President Trump An Paul Ryan Slight Of Hands At Work On Cuts

[PEB]

So all the talk is about tariffs an Ryan fighting them yet Paul is working closely with President Trump on health care, social security an welfare cuts. Paul Ryan talked about how smoothly the talks are going.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...e-and-social-security/?utm_term=.d423b0707241

 

[Trotsky]

Trump > Paul Ryan

 

[hillelslovak87]

A turd floating in sewage>>>>>>>Paul Ryan

A starving baby given chewing gum>Paul Ryan

Steve Bannon's diet>Paul Ryan

 

[Last Samurai]

yes everything is running smoothly


like a well-oiled machine

 

[VivaRevolution]

Lol, I want to see it.

Go after SS, and medicare, I dare you.

I beg you, please.

We will see a wave election the likes this country has never seen before.

 

[Scheme]

Lol, I want to see it.

Go after SS, and medicare, I dare you.

I beg you, please.

We will see a wave election the likes this country has never seen before.

So the largest 2 budget items by far should be immune to spending cuts?

 

[Last Samurai]

So the largest 2 budget items by far should be immune to spending cuts?

I'm sure the Dems are willing to work out
some cuts in the defense budget

 

[PEB]

So the largest 2 budget items by far should be immune to spending cuts?

Here is the thing a lot of Republicans where warning the administration that seeking a large corporate tax cut was going to require large spending cuts. They warned that even with cuts the offsets would not be enough to slow the growing debt.

They worried they needed to propose a plan that includes cuts while not seeking such a large tax break for corporations.

A lot of them did not want go after Social Security especially given the optics while dishing out huge tax breaks to corporations an individuals.

It really was considered a bad idea seeking such huge tax breaks while the administration was selling the idea that economic growth was going to fix the issue by raising revenue.

 

[VivaRevolution]

So the largest 2 budget items by far should be immune to spending cuts?

Well SS should because they have been stealing from it for decades, and the problem with Medicare spending is the same problem as with our entire HC system.

So unless we are talking about overhauling the whole HC system, or telling the people the truth about where our SS money went, then yes, they should be off limits.

Beyond that, fuck the republicans for ever even having a wet dream about raising the defense spending by 300 billion while cutting SS, or medicare.

 

[AnGrYcRoW]

And let's start a trade war while we're at it for shits and giggles

 

[computer fogie]

So the largest 2 budget items by far should be immune to spending cuts?

Definitely. Screwing retired people screws all of us eventually. Aren't you planning on living past retirement age? If so, you will wish they had been well funded and protected from thievery.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Definitely. Screwing retired people screws all of us eventually. Aren't you planning on living past retirement age? If so, you will wish they had been well funded and protected from thievery.

This makes so much sense yet it will fall on deaf ears

 

[Scheme]

Here is the thing a lot of Republicans where warning the administration that seeking a large corporate tax cut was going to require large spending cuts. They warned that even with cuts the offsets would not be enough to slow the growing debt.

They worried they needed to propose a plan that includes cuts while not seeking such a large tax break for corporations.

A lot of them did not want go after Social Security especially given the optics while dishing out huge tax breaks to corporations an individuals.

It really was considered a bad idea seeking such huge tax breaks while the administration was selling the idea that economic growth was going to fix the issue by raising revenue.

Corporate taxes aren't even a huge revenue for US government. They are like 10% of total revenue, cutting that from 35% to 20% (assuming no other changes) reduces their total revenue from 10% to 6%, a reduction of a mere 4%. If you reduce spending by 4% (which could easily be done by trimming the fat off medicare or military), then you cover the loss in revenue from corporations.

I could even argue that the amount of growth by cutting corporate taxes from 35 to 20% would in the long term pay for that part of the tax cut itself, since it's only a loss of ~4% total revenue.