Which fork of the path to take?
On Saturday President Obama’s radio address further outlined his budgetary path for this country. It was largely another attempt to counter the “Path to Prosperity” offered by Wisconsin Republican Rep. Paul Ryan.
Obama says “we have to take a balanced approach to reducing our deficit — an approach that protects the middle class, our commitments to seniors, and job-creating investments in things like education and clean energy.” (Government growth.)
Ryan says of his plan, “A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down to 4% by 2015, and result in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade. It spurs economic growth, with $1.5 trillion in additional real GDP over the decade. According to Heritage's analysis, it would result in $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average of $1,000 in additional family income each year.” (Private-sector growth.)
Obama says of Ryan’s plan: “this plan proposes these drastic cuts, it would also give $1 trillion in tax breaks to the wealthiest 2% of Americans – an extra $200,000 for every millionaire and billionaire in the country.” (Class warfare.)
Ryan says his plan reforms “the nation's outdated tax code, consolidating brackets, lowering tax rates, and assuming top individual and corporate rates of 25%. It maintains a revenue-neutral approach by clearing out a burdensome tangle of deductions and loopholes that distort economic activity and leave some corporations paying no income taxes at all.” (Fairness.)
Obams sees: “To restore fiscal responsibility, we all need to share in the sacrifice — but we don’t have to sacrifice the America we believe in.” (Equally sharing less for the sake of social justice.)
Ryan sees: “We can reform government so that people don't have to reorient their lives for less. We can grow our economy, promote opportunity, and encourage upward mobility.” (Economic growth.)
One calls for shared sacrifice, the other for shared prosperity.
One sees government as the solution, the other sees government as the problem.
One sees misery, the other sees opportunity.
This entry was posted on Monday, Apr. 18, 2011 at 07:03 AM
and is filed under Thomas Mitchell.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response.
26
Responses
to "Which fork of the path to take?"
Relying on an "economic analysis" by the Heritage Foundation is pretty funny. They had to withdraw their original projections, and what they are left with has left actual professional economists scratching their heads.
Still, it is good to see the entire Republican Party now committed to ending Medicare and replacing it with a privatized voucher system, for the sake of enacting massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. It certainly clarifies the discussion.
Still, it is good to see the entire Republican Party now committed to ending Medicare and replacing it with a privatized voucher system, for the sake of enacting massive tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. It certainly clarifies the discussion.
The Ryan fantasy plan has no basis in the real world.
Did you even read it Cowboy Hat? 2.8% unemployment? I know Paul Ryan is a idiot who can't do a budget or calculate figures, but are you so out of touch you can't research the fact that the unemployment rate hasn't seen 2.8% like forever?
It is an idiotic plan written by a putz who only knows how to run for office, but couldn't govern his way out of a wet paper bag.
Basically like every other 'slogan spewing' with no understanding of the underlying issues Republican 'know nothing'.
Did you even read it Cowboy Hat? 2.8% unemployment? I know Paul Ryan is a idiot who can't do a budget or calculate figures, but are you so out of touch you can't research the fact that the unemployment rate hasn't seen 2.8% like forever?
It is an idiotic plan written by a putz who only knows how to run for office, but couldn't govern his way out of a wet paper bag.
Basically like every other 'slogan spewing' with no understanding of the underlying issues Republican 'know nothing'.
The Ryan plan is pure fantasy land. The same clowns he quotes estimated that the Bush tax cuts would do the same thing, and look how that worked out. These guys have no math skills, just slogans and lies.
petenyc, you are against the Ryan plan which phases out Medicare as a guaranteed single-payer system and replaces it with a government-subsidized private insurance program. But you are for this same system for everyone that is not a senior, part of Congress or has received an exemption from Obamacare? Under Ryan's proposal, the new Medicare would approve a handful of plans and make them available through an exchange. Medicare would pay seniors yearly sums to buy these approved plans, with poorer and sicker people getting more money. That's essentially how Obama's heath care law works, though it applies this method to younger people, not seniors.
How can you be for Obamacare and not Ryan's plan?
How can you be for Obamacare and not Ryan's plan?
Did Ryan vote for "ObamaCare"? Huh, if his plan is "essentially" the same, according to some, wonder why that was?
So pete n' Jack, see you have plenty of criticism for Ryan's plan, but no defense of the abysmal economic record of our current community organizer-in-chief. And your normal retort is... "but it Bush's fault", right?
Speaking of fantasy land,this president has had two years to right the ship, with his party in the majority in both houses of congress, and we're still in a precipitous economic decline. Or is this 14T dollar deficit inconsequential to you Obamapologists?!
Speaking of fantasy land,this president has had two years to right the ship, with his party in the majority in both houses of congress, and we're still in a precipitous economic decline. Or is this 14T dollar deficit inconsequential to you Obamapologists?!
Who was it that said "When you come to a fork in the road...take it"???
