drive a 1.4L Fiat 500 or a 5.0L Ford Mustang. All you have to do is to pay more money for the vehicle, choose to pay more for gas, and more for insurance. In a free market the consumer decides what s/he wants and chooses the price level that s/he is comfortable with.

            I don’t think the “free market” fixes this …and if govt attempts to – we get the “death panels” argument.

            Of course the market fixes it. If you want to pay a huge premium for end of life expenses to be covered you will be able to get a policy. And you can be sure that the insurance companies will work a lot harder to lower the waste and reduce the costs of the services.

            and make no mistake that opponents of universal health care in other countries – make the point – that cost-benefit determinations are made with respect to end of life treatments – and this is touted as an example of the “bad” stuff that comes from Universal Health Care.

            Frankly, I am not going to make the call for anyone as long as they pay for the services that they want to purchase. It is not my business, yours, or the government’s what people to with their own money.

          4. there are a ton of insurance options right now from bare bones catastrophic to gold-plated comprehensive.

            in fact, it would be the catastrophic policies that people would expect to pay end-of-life costs… up to the max limits of the policy.

            right now the free market already provides max limit end-of-life benefits.. so not sure how the free market would make that kind of policy go away.

            I just think people are going to use the insurance they buy up to the limits of the policy…even if they know it might only buy a few more days of life.

            not all doctors – go ‘gently’. I thought that part of the article was a bit simplistic. Doctors are people and people do different things … and Docs don’t all go “gently”.

            If you want a real life example here. Valerie Harper has just disclosed that she has terminal brain cancer and 3 months to live. She knows it. Does anyone think she’s not going to avail herself with as much medical care as it will take to provide her with as good a quality of life in the remaining days – as possible?

            She’s not likely going to go “gently” even though she knows full well that she has a definite expiration date.

            that’s the not uncommon quandary that people reach at the end… they want their remaining days and they want what it takes to keep them alive with as much quality of life as possible.

            It’s a very human thing…

          5. Todd Mason

            No less than 150 congressmen write Obama asking him to postpone the increase in the ethanol mandate after the 2012 drought decimated the corn crop. (The EPA says it can’t because of how the law is written.) So do the UN hunger mandarins, US farm prices being key in global markets. Ground chicken costs more than ground beef in the supermarkets near me. Science has demonstrated that making ethanol from corn takes more energy than it produces. Yet no one, R or D, is going after this turkey, perhaps because presidential elections begin in Iowa, perhaps because ADM knows all the right buttons to push. So, Vangel, you offer simple answers for complicated problems. How about a simple answer for a simple problem that might actually work? And what I have in mind is more detailed than “get rid of it.”

      2. ” Health care costs will always go up. Longer life is in big demand. The question is how much should the government be paying? All of it? Any of it?”

        well the govt won’t be paying any of it but the govt might require you to.

        I always like Singapore because Singapore mandates that you set aside money for your health care and they have universal coverage but they also have about 1/3 our per capita costs, better life expectancy, and lower infant deaths than us.

        so it appears that individual mandate – works and addresses the issue of having some folks pay for the health care of others. Everyone pays part of what everyone pays for is de-facto insurance so that if their personal health care costs exceed what they’ve saved, the universal insurance kicks in.

  4. … and make no mistake here.. THIS IS exactly what the fiscal cliff, the sequester and the debt ceiling are all about.

    there is no plan from the folks who would shut down govt if they don’t get their way – on something that does not get the job done.

    1. “THIS IS exactly what the fiscal cliff, the sequester and the debt ceiling are all about.”

      You’re talking about the sequester Obama and the Democrats spent last week having a temper tantrum over?

      “there is no plan from the folks who would shut down govt if they don’t get their way – on something that does not get the job done.”

      And for the millionth time, where is your boyfriend’s plan?
      Plenty to carp about Ryan’s plan, but at least he has one.

