PDA

View Full Version : The GOP Path to Prosperity by Congressman Paul D. Ryan



BigBadBrian
04-07-2011, 11:46 AM
LINK (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703806304576242612172357504.html?m od=djemEditorialPage_h)

By PAUL D. RYAN
Congress is currently embroiled in a funding fight over how much to spend on less than one-fifth of the federal budget for the next six months. Whether we cut $33 billion or $61 billion—that is, whether we shave 2% or 4% off of this year's deficit—is important. It's a sign that the election did in fact change the debate in Washington from how much we should spend to how much spending we should cut.

Steve Moore has the details on Rep. Paul Ryan's plan to cut spending.
.But this morning the new House Republican majority will introduce a budget that moves the debate from billions in spending cuts to trillions. America is facing a defining moment. The threat posed by our monumental debt will damage our country in profound ways, unless we act.

No one person or party is responsible for the looming crisis. Yet the facts are clear: Since President Obama took office, our problems have gotten worse. Major spending increases have failed to deliver promised jobs. The safety net for the poor is coming apart at the seams. Government health and retirement programs are growing at unsustainable rates. The new health-care law is a fiscal train wreck. And a complex, inefficient tax code is holding back American families and businesses.

The president's recent budget proposal would accelerate America's descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership.

Our budget, which we call The Path to Prosperity, is very different. For starters, it cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt. Our proposal brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.

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.

Here are its major components:

• Reducing spending: This budget proposes to bring spending on domestic government agencies to below 2008 levels, and it freezes this category of spending for five years. The savings proposals are numerous, and include reforming agricultural subsidies, shrinking the federal work force through a sensible attrition policy, and accepting Defense Secretary Robert Gates's plan to target inefficiencies at the Pentagon.

View Full Image
...• Welfare reform: This budget will build upon the historic welfare reforms of the late 1990s by converting the federal share of Medicaid spending into a block grant that lets states create a range of options and gives Medicaid patients access to better care. It proposes similar reforms to the food-stamp program, ending the flawed incentive structure that rewards states for adding to the rolls. Finally, this budget recognizes that the best welfare program is one that ends with a job—it consolidates dozens of duplicative job-training programs into more accessible, accountable career scholarships that will better serve people looking for work.

As we strengthen and improve welfare programs for those who need them, we eliminate welfare for those who don't. Our budget targets corporate welfare, starting by ending the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that is costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. It gets rid of the permanent Wall Street bailout authority that Congress created last year. And it rolls back expensive handouts for uncompetitive sources of energy, calling instead for a free and open marketplace for energy development, innovation and exploration.

• Health and retirement security: This budget's reforms will protect health and retirement security. This starts with saving Medicare. The open-ended, blank-check nature of the Medicare subsidy threatens the solvency of this critical program and creates inexcusable levels of waste. This budget takes action where others have ducked. But because government should not force people to reorganize their lives, its reforms will not affect those in or near retirement in any way.

Starting in 2022, new Medicare beneficiaries will be enrolled in the same kind of health-care program that members of Congress enjoy. Future Medicare recipients will be able to choose a plan that works best for them from a list of guaranteed coverage options. This is not a voucher program but rather a premium-support model. A Medicare premium-support payment would be paid, by Medicare, to the plan chosen by the beneficiary, subsidizing its cost.

In addition, Medicare will provide increased assistance for lower-income beneficiaries and those with greater health risks. Reform that empowers individuals—with more help for the poor and the sick—will guarantee that Medicare can fulfill the promise of health security for America's seniors.

View Full Image

Getty Images/Imagezoo
.We must also reform Social Security to prevent severe cuts to future benefits. This budget forces policy makers to work together to enact common-sense reforms. The goal of this proposal is to save Social Security for current retirees and strengthen it for future generations by building upon ideas offered by the president's bipartisan fiscal commission.

• Budget enforcement: This budget recognizes that it is not enough to change how much government spends. We must also change how government spends. It proposes budget-process reforms—including real, enforceable caps on spending—to make sure government spends and taxes only as much as it needs to fulfill its constitutionally prescribed roles.

• Tax reform: This budget would focus on growth by reforming 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.

This is America's moment to advance a plan for prosperity. Our budget offers the nation a model of government that is guided by the timeless principles of the American idea: free-market democracy, open competition, a robust private sector bound by rules of honesty and fairness, a secure safety net, and equal opportunity for all under a limited constitutional government of popular consent.

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. This budget is the new House majority's answer to history's call. It is now up to all of us to keep America exceptional.

Mr. Ryan, a Republican, represents Wisconsin's first congressional district and serves as chairman of the House Budget Committee.

FORD
04-07-2011, 01:44 PM
I want to know when we send troops to Wisconsin. Because Hosni Walker and Muammar Ryan are bigger threats to the United States of America than anybody in some middle eastern desert shithole could ever be.

These KKKoch funded, John Birch Society worshiping lunatics are the REAL terrorists. :gun:

ULTRAMAN VH
04-07-2011, 02:52 PM
I want to know when we send troops to Wisconsin. Because Hosni Walker and Muammar Ryan are bigger threats to the United States of America than anybody in some middle eastern desert shithole could ever be.