Can't be any clearer then that can it?
Can't be any clearer then that can it?
Dave,
You don't 'right the ship' in two years during a recession and mortgage meltdown when you have had eight years of piling up un-accounted for debt. That's just someone with zero math skills spewing stupid slogans.
Only the truly clueless have to resort to the 'it's all bushes fault argument again right'? It's actually Cheney's fault, Bush was a puppet, but it was clearly during the years of his tax cuts and unfunded wars that America's fiscal position was destroyed.
Simply whining that it is time to stop blaming Bush is a 6 year old who can't do math's argument.
You don't 'right the ship' in two years during a recession and mortgage meltdown when you have had eight years of piling up un-accounted for debt. That's just someone with zero math skills spewing stupid slogans.
Only the truly clueless have to resort to the 'it's all bushes fault argument again right'? It's actually Cheney's fault, Bush was a puppet, but it was clearly during the years of his tax cuts and unfunded wars that America's fiscal position was destroyed.
Simply whining that it is time to stop blaming Bush is a 6 year old who can't do math's argument.
to "john coffee hayes": I am pleased that you recognize that the budget unanamously passed by the Republican congress relies on a system of health care exchanges based on President Obama's health care reforms. I hope you also realize that as part of that budget the Republicans just voted to retain the very same cuts to Medicare Advantage that they excoriated in the campaign last year. Ah well, I suppose consistency is the hobgobblin of little minds.
There are, however, a few differences between the proposals. Obama's health reform exchanges apply only to individuals who can't get insurance through their employer, while the Republicans shove all citizen over 65 into their voucher system. Even more importantly, the subsidies that the Obama reforms provide to participants in the exchanges are tied to the actual increases in the cost of health care. In contrast, the Republican budget provides subsidies that are deliberately tied to a rate well below the increase in medical costs. The Obama reforms are also based on literally scores of ideas for bending the health care cost curve downwards. For example, it encourages the creation of "accountable care organizations" that would be paid a lump sum for their treatment of the patient as a whole, not for each discrete procedure. The Republican budget contains none of those provisions. It's theory of cost control is to ration by restricting the funds available to seniors to buy health insurance, on the grounds that an 85 year-old in poor health will then become a more discerning consumer.
That is the plan for ending Medicare as we know it that the Republicans will run on in 2012.
There are, however, a few differences between the proposals. Obama's health reform exchanges apply only to individuals who can't get insurance through their employer, while the Republicans shove all citizen over 65 into their voucher system. Even more importantly, the subsidies that the Obama reforms provide to participants in the exchanges are tied to the actual increases in the cost of health care. In contrast, the Republican budget provides subsidies that are deliberately tied to a rate well below the increase in medical costs. The Obama reforms are also based on literally scores of ideas for bending the health care cost curve downwards. For example, it encourages the creation of "accountable care organizations" that would be paid a lump sum for their treatment of the patient as a whole, not for each discrete procedure. The Republican budget contains none of those provisions. It's theory of cost control is to ration by restricting the funds available to seniors to buy health insurance, on the grounds that an 85 year-old in poor health will then become a more discerning consumer.
That is the plan for ending Medicare as we know it that the Republicans will run on in 2012.
Moscow petey coming hard for those sweet Marxist proposals!
After all, we couldn't have all those millions of financially irresponsible senior citizens (and senior illegals!) wondering out in the cold, with no place to rest their heads, can we?
Nor can we trust those rich parents at Anthem Country Club to feed their kids school breakfast and lunch, right?
And no way can we cut off those getting unemployment benefits for the last 99 weeks...let's just send them another 20 weeks of payments, right?
And the fact that we have no money (despite the objections of chief economist and film maker Michael Moore) should never play into the equation, should it?
We'll just have the Fed print more!
And when THAT stops working, we'll just use our kids' Monopoly money, right?
After all, we couldn't have all those millions of financially irresponsible senior citizens (and senior illegals!) wondering out in the cold, with no place to rest their heads, can we?
Nor can we trust those rich parents at Anthem Country Club to feed their kids school breakfast and lunch, right?
And no way can we cut off those getting unemployment benefits for the last 99 weeks...let's just send them another 20 weeks of payments, right?
And the fact that we have no money (despite the objections of chief economist and film maker Michael Moore) should never play into the equation, should it?
We'll just have the Fed print more!
And when THAT stops working, we'll just use our kids' Monopoly money, right?
Oh, and that would be wandering not wondering, but the way seniors are portrayed by the left, either would work, wouldn't it?
And by all means, Harry has to have his choo choo going to Victorville, ok?
And by all means, Harry has to have his choo choo going to Victorville, ok?
S & P just gave us a negative outlook on our credit rating. Democrat response: They don't know what their talking about at S & P. It is becoming more obvious that democrats will resist any cuts to spending.