      1. “You’re talking about the sequester Obama and the Democrats spent last week having a temper tantrum over?”

        you mean the ones the GOP voted in favor of also?

        “there is no plan from the folks who would shut down govt if they don’t get their way – on something that does not get the job done.”

        And for the millionth time, where is your boyfriend’s plan?
        Plenty to carp about Ryan’s plan, but at least he has one. ”

        he actually has a plan – but it involves revenues as well as cuts… he wants to reform the tax code and use the revenues from it to pay down the debt.

        the GOP wants to ignore the debt and use tax reform to lower taxes even further.

        I’d support a compromise… between the two… as long as we can move forward.

        I do not support shutting down the govt in an “all or nothing” effort – from either side.

      2. “you mean the ones the GOP voted in favor of also?”

        Umm, yes. THe same one you spent much of the past year lecturing us how Obama supported it while the GOP was running scared away from it.

        How’d that work out for ya?

        “he actually has a plan – but it involves revenues as well as cuts… he wants to reform the tax code and use the revenues from it to pay down the debt.”

        What’s the date Obama projects a balanced budget? He can’t pay down a penny of debt until he has a surplus.

        What’s the date?

        1. “Umm, yes. THe same one you spent much of the past year lecturing us how Obama supported it while the GOP was running scared away from it.

          How’d that work out for ya? ”

          since both of them want it- it seems to have worked out fine. I think Obama has erred on the PR and the GOP has benefited from it but in the end – the GOP probably would have never cut DOD so this gives them the cover they need – to do it.

          ““he actually has a plan – but it involves revenues as well as cuts… he wants to reform the tax code and use the revenues from it to pay down the debt.”

          What’s the date Obama projects a balanced budget? He can’t pay down a penny of debt until he has a surplus.

          What’s the date? ”

          http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/03-16-APB1.pdf

          1. “since both of them want it- it seems to have worked out fine.”

            Even now, your dishonesty sometimes still amazes me.
            This is the same guy who claimed federal prosecutors would just have to let criminals go if the sequester went through. You’re now saying he really supported in secret and spent all last week telling outrageous lies for political reasons?

            ” but in the end – the GOP probably would have never cut DOD so this gives them the cover they need – to do it.”

            DOD was already being reduced before the sequester, so that’s just false. It’s true the GOP passed 2 bills that exceeded the sequester cuts (and were ignored by Harry Reid) but mostly spared defense, but so what? A dollar cut is a dollar cut. Given my druthers, I’d rather cut off a welfare bum than a US Marine.

            Also, your link is laughable. It shows right there in table 2
            deficits every single year for as far as they project out until 2022.

            Your claim that he wants to “reform the tax code” (aka hike taxes on productive Americans) and use the revenue to “pay down the debt” is pure typical Larry bullshit.

            He doesn’t pay a penny of debt. It says right in the overview: “Federal debt held by the public would increase from
            $10.1 trillion (68 percent of GDP) at the end of 2011
            to $15.2 trillion (77 percent of GDP) at the end of
            2017 and then to $18.8 trillion (76 percent of GDP)
            at the end of 2022 (see Table 2).”

            Your loyalty to your boyfriend is touching. Completely dishonest and pathetic, but touching.

          2. “since both of them want it- it seems to have worked out fine.”

            Even now, your dishonesty sometimes still amazes me.
            This is the same guy who claimed federal prosecutors would just have to let criminals go if the sequester went through. You’re now saying he really supported in secret and spent all last week telling outrageous lies for political reasons? ”

            no.. I don’t think so. he did engage in some scare tactics but you ought to hear the GOP Congressmen in Hampton Roads, Va taking about the impacts in a similar way.

            “” but in the end – the GOP probably would have never cut DOD so this gives them the cover they need – to do it.”

