|
Post by Mark (EC,IN) on Mar 13, 2013 3:24:07 GMT -5
A few days ago Rand Paul proposed a plan to balance the budget in ten years using spending cuts and no tax increases. Well not to be out done, I see the Dumocrats have now come up with a plan to balance the budget in ten years also........with a trillion dollars in new taxes. seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020543442_murraybudgetxml.h...
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 13, 2013 8:49:33 GMT -5
Where are the Republicans plans,Mark? You should be wondering why they stand on the sidelines and complain,instead of trying to stop obama. The reason is ,they like overspending and giving money to people,just like democrates. Mark,the state of Indiana is giving Winchester 300'000 for a welcome to Winchester roadside monument,this county is 90% Republican,the Govenor is Republican,why are they throwing our money away like this?
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 13, 2013 9:29:17 GMT -5
The Right-Wing Case Against Paul Ryan’s Budget
If you boiled down the media’s reaction to Paul Ryan’s budget to a three-letter phrase, it would be: WTF? Most commentators and reporters are flummoxed that the new budget, released this morning, makes no concession to the fact that Republicans just ran a presidential campaign on these very ideas and were soundly defeated. Dig the incredulity in the lead to this New York Times report:
“Four months after Republicans suffered a convincing defeat in the presidential election, Representative Paul D. Ryan of Wisconsin, the party’s vice-presidential nominee, unveiled a spending-and-tax plan on Tuesday that relies on the same lightning rod proposals of his 2012 campaign to balance the federal budget in 10 years.”
You wouldn’t know it from the media coverage, but some conservatives don’t agree that Ryan’s budget is a shockingly right-wing “lightning rod” proposal—they think it’s too liberal. And they’re deeply disillusioned by what they view as Ryan’s breaking faith with the conservative movement.
I just got off the phone with a leader of this movement, who didn’t want to be named—his group is still deciding whether to publicly challenge Ryan—but was happy to share the right-wing case against his budget.
Here it is in a nutshell: These conservatives believe that most Republican elected officials today lack the gumption and courage to make the cuts, especially to entitlement programs, that they believe are necessary. But they feel they’ve been making progress—their big victory this year was getting Republican leaders to commit to offering a budget that balances within 10 years, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling. (Recall that Ryan’s last budget didn’t balance until 2038.) They had great hopes for Ryan’s new budget, hopes that were dashed when it turned out he planned to keep the $624 billion in tax increases from the fiscal cliff deal.
Basically, they see this as a breach of faith. The point of balancing the budget in 10 years, in their view, is to force Republicans to vote for entitlement cuts—and then, they hope, to see those same Republicans get reelected. This would demonstrate that voting for deep entitlement cuts would not be the automatic death sentence that many Republicans presume and, in time, would condition Republicans to think differently, and much more ambitiously, about what they could achieve. Today, my source told me, Republicans would shy from such cuts, even if they controlled all of Congress and the White House. It’s important to begin laying the groundwork now, so that future Republicans will be willing to go much further.
Ryan’s budget was supposed to be a key component of this plan, a great leap forward. But rather than balancing “the hard way”—by cutting entitlements—it balances “the easy way,” by meekly accepting the Obama tax increase. In doing so, it disappoints conservatives who thought the 10-year window was going to be a game-changer. Ryan’s new budget follows the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law. Ironically, these conservatives are upset for much the same reason as liberals are: Ryan’s new budget isn’t much different than his old one. Green is senior national correspondent for Bloomberg Businessweek in Washington. Follow him on Twitter @joshuagreen
|
|
|
Post by wheatfarmer on Mar 13, 2013 10:13:46 GMT -5
The Right-Wing Case Against Paul Ryan’s Budget If you boiled down the media’s reaction to Paul Ryan’s budget to a three-letter phrase, it would be: WTF? Most commentators and reporters are flummoxed that the new budget, released this morning, makes no concession to the fact that Republicans just ran a presidential campaign on these very ideas and were soundly defeated. Winning with less than 4% more of the popular vote does not come across as soundly defeated. An error in the hypothesis creates a posting of erroroneous blather.
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 13, 2013 12:04:09 GMT -5
And all this time I thought the electoral college elected the President,your hypothesis is blather,sir.
|
|
|
Post by wheatfarmer on Mar 13, 2013 21:46:55 GMT -5
I would really like to debate with you about what is or is not a sound defeat, but if I light one more candle at both ends I will have to become an accomplished juggler to keep the house from burning down.
Maybe later compadre. Put off jobs are screaming for attention.
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 14, 2013 7:58:19 GMT -5
I think we just witnessed a sound defeat .
|
|
|
Post by Mark (EC,IN) on Mar 14, 2013 10:51:53 GMT -5
I think we just witnessed a sound defeat . It was a pretty good defeat by the electoral college....I'm not sure about the popular vote. There are a lot of low information voters now (I think that is what they call them). I just think we have got to the point that there are "more people riding in the wagon, than there are pulling the wagon"..............and it's going to get worse.
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 14, 2013 12:22:12 GMT -5
Are farmers riders or pullers?
|
|
|
Post by Mark (EC,IN) on Mar 14, 2013 12:23:49 GMT -5
Are farmers riders or pullers? What is your opinion?
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 14, 2013 12:25:29 GMT -5
Riders
|
|
|
Post by Mark (EC,IN) on Mar 14, 2013 12:32:54 GMT -5
I think of those who "ride" as the ones who take more than they give. I don't think farmers fit that class. I think most farmers are pulling the wagon.
|
|
|
Post by 420 on Mar 14, 2013 12:40:49 GMT -5
I signed up for crop insurance last nite-the government payed half of the premium,thus guaranteeing a profit. How many other business are guaranteed a profit by the government. Last year we got 16000 in direct payments,what did we do to earn that? Just because you payed in more than you took out doesnt make you a puller. Tell me why the government should write you a check and not the guy who works at Mc Donalds.
|
|
|
Post by Mark (EC,IN) on Mar 14, 2013 12:48:29 GMT -5
I signed up for crop insurance last nite-the government payed half of the premium,thus guaranteeing a profit. How many other business are guaranteed a profit by the government. Last year we got 16000 in direct payments,what did we do to earn that? Just because you payed in more than you took out doesnt make you a puller. Tell me why the government should write you a check and not the guy who works at Mc Donalds. So you consider yourself a rider? I'll agree with you 420....the government shouldn't be sending checks to anybody. But as long as I send the government more money than they send me....I'm contributing to things. (helping pull) Most welfare recipients don't send any money in they are riding.
|
|
|
Post by MarlandS on Mar 14, 2013 12:48:39 GMT -5
Tell me how much you'll get if you don't have a claim ? Or if you do have a claim but prices are in the shitter while inputs are still high ?
Any person can get insurance to make a profit , just get a replacement policy on your vehicle , total it within a year and i'll bet you the new vehicle is worth more than the old one . profit
|
|