These KKKoch funded, John Birch Society worshiping lunatics are the REAL terrorists. :gun:

Uh yeah right! Paul Ryan actually steps up to the plate and offers a plan to save the future of this country and you label him a terrorist? The democrats didn't even form a budget. In his 1st term Obama has doubled the debt and will triple it by the end of his budget. Regardless of who will step up to the plate to save this country from fiscal doom, its going to be painful for the american public. The party is over folks.

kwame k
04-07-2011, 03:00 PM
I've been saying all along our taxes are going to go up.....someone has to pay for the war party we've been rocking for over a decade!

I'm just glad that corporations don't have to pay taxes and Washington is talking about cutting public employees wages/benefits but thank God they're not going to cut Congress' pay or that of their staffers. That would be un-American.

Like FORD said.....stop the fucking wars and have corporations just pay their fair share of taxes and there wouldn't be a budget problem.

ULTRAMAN VH
04-07-2011, 03:00 PM
This Is Going to Hurt
There is no painless way to balance the budget.




Want to know just how bad our budget problems are? The 2012 budget plan unveiled yesterday by Rep. Paul Ryan and Republican House leaders cuts federal spending by $6.2 trillion over the next ten years — and still adds $6 trillion to the national debt.

Yet, by and large, Americans still believe there is a painless way to balance the budget. They have a better chance searching for that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

That’s not to say that Americans don’t understand the need to balance our budget. Most Americans want spending cut and the budget balanced. In fact, a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that fully 71 percent of voters oppose raising the current $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.



But when it comes to what to cut, voters have a hard time finding anything they are willing to go without. Of course, everyone is against “fraud, waste, and abuse.” And certainly there is a great deal of that in the federal budget. But there is no line item called “fraud, waste, and abuse.” One can’t go in and simply slice waste off the top of the budget. Rather, it is marbled throughout in ways that often defy easy cutting. Moreover, one person’s boondoggle is another person’s critical program.

And when it comes to programs, there are remarkably few that the public seems willing to cut. For example, we’ve increased federal education spending by 188 percent in real terms since 1975 without any improvement in outcomes. Yet just 24 percent of voters say they support cuts in federal education spending. A majority of Americans also oppose cutting anti-poverty programs, homeland security, aid to farmers, and funding for the arts and sciences.

Indeed, about the only program the public seems anxious to cut is foreign aid — not surprising, since voters think it consumes 10 percent of federal spending. The actual figure is slightly less than 1 percent. The public also wants to cut the benefits and pensions of government workers. They believe that makes up another 10 percent of the budget. In reality, it is 3.5 percent. That’s not an argument against cutting foreign aid or the excessive benefits of government workers, but you aren’t going to get to a balanced budget that way.

In fact, you are not going to get to a balanced budget by cutting domestic discretionary spending. All domestic discretionary spending, everything from the FBI to the FDA, from the Department of Commerce to the Department of Education, makes up just 18 percent of the federal budget. You could eliminate it all, and we would still face a budget deficit this year of more than $680 billion.

And while we are at it, 57 percent of voters oppose cuts in defense spending. Defense, of course, accounts for another 19 percent of federal spending. It will have to be on the table if the budget is ever going to be balanced.

In the end, the only real way to bring the federal budget into long-term balance is to reform entitlement programs, as Ryan has proposed doing. But here again, the public is reluctant to support cuts. According to the most recent Gallup Poll, two-thirds of Americans oppose cutting Social Security benefits. Even self-professed supporters of the Tea Party oppose cutting Social Security by 2–1. Nearly as many voters, 61 percent, oppose cutting Medicare.

On the other side of the ledger, Americans are slightly more willing to raise taxes to balance the budget — but only on the “rich,” usually defined as someone earning a lot more than they do. But, of course, taxing the rich won’t get you to a balanced budget either. Even setting aside the damage to the economy that tax increases would do, you simply can’t get enough money out of the rich to solve our fiscal problems. In fact, if you confiscated — not just taxed, but confiscated — all the wealth of every millionaire in America, you could come close to covering our current national debt. But once entitlements start to really kick in, in about a decade or so, we’d be in trouble again.

Any tax increase that would make a dent in our long-term debt would have to go well beyond the rich, biting deeply into the middle class. But tax hikes of that magnitude would devastate economic growth and prove counterproductive in the end. Simply put, we can’t tax our way out of this hole.

So if you want to know why we are in trouble, look no further than us. If we are serious about avoiding the fiscal train wreck to come, we are going to have to be willing to cut even those programs we like. There can be no sacred cows. Everything has to be on the table.

Ryan’s approach is a good start. But for the long term, it will require a 2012 presidential candidate capable of explaining the facts to an uninformed public and courageous enough to make the necessary cuts — even if the public thinks they hurt.

— Michael Tanner is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Leviathan on the Right: How Big-Government Conservatism Brought Down the Republican Revolution.