            DOD was already being reduced before the sequester, so that’s just false. It’s true the GOP passed 2 bills that exceeded the sequester cuts (and were ignored by Harry Reid) but mostly spared defense, but so what? A dollar cut is a dollar cut. Given my druthers, I’d rather cut off a welfare bum than a US Marine. ”

            really? so who reduced DOD “before”? who did that?
            re: bum vs Marine. me too but you gotta admit – a full retirement after 20 years is a pretty expensive entitlement … how many of these can we really afford?

            “Also, your link is laughable. It shows right there in table 2
            deficits every single year for as far as they project out until 2022. ”

            what’s laughable about it? it shows for each year the tax revenues and expenditures.. and it totally backs up my claim about how much revenue we take in.

            “Your claim that he wants to “reform the tax code” (aka hike taxes on productive Americans) and use the revenue to “pay down the debt” is pure typical Larry bullshit.”

            He doesn’t pay a penny of debt. It says right in the overview: “Federal debt held by the public would increase from
            $10.1 trillion (68 percent of GDP) at the end of 2011
            to $15.2 trillion (77 percent of GDP) at the end of
            2017 and then to $18.8 trillion (76 percent of GDP)
            at the end of 2022 (see Table 2).” ”

            that’s if he does not get what he’s asking for guy.

            he sees that problem and he’s trying to deal with it.

            “Your loyalty to your boyfriend is touching. Completely dishonest and pathetic, but touching.”

            the only loyalty I have is to any plan – from anyone that truly addresses the deficit and debt.

            I have no favorites.

            I’d actually like to see the GOP do a real budget and put the squeeze on the Dems to act.

          3. “no.. I don’t think so. he did engage in some scare tactics but you ought to hear the GOP Congressmen in Hampton Roads, Va taking about the impacts in a similar way.”

            I can’t refer to vague GOP Congressmen you don’t mention by name. I can point to your hero who promised armageddon if the sequester passed. He’s now releasing illegal immigrants and going to do everything he can to make sure he exacts as much pain as possible. The idea that he is secretly for cutting spending beyond defense is laughable to anyone who has been sentient the past 5 yrs.

            http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/

            “really? so who reduced DOD “before”? who did that?”

            That would be the Congress and Obama. I’ve never disputed Obama’s desire to gut the military.

            ” a full retirement after 20 years is a pretty expensive entitlement … how many of these can we really afford?”

            The point is the GOP passed cuts that exceeded the sequester. Military pensions are a separate issue.

            “what’s laughable about it? it shows for each year the tax revenues and expenditures.. and it totally backs up my claim about how much revenue we take in.”

            Are you going senile? I asked you for a date where Obama projects a balanced budget. Nowhere in that document does he do anything but blow out the debt even more.

            “that’s if he does not get what he’s asking for guy.”

            THAT”S THE BUDGET YOU LINKED.

            WHERE IS HIS PLAN TO BALANCE THE BUDGET?

            You said he had a plan to pay down the debt.

            WHERE IS HIS PLAN TO PAY DOWN ANY DEBT?

            “he sees that problem and he’s trying to deal with it.”

            Yeah, he wants to raise my taxes while leaving the welfare bums and other freeloaders in fat city. His solution to the sequester was to raise taxes even further while cutting nothing.

            “the only loyalty I have is to any plan – from anyone that truly addresses the deficit and debt.”

            And so you linked Obama’s plan that does neither while attacking the GOP plan that is ripe for criticism, but far better than what your hero has come up with.

            “I have no favorites.”

            Oh, puhleeze. You’re a dishonest, partisan hack as you demonstrate here daily.

            “I’d actually like to see the GOP do a real budget and put the squeeze on the Dems to act.”

            The GOP passes a budget in the House every yr and it hasn’t squeezed anything from Reid.

            Yet you only have time to attack the GOP.

          4. “really? so who reduced DOD “before”? who did that?”

            That would be the Congress and Obama. I’ve never disputed Obama’s desire to gut the military.

            but I thought you said Obama had no cuts?

            “” a full retirement after 20 years is a pretty expensive entitlement … how many of these can we really afford?”