Guess Obama and Reid think they can just make a law that will force S & P to give them AAA ratings forever.
Guess Obama and Reid think they can just make a law that will force S & P to give them AAA ratings forever.
You want to take the fork where Ryan's plan dumps Medicare; increases costs to seniors and cut taxes even more for the rich and corporations? Heh.
Ryan doesn't "cut taxes for the rich." His plan cuts the rate, but deletes special interest loopholes and the deductions, so that companies like GE would actually "pay" taxes for a change.
Ryan has not named a single "special interest loopholes and deduction" that he would eliminate. Not one. I challenge anyone, including Mr. Mitchell, to cite a section of Ryan's plan that identifies with specificity any of the $4.2 trillion(!) in loopholes that would have to be closed to finance his sharp tax rate reductions for upper-income earners and corporations.
Yet the Republicans all voted to end Medicare as we know it in order to support this budget.
Yet the Republicans all voted to end Medicare as we know it in order to support this budget.
Anyone enrolled in Medicare should keep this in mind about the Ryan budget the Republicans just voted to adopt. According to the Congressional Budget office, in the first year the voucher would apply, total health care expenditures for a typical 65-year-old would be almost 40 percent higher with private coverage under the Ryan plan than they would be under Medicare as we know it. And out-of-pocket costs would more than double — from $6,150 to $12,500. In later years, as the value of the voucher eroded, the increase in out-of-pocket costs would be even greater.
not to be a comment hog, but let's be clear: the Ryan budget the Republicans just passed specifically cuts marginal rates on the highest tax brackets and on corporations from 35% to 25%.
I'm looking forward to someone explaining to me why that is not a massive tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.
I'm looking forward to someone explaining to me why that is not a massive tax cut for the wealthiest Americans.
petenyc it is a house bill that must be rectified with a Senate bill prior to any final bill from congress making it to the president for signing into law. Think of it like this, the union and Clark County start at opposit ends and the arbitrator decides. You simply cannot cite the house bill as law because it is not and will not be as written. You should think of it a 1st step in the bargaining proceedure. Considering the divide between the 2 houses of Congress, this one is going to the mat and Standard and Poors understands what is happening as well. So yes that cut is in the house version, but the Senate version is not even out of committee yet. We have to wait quite a few months before we will have any idea what will be coming out of the Legislative Branch.
right, it is not law. It is simply the near-unanimous Republican view of what the budget should be: ending Medicare as we know it, retaining the Obama health reform cuts to Medicare Advantage that they excoriated last year, sharply increasing out of pocket health costs for seniors, slashing border enforcement and Pell Grants, and cutting taxes by 10% for upper-income earners and corporations.
By the way, has anyone found any of those loopholes Mr. Mitchell was talking about?
By the way, has anyone found any of those loopholes Mr. Mitchell was talking about?
petenyc hopefully you are not worried this is what will be the law either. Think of it like this, you were happy when the Demcrats took the admin, and both houses of congress for total control of 2/3 of the federal govt. The other side (myself included) was not. Now the seesaw is tipping and the balance is going away from you. You are becoming upset about that but is anything really changing? What comes out at the other end will not be so bad. Obamacare will not be so bad in the end either. It was the very visible way it became law made that bad taste in so many mouths. Patience, download the bill if you really want to. It is just not worth the time. Let the 4th3st8 pair it down for us, there is surely plenty of them who have the time and will find things all sides need to see. But it is out of our hands now, representative government has it, and we get to watch and send letters.
Moscow Petey, what's the corporate tax rate in Canada, comrade?
Or a better question, why didn't you Marxist change the tax code when you didn't need 0NE REPUBLICAN VOTE??
Dr. Utopia had 13 months to accomplish the 'fundamental transformation' you all salivate over.
So, I guess your chosen one.....FAILED!
Or a better question, why didn't you Marxist change the tax code when you didn't need 0NE REPUBLICAN VOTE??
Dr. Utopia had 13 months to accomplish the 'fundamental transformation' you all salivate over.
So, I guess your chosen one.....FAILED!
Let me get this right, X; the Ryan budget is not the actual budget they want? Are you saying they 'over asked?' Are they lying when they say this is the actual budget that's needed? Clear this up, will you, you seem to have inside information the rest of us don't have.
Where's the next Warren Harding? He's desperately needed in DC!
Jerry.Sturdivant My secret is:
Wait for it now
I know how a bill gets passed out of the Legislative Branch!
Wait for it now
I know how a bill gets passed out of the Legislative Branch!
I knew you couldn't answer............
And I knew you would try to spin it, you never disapoint. I already answered it, it wont pass out of the Congress as written. Deal with it.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Comments (26)
Registration Notice: The Review-Journal has implemented a new registration procedure that requires all existing and new accounts to validate and login using Facebook. Visit the Registration FAQ for more information.
Share your thoughts on this story.
Sign in or register to make a comment.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.