FORD
04-07-2011, 03:20 PM
There is absolutely no need to cut Social Security or Medicare.

You fix Social Security by removing the "cap" on deductions. Social Security deductions are only on the first $100 k or so. In other words, a Gold Mansacks shitbag who sits on his ass and swindles the American people for an income pays exactly the same in Social Security as the construction worker who busts his ass 12 hours a day.

Lift the cap, deduct the same percentage that's taken now on Social Security on ALL income, and Social Security would not only be solvent, you could actually double the payment to the old and disabled.

The solution to Medicare is the same as the obvious solution to overall health care. One nationwide single payer health insurance pool. Everyone pays in, everyone gets the same coverage out of it.

Problems solved. Do these two things, along with ending all the useless occupations, ending the tax loopholes, and making the rich pay their fair share, and the "financial crisis" (created by 30 years of bullshit reverse Robin Hood policies) is solved.

BigBadBrian
04-07-2011, 03:29 PM
I want to know when we send troops to Wisconsin. Because Hosni Walker and Muammar Ryan are bigger threats to the United States of America than anybody in some middle eastern desert shithole could ever be.

These KKKoch funded, John Birch Society worshiping lunatics are the REAL terrorists. :gun:

That just shows what a Marxist lunatic you are. You're part of the national problem: sponging off the public in a government job where all you do is frequent this board all day long. Slacker.

FORD
04-07-2011, 04:09 PM
Geezus, I live in a goddamn State Capitol. Where else would I work?

kwame k
04-07-2011, 04:36 PM
I guess having a State job is bad in his eyes?

Maybe he wants to outsource those jobs, too!

BigBadBrian
04-08-2011, 07:58 AM
I guess having a State job is bad in his eyes?

Maybe he wants to outsource those jobs, too!

No, just do an honest day's work for his salary. Which he obviously isn't doing now.

SunisinuS
04-08-2011, 10:52 AM
No, just do an honest day's work for his salary. Which he obviously isn't doing now.


Now Brian...some people in Public Service try....on both sides. I need you to see this:

kwame k
04-08-2011, 11:20 AM
No, just do an honest day's work for his salary. Which he obviously isn't doing now.

.....and you know this for a fact or is this another baseless opinion of yours, Op-Ed?

I'm working right now while I'm posting.....it's called multitasking, something your Neanderthal brain probably can't comprehend, Forrest.

BigBadBrian
04-13-2011, 08:09 AM
.....and you know this for a fact or is this another baseless opinion of yours, Op-Ed?

I'm working right now while I'm posting.....it's called multitasking, something your Neanderthal brain probably can't comprehend, Forrest.

Multitask? Goober, you couldn't do 2 things at once if your life depended on it. Liar.

BigBadBrian
04-17-2011, 08:44 AM
Any tax increase that would make a dent in our long-term debt would have to go well beyond the rich, biting deeply into the middle class. But tax hikes of that magnitude would devastate economic growth and prove counterproductive in the end. Simply put, we can’t tax our way out of this hole.

The "progressives" on this board have no problem raising taxes on others, but would cry like a little girl if taxes were raised on them. most people on this board don't pay federal taxes (or they get everything refunded to them). Why not? That is wrong. The CBO shows we would make almosst 4 times the revenue if we raised taxes on the lower 4 tax brackets instead of the upper 2. Better yet, let's raise taxes on everyone!

kwame k
04-17-2011, 10:24 AM
The CBO shows we would make almosst 4 times the revenue if we raised taxes on the lower 4 tax brackets instead of the upper 2.

:headlights:

I stand corrected and promise never to pick on you again, Forrest.....picking on the mentally handicaped just isn't cool.......you know, like you pretending you're some rich capitalist when in fact we all know you still live in mommy's basement or like the conservatives that protest vehemently against gays, only to find out they're closest fags like your idol Rush and BecKKK....

Stick to spamming the Front Line with Op-Ed's, Forrest, when you think for yourself it just shows how much of a sheep/idiot you really are.

Zero links to back up your tripe, as usual......you and people like you are the reason this country is so fucked up:pullinghair:

Duh........ Rush said if we tax the lower 4 tax brackets we'll make 4 times the money instead of the upper 2. :lmao:

Does that mean we'd only make 2 times the money on the upper 2...... Duh, Rush said that GE paying zero taxes while getting 3.2 billion back from We the People is a good thing!

Does mommy still have to spoon feed you and dress you, Forrest?

kwame k
04-17-2011, 10:27 AM
Multitask? Goober, you couldn't do 2 things at once if your life depended on it. Liar.

Only took ya five days to come up with that witty retort, Forrest? The new meds must be working, congrats!

BigBadBrian
04-17-2011, 11:58 AM
Only took ya five days to come up with that witty retort, Forrest? The new meds must be working, congrats!

Keep trying, Goober. You'll come up with a valid argument and be able to hang with the big boys one day. :lmao:

kwamek =http://jaydeanhcr.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/goober1.jpg



:lmao:

FORD
04-17-2011, 03:30 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOxGEutfE9Y