            The point is the GOP passed cuts that exceeded the sequester. Military pensions are a separate issue. ”

            exceeded? how did that work? I thought both houses had to approve and the POTUS sign? Military pensions are not an issue? You say SS and Medicare are issues, right? did you realize that the military not only gets 20yr pensions but SS and Medicare also as well as TRICARE?

            “what’s laughable about it? it shows for each year the tax revenues and expenditures.. and it totally backs up my claim about how much revenue we take in.”

            Are you going senile? I asked you for a date where Obama projects a balanced budget. Nowhere in that document does he do anything but blow out the debt even more.”

            my bad…. I confused the historical budget doc with the Obama 2013 doc. But I do not think he blows out the debt either AND he is asking for ways – revenues – to reduce it.

            ““that’s if he does not get what he’s asking for guy.”

            THAT”S THE BUDGET YOU LINKED.”

            it’s the baseline budget as is right now with current budget authority.

            “WHERE IS HIS PLAN TO BALANCE THE BUDGET?

            You said he had a plan to pay down the debt.

            WHERE IS HIS PLAN TO PAY DOWN ANY DEBT? ”

            he wants tax reform and then to use the revenues to pay down the debt.

            “he sees that problem and he’s trying to deal with it.”

            Yeah, he wants to raise my taxes while leaving the welfare bums and other freeloaders in fat city. His solution to the sequester was to raise taxes even further while cutting nothing. ”

            you just said he cut DOD right? he’s also indicated cuts in Medicare …

            “the only loyalty I have is to any plan – from anyone that truly addresses the deficit and debt.”

            And so you linked Obama’s plan that does neither while attacking the GOP plan that is ripe for criticism, but far better than what your hero has come up with. ”

            without more revenues – the baseline budget won’t get any better.

            “I have no favorites.”

            Oh, puhleeze. You’re a dishonest, partisan hack as you demonstrate here daily.

            “I’d actually like to see the GOP do a real budget and put the squeeze on the Dems to act.”

            The GOP passes a budget in the House every yr and it hasn’t squeezed anything from Reid.

            Yet you only have time to attack the GOP. ”

            you can’t pass a budget in the house that you KNOW the Senate won’t pass.

            both budgets had no chance of passing as they cut Medicare and repealed ObamaCare.

            that’s not a real budget.. when you KNOW you’ve put stuff in it that will not pass and it did not balance either.. it was all about symbolic actions that they knew would not pass…not a serious effort.

            you have to WANT to meet in the middle and they have done everything BUT that.. because they believed that if they did that – that Obama would not be re-elected.

            so now they’re just about obfuscation and gridlock for the hell of it.

            they are not serious.. and they pretty much admit it.

            let’s see what they do with Ryan’s next effort next week.

          5. “but I thought you said Obama had no cuts?”

            Yeah, you’re right. Obama’s plans are to raise taxes on productve people and gut defense. He still comes nowhere close to a balanced budget because he blows it out in other areas. Your comical link proves that, if you even bothered to read it.

            “exceeded? how did that work? I thought both houses had to approve and the POTUS sign?”

            HOw did it work? The GOP passed the bills and sent them to Harry Reid’s chamber to die. Do you seriously not understand this?

            “Military pensions are not an issue? You say SS and Medicare are issues, right? did you realize that the military not only gets 20yr pensions but SS and Medicare also as well as TRICARE?”

            I agree military pensions need to be addressed on their own. That wasn’t part of the bills the GOP passed. Obama hasn’t addressed them either.

            “my bad…. I confused the historical budget doc with the Obama 2013 doc. But I do not think he blows out the debt either AND he is asking for ways – revenues – to reduce it.”

            What are you babbling about? Where’s his plan to “pay down the debt?”

            “it’s the baseline budget as is right now with current budget authority.

            “he wants tax reform and then to use the revenues to pay down the debt.”

