New Paul Ryan Budget

[kpt018]

Look at the Dems refusing to negotiate, holding the country hostage.

LMAO! I can't even get mad at your trolling anymore.

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

Looks good to me. Too bad the Dems would prefer to shut down the government.

 

[panamaican]

Ok. Not sure if you took my meaning to be that it should have been a serious budget, but I didn't say or imply that. I'm stating the same thing you basically said here, it wasn't a serious proposal.

I think it's a serious proposal. But criticizing the validity of the budget based on whether or not it will pass doesn't make sense.

As a bi-partisan effort, it certainly has things for either side. It has cuts for the GOP and it assumes a roll back of the sequester and a higher spending limit for the Dem's. Bi-partisan is important but part of that is doing what's necessary, not just what one party or another would agree to. If a program should be cut, logically, then you cut the program. You don't keep the program just to satisfy either sides partisan needs.

The article does point out that he probably wouldn't get House Repub support for his bill either. As they say, you know it's probably a fair deal when it pisses off everyone.

Now of course it's going to lean GOP but that's understandable. Paul Ryan is a republican and he got there because his beliefs on budget matters lean that way. But just because the rank and file Dem's don't agree with every part of it doesn't mean it's not a serious attempt at a bi-partisan result.

 

[kpt018]

I think it's a serious proposal. But criticizing the validity of the budget based on whether or not it will pass doesn't make sense.

It is not a serious attempt at actually passing a budget (Likely won't make it through Congress, definitely won't pass the Senate). Imagine a Democrat proposal that increased the top marginal tax rate to 95%, proposed a 50% tax on all firearm sales and then called it a proposal that should have serious consideration by Republican Congressmen and Senators. Yeah, I'm not saying just because it will get shot down it's a bad proposal, I'm saying it's a bad proposal which means it isn't a serious one (and will get shot down and rightfully so).

 

[Bay Area]

Let's stop with the "party of fiscal responsibility" and call it what it is; the party of big business, big oil, anti-climate change who wants no part of helping poor people.

This.

Tea Partiers (the poor and middle class ones) are morons.
They march to their own demise.

 

[Denter]

This.

Tea Partiers (the poor and middle class ones) are morons.
They march to their own demise.

Why haven't they developed the appropriate class-conciousness? :icon_conf

 

[Bay Area]

Why haven't they developed the appropriate class-conciousness? :icon_conf

Because they're stupid.

Marching for big business. The same big business that wants to concentrate the wealth at the top.

 

[kpt018]

Why haven't they developed the appropriate class-conciousness? :icon_conf

For many, they are voting based on affinities. I don't doubt there are some who really believe that wealth "trickles down" and Republican policies are the best for the country, but most are based on affinities.

Same goes for Democrats. It's just that, in my view, their positions are much more supportable with facts and also happen to mostly align with their own interests.

 

[Crocswithsocks]

Agree with me or you're stooopid!

 

[xcvbn]

I'm all for getting our deficit cut, but why take money from low income people and not freeze congressional and senate wages? Or cut foreign aid to terrorists? Or cut government pensions?

I see welfare, the pell grants, and the like as the only bone low income people get thrown all the while big business is always sitting pretty.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If Paul Ryan wanted to be brave he would craft a budget that would reduce or eliminate the budget deficit in 10 to 15 years, make changes to SS and Medicaid, cut Military spending in someways, and overhaul the tax system.

...but Paul Ryan is not brave.

How would that be brave? It's not like he'd personally be harmed by the slower economic growth or cuts to programs that would result from that. And, sure, doing something stupid that no one but GOP donors actually wants done would hurt his political career, but that would just accelerate the point in his life when rich right-wing media types are throwing money at him to associate with them. The guy is completely bullet-proof so he has no need for bravery.

I'm all for getting our deficit cut, but why take money from low income people and not freeze congressional and senate wages? Or cut foreign aid to terrorists? Or cut government pensions?

I see welfare, the pell grants, and the like as the only bone low income people get thrown all the while big business is always sitting pretty.

I think lowering the deficit right now is a terrible idea that would do a lot of harm and provide no benefits, but I would at least believe that the GOP was sincere about wanting to do that if they were willing to trade a single thing that they actually want to get it. This whole approach of "the deficit is the worst thing in the world, but we can't cut oil subsidies or the military budget or ask rich people to pay an extra dime to do anything about it" is obviously bullshit. If a Republican Congressman were to say, "cutting the deficit further, even though it's already been cut dramatically over the past few years, is so important to me that I'm willing to raise taxes on the rich," I'd think he was dumb, but I would at least respect that he's honest.

 

[HOLA]

I'm all for getting our deficit cut, but why take money from low income people and not freeze congressional and senate wages? Or cut foreign aid to terrorists? Or cut government pensions?

I see welfare, the pell grants, and the like as the only bone low income people get thrown all the while big business is always sitting pretty.

It does.

It would also slash federal pensions by $125 billion over 10 years. It would eliminate a program to repay federal employees

 

[Hollywood Nicky]

Agree with me or you're stooopid!

vote for your own interests or you are stupid. wouldn't you agree?

 

[NRFC]

Because they're stupid.

Marching for big business. The same big business that wants to concentrate the wealth at the top.

This comment makes no sense and defies logic.

Why would the poor and middle class Tea Partiers support "big business and wealth at the top"? How does that possibly help them? I'll answer that... it doesn't.

Could it be more that they are concerned about massive entitlement spending and Government fiscal irresponsibility? Its the ideological concept between big and small government.

I like the name calling from the left... "morons" , "stupid".

Also whats worse... Ryan actually proposing a partisan budget or the Democratic Senate NOT releasing a budget for FOUR years?

Senate passes its first budget proposal in four years
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/23/politics/senate-budget-bill

 

[Bay Area]

^^ Do you know who started the Tea Party and what the strategy was behind it?

 

[kpt018]

Could it be more that they are concerned about massive entitlement spending and Government fiscal irresponsibility? Its the ideological concept between big and small government.

No, hence the thread. If Republicans were really concerned about fiscal responsibility we wouldn't see proposals to cut taxes for the wealthy and for big business, proposals to increase or maintain this astronomical level of defense spending, subsidies for big oil, etc. etc..

And the budget includes things like cutting welfare spending by $5b over ten years. It's obviously immaterial but it gets right wingers hard when they screw over poor people.

Fiscal responsibility my ass.

 

[HOLA]

No, hence the thread. If Republicans were really concerned about fiscal responsibility we wouldn't see proposals to cut taxes for the wealthy and for big business, proposals to increase or maintain this astronomical level of defense spending, subsidies for big oil, etc. etc..

And the budget includes things like cutting welfare spending by $5b over ten years. It's obviously immaterial but it gets right wingers hard when they screw over poor people.

Fiscal responsibility my ass.

One of the comments from the comment section of the article posted:

I don't think the federal funding for the National Endowment for the Arts would pay for a week's worth of shaft grease for our fleet of aircraft carriers.

The budget appears to be about $150 million for the National Endowment for the Arts.

 

[kpt018]

One of the comments from the comment section of the article posted:



The budget appears to be about $150 million for the National Endowment for the Arts.

Lol, right. Going after the big dollars!

 

[nixkid]

Paul Ryan's budget is and always will be a PR tool to further his political career. It has a snowballs chance in hell of passing. He knows it, we know it, everyone knows it. But as long as it gets enough media attention and plays well with the right constituencies then it has served its purpose until next year.

 

[Rhood]

Paul Ryan needs to take Economics 101
I wonder if his paper degree is even legit.