House GOP to release budget blueprint that slashes spending

Chiefgator said:

I personally think Spending Cuts (reduction of Costs in the business world) and some tax increases are the way to go.

Click to expand...

So long as they're increases on the 47% +/- of people who currently don't pay anything, i'd be all for it.

Rhapsody1447 said:

Unfortunately, what's considered a manageable deficit is not determined by policymakers in D.C. Annual increases in federal debt are only sustainable if they grow at a slower rate than real GDP. Considering this "politically unworkable" budget projects 30 years of annual increases in federal debt, that's a pretty big bet on our ability to produce real growth. The CBO alternative fiscal scenario projects a 15% annual deficit in 2040. Find me someone who would deem that "manageable".



What's laughably insane is the failure to address mandatory spending programs that are greater than 100% of tax revenue. What's laughably insane is leaving programs with projected growth rates larger than government revenue untouched. What's laughably insane is justifying any marginal increase in effective tax rates while these fiscally broken programs go on unabated. The fact these cuts are considered radical when they would take 30 years to return to a balanced budget is what's laughable.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you, but there is no reason to couple taxes and spending the way you seem to want to do, i.e. it's no problem being insane on the revenue side unless we first stop being insane on the spending side. We can't solve this problem without addressing both sides of the equation. Cutting spending while you're cutting revenue is like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it. So is raising taxes without cutting spending. We need to reform SS and Medicare, cut military spending, and raise taxes. And we can't do anything drastic on any of those fronts in the next two years without endagering the fragile recovery. Sucks, but it is what it is.

go through with a fine tooth comb and cut spending.im pretty sure we can save billions by cutting funding to bs projects and redundant regulations.

increase taxes through silent and untapped means.add a 10% tax on all entertainment electronics nation wide and end all funding for green programs except for research,if they work companies will build them and people will buy them,we dont need government subsidies being spent on an electric car no one buys or solar panels that cost more than any amount they will save on electric.

AdamT said:

I don't disagree with you, but there is no reason to couple taxes and spending the way you seem to want to do, i.e. it's no problem being insane on the revenue side unless we first stop being insane on the spending side. We can't solve this problem without addressing both sides of the equation. Cutting spending while you're cutting revenue is like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it. So is raising taxes without cutting spending. We need to reform SS and Medicare, cut military spending, and raise taxes.

Click to expand...

If you agree with me then you would be repulsed by this administrations complete ignorance of the problem and would deem Obama's FY2013 budget as laughably insane. I focus on the spending side because I recognize the folly in using absurdly optimistic assumptions of future tax revenue. Such as the projections laid out in Obama's FY2010 budget titled "A New Era of Responsibility" which were off by a mere trillion dollars over the next two years. Representative Ryan remains the only sitting politician who has seriously addressed the problem of unsustainable spending programs and has been met with not one serious response from the other side of the aisle. In fact, the Democratic Senate has refused to even pass a budget in over three years. You call Ryan's latest proposal to lower marginal rates and broaden the tax base as being 'insane' on the revenue side despite the CBO grading it as revenue neutral with no increase in economic growth assumptions. However your argument is weak when compared to the spending insanity of the alternatives (or lack thereof). Considering military spending is being cut dramatically and automatic tax increases are already in place for 2013, where is Obama's 'sane' proposals for addressing SS/Medicare? Programs that make up over 40% of our budget? Instead of addressing these problems, Obama has created an entirely new mandatory program whose future outlays are so opaque we can't even predict how large they will be. Sorry, given their ramifications, I won't accept the "rosy" (a whopping $20 billion a year) projections of further increasing the progressiveness of our tax system as a serious form of deficit reduction until they include the necessary reforms to mandatory spending.

AdamT said:

And we can't do anything drastic on any of those fronts in the next two years without endagering the fragile recovery. Sucks, but it is what it is.

Click to expand...

How about just a plan to deal with them in the future? It sure seems that the President has no problem doing something drastic when it comes to raising taxes and cutting military spending.

Rhapsody1447 said:

If you agree with me then you would be repulsed by this administrations complete ignorance of the problem and would deem Obama's FY2013 budget as laughably insane.

Click to expand...

Sadly, the projected deficits from Obama's proposed budget are far lower than the deficits that would result from the proposed budgets of any of the GOP contenders (save Paul, but his would rocket us into a depression). Based on that, I would assume you are supporting Obama's bid for reelection. Yes?

AdamT said:

Sadly, the projected deficits from Obama's proposed budget are far lower than the deficits that would result from the proposed budgets of any of the GOP contenders (save Paul, but his would rocket us into a depression). Based on that, I would assume you are supporting Obama's bid for reelection. Yes?

Click to expand...

None of the Republican candidates have released a complete budget proposal subject to CBO scoring. The projections you are referring to are independent projections of future tax revenue based on the broad overview of the candidate's tax and spending proposals. Romney has praised both of Ryan's budget proposals and echoes his sentiments for addressing entitlement reform.

AdamT said:

Sadly, the projected deficits from Obama's proposed budget are far lower than the deficits that would result from the proposed budgets of any of the GOP contenders (save Paul, but his would rocket us into a depression). Based on that, I would assume you are supporting Obama's bid for reelection. Yes?

Click to expand...

Are you referring to the Paul Ryan budget or the Ron Paul budget?

Chiefgator said:

Are you referring to the Paul Ryan budget or the Ron Paul budget?

Click to expand...

I'm referring to projections based on the published plans of all the GOP candidates.

Rhapsody1447 said:

None of the Republican candidates have released a complete budget proposal subject to CBO scoring. The projections you are referring to are independent projections of future tax revenue based on the broad overview of the candidate's tax and spending proposals. Romney has praised both of Ryan's budget proposals and echoes his sentiments for addressing entitlement reform.

Click to expand...

Let's be honest -- Ryan has yet to produce a real budget. His first budget relied upon completely ridiculous assumptions about GDP growth. His second go-round assumes over a trillion dollars in "unspecified" budget cuts. :lol: His new plan also makes laughable assumptions about projected revenues.

Not an unbiased source (American Progress Tax and Budget Policy Director Michael Linden), but I think a pretty accurate assessment:

[T]he House budget’s entire claim to deficit reduction is built on the foundation of those fantasy revenue levels. Without them, the debt goes up, not down. In fact, with all the House budget’s tax cuts properly accounted for, revenue would average just 15.3 percent of GDP from 2013 through 2022, not 18.3 percent. The result: deficits would never drop below 4.4 percent of GDP, and would rise to more than 5 percent of GDP by 2022.

The national debt, measured as a share of GDP, would never decline, surpassing 80 percent by 2014, and 90 percent by 2022. By comparison, President Barack Obama’s budget proposal, released in February, would stabilize the debt by 2015, and bring it down to 76 percent by 2022.

Click to expand...

Hell, even Reagan figured out that you can cut taxes too far. Jeez, people. You've never paid lower taxes than you are right now.

Tigger said:

Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of Education
Social Security
Welfare
Medicare
All Foreign Aid
All Domestic Farm & Business Aid
Disaster Relief Aid

I could go on, but that should give you an idea...

Click to expand...