            You must just be messing with me. Where’s his plan to pay down the debt if he gets his tax hikes?

            Where. Is. It?

            “he sees that problem and he’s trying to deal with it.”

            “you just said he cut DOD right? he’s also indicated cuts in Medicare …”

            Yeah, correct. He wants to cut defense, and blow it out in other areas. His cuts to Medicare were used to fund Obamacare and help Obamacare’s CBO score, creating new disasters.

            “without more revenues – the baseline budget won’t get any better.”

            What does that have to do with anything? Where is his plan?

            “you can’t pass a budget in the house that you KNOW the Senate won’t pass.”

            The Senate doesn’t even bother to submit their own budget for reconciliation. And why wouldn’t it pass? Oh, because it cuts spending on other things than defense. This is also known as “reducing the deficit” which you claim to be for. Except you’re not really unless, like Obama, it axes defense and raises taxes.

            “both budgets had no chance of passing as they cut Medicare and repealed ObamaCare.”

            Ah, because the spendthrift Democrats wouldn’t go for that.

            Let’s hear more about Obama’s deficit reduction bonafides, Larry.

            “when you KNOW you’ve put stuff in it that will not pass and it did not balance either.. it was all about symbolic actions that they knew would not pass…not a serious effort.”

            And now you criticize the GOP for cutting too much spending. You also criticize them for spending too much in the bills Obama merely signs and has no real input.
            I guess they just can’t win with you.

            For some reason I get the feeling you aren’t sincere, Larry.

            “so now they’re just about obfuscation and gridlock for the hell of it.”

            I thought you wanted them to act on principle. Now you’re saying they should pass even more bloated budget bills that Obama will sign. Somehow, Larry who claims to be for balancing the budget, can’t seem to find any accountability for Obama.

            But you aren’t playing favorites.

          6. Paul – I thought you had retired for the evening …

            re: ” Where’s his plan to pay down the debt if he gets his tax hikes?”

            he believes that in addition to cuts, we need revenues – to help balance the budget and ultimately to help pay down the debt.

            in terms of cuts – Todd gave you a link….

            http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/sequester/the-presidents-plan

            re: bloated budgets…

            he’s indicated cuts .. and a willingness to consider more cuts – including Medicare – the GOP basically is saying “do it our way or we’ll just gridlock”.

            they’ve done this for 4 years and it cost them dearly.

            Obama might want them to do it again and look to get more gains in the next election.

            I don’t think the GOP is going to get more votes from their current actions…

            The GOP is splitting apart because they will not compromise…

            it’s like they are kamikazes

            we have to find SOME things we can agree on RATHER THAN continuing to emphasize what we don’t agree it and making it the reason why we won’t do anything.

            The GOP are primarily the reason why the budget blew up to start with.. more than doubled the National Defense budget from 300 billion to over a trillion.. and now want to cut entitlements but not national defense and not enough anyhow to balance the budget.

            it’s a nothing agenda. It’s one thing to advocate cuts. it’s another to advocate cuts primarily on entitlements and you still don’t balance the budget.

            that’s not fiscally responsible at all. It’s as bad as what the Dems are doing.

          7. “he believes that in addition to cuts, we need revenues – to help balance the budget and ultimately to help pay down the debt.”

            So where is the plan?

            “in terms of cuts – Todd gave you a link….”

            Wait, so now your link is no longer viable? His 2013 budget? You’ve decided that didn’t do it after all? I thought you knew all about Obama’s plans, Larry. I’m starting to question that now.

            Regarding the new improved link, I see some vague bullet points. He’s going to save $50 billion by “encourage efficient care?” Fantastic. I didn’t know we could save so much money by pestering people.
            Perhaps he should appoint a new Encouragement Czar to spread this wonderful innovation across the vast, bloated federal government. He’s also going to “encourage beneficiaries to seek high value health care.” Excellent idea, why didn’t anyone think of that before?
            He’s also got $120 billion for “other health savings.” Excellent, and so specific!
            He counts $200 billion in interest savings. In other words, gimmick. But he really really really loves his tax hikes on productive people, doesn’t he?

