GOP Budget Offers First-Rate Vision for First-Rate Country

[Greenbeard]

Show me the exact section where it 'It includes those little nagging details like what income tax rates would be charged for which income brackets'.

The description is on page 39, the numbers are on page 236. Existing tax brackets remain the same, indexed as they are under current law, except the changes made by the EGTRRA and JGTRRA are repealed after 2012 for incomes in excess of $250,000 ($200,000 if single), while current law is extended for incomes below. That means part of the 33% bracket is replaced with a 36% income tax bracket and the entirety of the 35% income tax bracket is replaced with a 39.6% bracket. His budget also offers a 30% floor for millionaire households (i.e. the Buffet Rule). His budget does more of course--limiting itemized deductions and phasing out personal exemptions for high-earners, changing some of the numbers for tax rates on dividends, capital gains, and the estate tax, etc). All proposals with numbers to go along with them.

Ryan's a fucknut and so, apparently, are his cheerleaders. There's a reason Obama's budget can be analyzed and dissected and Ryan's cannot. Ryan's "budget" is a joke.

Anything else I can read for you today?

 

[FA_Q2]

Anything else I can read for you today?

All right Greenbeard, sometimes you are annoying and pretentious as hell but that was simply hilarious. I almost fell out of my chair

 

[Polk]

More bravery from Ryan: He can't name a single loophole he'd close.

Ryan: Not My Job To Say What Tax Loopholes To Close | TPM Livewire

 

[Greenbeard]

In that vein, it's probably worth noting some of the key features of Ryan's "first-rate vision." From the CBO's analysis of what Ryan gave them:

Discretionary spending includes both defense spending and nondefense spending—in roughly equal amounts currently. That combination of other mandatory and discretionary spending was specified to decline from 12 percent of GDP in 2010 to about 6 percent in 2021 and then move in line with the GDP price deflator beginning in 2022, which would generate a further decline relative to GDP. No proposals were specified that would generate that path.

The path for revenues as a percentage of GDP was specified by Chairman Ryan’s staff. The path rises steadily from about 15 percent of GDP in 2010 to 19 percent in 2028 and remains at that level thereafter. There were no specifications of particular revenue provisions that would generate that path.

What a visionary.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Revenues are at a 50 year low right now. To balance the budget without any spending cuts would require getting rid of all discretionary spending (including disbanding the military). If you wanted to shield the military from any cuts, you'd still need to get rid of all other discretionary spending and then chop Social Security checks by 25% and cut all Medicare and Medicaid payments by 25%.

…and drown it in a bathtub.

 

[Polk]

In that vein, it's probably worth noting some of the key features of Ryan's "first-rate vision." From the CBO's analysis of what Ryan gave them:

Discretionary spending includes both defense spending and nondefense spending—in roughly equal amounts currently. That combination of other mandatory and discretionary spending was specified to decline from 12 percent of GDP in 2010 to about 6 percent in 2021 and then move in line with the GDP price deflator beginning in 2022, which would generate a further decline relative to GDP. No proposals were specified that would generate that path.

The path for revenues as a percentage of GDP was specified by Chairman Ryan’s staff. The path rises steadily from about 15 percent of GDP in 2010 to 19 percent in 2028 and remains at that level thereafter. There were no specifications of particular revenue provisions that would generate that path.

What a visionary.

Because getting in to specifics would reveal how radical this plan is. His budget would reduce total discretionary spending to a percentage of GDP lower than just the military budget is today.

 

[BreezeWood]

We dont have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.

Revenues are at a 50 year low right now. To balance the budget without any spending cuts would require getting rid of all discretionary spending (including disbanding the military). If you wanted to shield the military from any cuts, you'd still need to get rid of all other discretionary spending and then chop Social Security checks by 25% and cut all Medicare and Medicaid payments by 25%.

OK, in the last 50 years, have we attain a surplus? NO. The debt keeps mounting on and has been since even before then. So raising more revenue under the current groping and intrusive govt. we have signals they will simply squeeze the private capital more and still spend more money than is obtained in revenue.

The only way to keep this govt. in check and from sliding off the table into a despot and market squeezing is to force them into massive cuts to balance the budget. Cut salaries back to national averages across all public servants, gut wasteful departments and unnecessary ones, oversea war and aid expenditures. The whole gambit.

It wont happen though. Raise the rates though. Mark my words, they will still deficit spend and accumulate more debt.

The Clinton Administration balanced the budget and began paying down the deficit ... Clinton proved that both a beneficent society and monetary discipline can be accomplished simultaneously, a balance the Republicans have yet to accomplish or are willing to allow.

 

[Erand7899]

Why wasn't there capital flight back when the top tax rate was 91%???

Riddle me that.


First, there was relatively little international marketplace at that time, and most of the world markets were very unsafe places to invest one's money.

Second, and the most important, is that the very rich did not pay much of that 91% tax rate, because most of their income came from capital gains and tax free bonds, and not from regular income. The people hit by the high marginal tax rates, then and now, are those that are getting rich, and those are the same people that make this nation prosperous.

 

[rdean]

The right wing is NEVER "first rate".

 

[Listening]

Ryan is a 4th generation multi-millionnaire doofus- It's some kind of Pub hypnosis- dumbest voters in the world...

Must be tough knowing those dumb voters along with the independents you've pissed off are going to make the libs the minority in the senate and are going to put a "pub" in the WH.

You might want to start filling out job applications.

Your welfare is about to dry up.

 

[Listening]

The right wing is NEVER "first rate".

Is this an example of how the right...er...I mean left calls names.

Hypocrite.

 

[Listening]

I'm really hoping that the DNC throws some serious money behind Rob Zerban.

Why ?

He sounds like a great success story.

Isn't it a bit silly to think everyone who gets help also gets this motivated ?

 

[starcraftzzz]

Tit for tat?

No thanks. You're moving the posts.

Ron Paul has the best plan I've seen to date on cutting federal spending. Ending wasteful and unconstitutional depts., EPA, dept of energy, dept of ed. etc..I would go much further and not raise another dollar in taxes. Most "discretionary spending" is wasteful and intrusive to market sectors.

Yes eliminating Medicare SS and spending that creates 10 dollars in benefits for every dollar spent is an awesome plan. An even better one is to intimate the EPA, DOE's of which whose regulations save hundreds of thousandths of lives and trillions of dollars

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Revenues are at a 50 year low right now. To balance the budget without any spending cuts would require getting rid of all discretionary spending (including disbanding the military). If you wanted to shield the military from any cuts, you'd still need to get rid of all other discretionary spending and then chop Social Security checks by 25% and cut all Medicare and Medicaid payments by 25%.

OK, in the last 50 years, have we attain a surplus? NO. The debt keeps mounting on and has been since even before then. So raising more revenue under the current groping and intrusive govt. we have signals they will simply squeeze the private capital more and still spend more money than is obtained in revenue.

The only way to keep this govt. in check and from sliding off the table into a despot and market squeezing is to force them into massive cuts to balance the budget. Cut salaries back to national averages across all public servants, gut wasteful departments and unnecessary ones, oversea war and aid expenditures. The whole gambit.

It wont happen though. Raise the rates though. Mark my words, they will still deficit spend and accumulate more debt.

The Clinton Administration balanced the budget and began paying down the deficit ... Clinton proved that both a beneficent society and monetary discipline can be accomplished simultaneously, a balance the Republicans have yet to accomplish or are willing to allow.

No, Clinton did not do what you claim. Deficit is the difference between expenditure and revenue. One doesn't pay down deficit, they balance budgets. Debt was not paid down by Clinton and I'm tired of having to correct morons on this. Today isn't your day.