            Still, no plan to balance the budget, let alone pay down the debt. Are you teasing me, Larry? I think you are.

            Where’s that plan you told me about, Larry? Would love to see it.

            “he’s indicated cuts .. and a willingness to consider more cuts – including Medicare – the GOP basically is saying “do it our way or we’ll just gridlock”.”

            How can he do any of this? I thought he was just the guy who signs the checks, Larry? At least that’s what you’ve been telling me now for several months.

            I’m so confused.

            “they’ve done this for 4 years and it cost them dearly.”

            How? Obama’s just a check signer.

            “Obama might want them to do it again and look to get more gains in the next election.”

            Do? How does he do anything other than whip out a pen and sign away?

            “The GOP is splitting apart because they will not compromise…”

            Compromise? With who? Harry Reid just ignores the budgets they send over.

            And Obama is just a figurehead, right?

            “it’s like they are kamikazes”

            How so? They merely send Obama spending bills that he signs.

            “we have to find SOME things we can agree on RATHER THAN continuing to emphasize what we don’t agree it and making it the reason why we won’t do anything.”

            Well, I thought you told me Obama agreed on the sequester. After his histrionics last week, I guess that’s out the door.

            “The GOP are primarily the reason why the budget blew up to start with.. more than doubled the National Defense budget from 300 billion to over a trillion.. and now want to cut entitlements but not national defense and not enough anyhow to balance the budget.”

            Yet those deficits didn’t start blowing up over a trillion until the Pelosi Congress and Obama took over. The federal budget is about 40% larger than it was in 2007, the last yr of a GOP COngress.

            How’s that math workin’, Larry?

            “it’s a nothing agenda. It’s one thing to advocate cuts. it’s another to advocate cuts primarily on entitlements and you still don’t balance the budget.”

            Reminds me again, where’s Obama’s plan to pay down debt you promised?

            Still waiting. I guess you gave up on the 2013 budget you linked earlier. You don’t seem to be mentioning it now.

          8. The Dems doubled the national defense spending?

            who knew?

            re: the check signer. he has to approve the budget that he receives from both houses of Congress – and yes..he does have to receive it.

            re: compromise – in order to send a budget to the POTUS, it has to reach a compromise in Congress

            no compromise = no budget.

            the funny thing is .. with no budget there is no spending unless a continuing resolution is passed – by both houses of Congress …and guess what – every year – a majority of the GOP does vote in favor of a continuing resolution that spends money at the same deficit level as before.

            70 of them refused to go along with that in Sept 2012, but the rest of the GOP voted yes.

            see Paul… your guys are just plain feckless hypocrites.

            if they REALLY wanted to make their point – they’d not only not compromise on the budget but they’d not compromise on the continuing resolution also.

            not only did they compromise, they did not insist on a single cut… just signed off on spending as before. These are the same fools that next day get up in front of the cameras and say we have a “spending problem” and that “washington is broke”. for sure…

      3. Todd Mason

        Umm, looks like a plan to me.
        http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/sequester/the-presidents-plan

        I’m sure you don’t like it, but then everything comes down to compared to what. What we at speak.gov is ….well… no… not there …. Boehner wants you to know the house is still open to tourists. Check your tomatoes and rotten eggs at the door.

        1. Looks like a bunch of incredibly vague bullet points and bullshit, heavy on the tax hikes on productive people.

          Yes, let’s just “reduce payment to drug companies.” I’m sure stiffing the providers won’t have any side effects.

  5. MacDaddyWatch

    BEIGE BOOK…OBAMACARE = JOBS & SALES KILLER:

    Fresh from the government’s very own printing press…

    The Beige Book, which paints a picture of the economy by drawing on the contacts maintained by regional Fed banks with their local business communities, was prepared this time around by the Kansas City Federal Reserve. It’s not usually considered to have any partisan tilt, although obviously the views it reports are those of the business sector (rather than, say, the labor unions).

    “Employers in several Districts cited the unknown effects of the Affordable Care Act as reasons for planned layoffs and reluctance to hire more staff,” the report says.

    The Richmond Fed reports that employers in its area continued to point to the Affordable Care Act as “reasons for planned layoffs and reluctance to hire more staff.”

    The Dallas Fed contacts “noted concern that client companies are hiring the absolute minimum to get by due to uncertainty about the Affordable Care Act.”

    It’s not just hiring that is being hurt by Obamacare, according to the Beige Book. Sales are also.

    “Many District contacts commented on the expired payroll tax holiday and the Affordable Care Act as having restrained sales growth,” the report says.

    How many of you recall how Pelosi saying that ObamaCare would IMMEDIATELY create hundreds of thousand s of new jobs?

    IMMEDIATELY? That’s her very own words.

  6. Todd Mason

    Hey, Paul. I thought you agreed in another thread that there are tax breaks we can ax without hurting “productive Americans.”
    Like Goldman Sachs’ use of 9/11 rebuilding incentives — in Midtown.

    In the best of all worlds, the Rs and Ds would lay their plans on the table and let the good ideas float to the top. Boehner can’t do that because he can’t speak for the House Rs, as became painfully evident in 2011. Neither can Ryan. Given the internal dissent, all the Rs can do is ratchet up the dysfunction level until Obama offers cuts that the House R crazies consider palatable. The only good news for Boehner is that approval numbers cannot go into negative numbers.

    1. “In the best of all worlds, the Rs and Ds would lay their plans on the table and let the good ideas float to the top.”

      Yeah, how’s that going to happen when Harry Reid hasn’t submitted a budget for reconciliation since before the Ipad existed? The GOP sends spending bills like clockwork over to the Senate where they die a lonely death.

      Obama still hasn’t submitted his 2014 budget that is required by law to be finished by February. His last 2 budgets haven’t received a single vote in the Congress, GOP or Democrat.

      But yeah, it’s the GOP who are so dysfunctional.

      You’re as hackish as Larry.

      1. Todd Mason

        If by hackish you mean committed to ideas irrespective of the facts, I plead innocent. And ask you again: You’re committed to subsidizing ethanol even as chicken stocks decline (and prices rise) because of high corn prices? There’s NOTHING in the tax code that’s a flat-out gift from hard working, taxpaying Americans like you and I?

        1. “If by hackish you mean committed to ideas irrespective of the facts, I plead innocent. ”

          I’m guessing you meant to say you plead guilty. And no, that’s not what I meant.

          And huh? Where did you get the idea that I’m pro-ethanol?

          On the contrary, I’d like to see Lord Almighty Obama instruct his radical apparatchiks at the EPA to waive the ethanol mandate. Thus far, he has declined to do so:

          http://www.redstate.com/2012/11/16/obamas-epa-continues-handouts-for-rich-ethanol-farmers-on-the-backs-of-consumers/

          I see in the master “plan” you linked, he supposedly is going to address “some” farm subsidies. Perhaps he meant something easy like this that wouldn’t require a Congressional vote? Can’t know for sure, his master plan seems to be long on spending gimmicks, heavy on tax hikes.

          Any. Day. Now.

          1. Todd Mason

            You keep evading the question. Are there no tax breaks worth axing? BTW, ethanol mandates began in 2005 under guess who, and became law under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 under guess who again. Yes, the EPA declined to suspend increases in the mandate last fall, saying the conditions set out in the law to grant waivers had not been met. That said, if Boehner wants to drive a stake in this one, the Senate and Obama would be hard pressed to say no, eh?

Comments are closed.

Sort By:

Refine Content:

Scholar

Additional Keywords:

Refine Results

or to save searches.

Open
Refine Content