Ryan's Marvelous Budget

[Big Fitz]

Gov. Romney is said to have characterized Rep. Ryan's Budget as Marvelous.

President Obama is currently taking it apart in a major address live to the nation.

I smell the bouquet of "Sour Grapes" 414-0 vintage.

 

[uscitizen]

Better than what? Pointing out that Ryan's budget is nowhere in the ball park of "radical," and that Obama is merely characterizing it as such for political points? Of course the same could be said of Paul Ryan and the Republican Party as well. Paul Ryan's budget doesn't balance until 2040, which is to say that it never balances, and it increases spending. There's nothing radical about that in any sense of the word.

Privatizing Medicare is not radical?

Not particularly.

I rest my case.

 

[Big Fitz]

Better than what? Pointing out that Ryan's budget is nowhere in the ball park of "radical," and that Obama is merely characterizing it as such for political points? Of course the same could be said of Paul Ryan and the Republican Party as well. Paul Ryan's budget doesn't balance until 2040, which is to say that it never balances, and it increases spending. There's nothing radical about that in any sense of the word.

Ryan's budget assumes an end to all non-military discretionary spending.

I think that qualifies as radical.

And yet overall it increases spending.

Baby steps still move the body forward.

 

[Wiseacre]

I heard the speech he gave a year or so back, where he attacked Ryan's initial budget. So tell me, do you think this is actually helpful? Does it qualify as good leadership in your opinion? Doesn't to me.

Leadership? Well, it depends how one defines leadership. In my opinion a leader has a vision, is able to express that opinion and has the personality to convince others it is worth their support.

What President Obama is doing is helpful. He is expressing his vision, clearly and in the context of and in contrast to the Republicans proposed priorities and the on going debate on economic policy.

Romney offers tax cuts, regulatory cuts, and cutting of the Federal Government in the context of "ain't it awful what Obama has done". None of his rhetoric is framed in leadership as defined by me.

His vision seems limited to obtaining the title of POTUS;
He has not been able to offer a vision for a post Obama America;
He has not been able to convince most Republicans.

We can argue all day about whose budget is better. My problem is with the way Obama is handling it; everything is highly politicized with him, since day one. I see no sense of cooperation or compromise, it's all do it my way. You say part of leadership is to convince others to support his policies; doesn't look to me like he's been able to do that successfully.

Here's the real deal though - if Obama gets re-elected, he's not likely to get a democrat-controlled House, and may well lose the Senate to the Republicans. I expect the Senate to be very close, maybe 50-50 or 51-49 either way. Even if the Dems maintain thier majority, if Obama cannot work with the repubs then we're in for 4 long tough years of stagnant growth and maybe another recession.

Dunno if Romney can do better; but IMHO Obama had his chance and blew it. It's time to try another person.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Better than what? Pointing out that Ryan's budget is nowhere in the ball park of "radical," and that Obama is merely characterizing it as such for political points? Of course the same could be said of Paul Ryan and the Republican Party as well. Paul Ryan's budget doesn't balance until 2040, which is to say that it never balances, and it increases spending. There's nothing radical about that in any sense of the word.

Ryan's budget assumes an end to all non-military discretionary spending.

I think that qualifies as radical.

And yet overall it increases spending.

That's called inflation.

Although, I am surprised Ryan didn't claim his budget would end all inflation too.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Privatizing Medicare is not radical?

Not particularly.

I rest my case.

I'm not sure I know what your case is though.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ryan's budget assumes an end to all non-military discretionary spending.

I think that qualifies as radical.

And yet overall it increases spending.

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Ryan's budget assumes an end to all non-military discretionary spending.

I think that qualifies as radical.

And yet overall it increases spending.

That's called inflation.

Although, I am surprised Ryan didn't claim his budget would end all inflation too.

No, it's called not cutting baseline spending.

 

[Big Fitz]

And yet overall it increases spending.

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

 

[DontBeStupid]

And yet overall it increases spending.

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

You guys keep saying that, but no one ever says why we need to do it.

Interesting.

 

[Big Fitz]

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

You guys keep saying that, but no one ever says why we need to do it.

Interesting.

Money can just continue to come from nothing in your mind, can't it?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Not when they have no intention of making any real cuts.

 

[DontBeStupid]

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Really? Then why did Government spending decrease from 2009 to 2010?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is how low the standards are for americans and their parties of choice, and yet they STILL vote for them.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Baby steps still move the body forward.

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

You guys keep saying that, but no one ever says why we need to do it.

Interesting.

The debt and deficit come to mind.

 

[Big Fitz]

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Not when they have no intention of making any real cuts.

Maybe, maybe not. I'll tell you this though, they don't get religion about making real cuts, they won't be given the choice. It will happen regardless of our or their desires and nothing they can do will stop it then.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Really? Then why did Government spending decrease from 2009 to 2010?

Because he hit the accelerator so hard the year before that it broke for a second, but worry not he's back on the path to spending us into oblivion, which any big gov't supporter would approve of.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Not when they have no intention of making any real cuts.

Maybe, maybe not. I'll tell you this though, they don't get religion about making real cuts, they won't be given the choice. It will happen regardless of our or their desires and nothing they can do will stop it then.

Not sure what you're saying here.

 

[Big Fitz]

Going from 90 MPH to 80 MPH towards the cliff isn't much of an improvement. We need a budget that actually cuts baseline spending, and not simply proposed increases in spending. This Ryan budget is a sham. The same type of nonsense the GOP has been doing for years.

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is how low the standards are for americans and their parties of choice, and yet they STILL vote for them.

Oh trust me, I well know we need to make a lot more radical cuts across the board, ban automatic increases and cut loose millions of people from the public tit. This budget doesn't do all that right now, and I know it. But it's a start, and even a start of doing the right thing is better than the continuation of accelerating doing the wrong thing which we've been doing now for far too long.

 

[Big Fitz]

At least it's hitting the breaks. It's better than slamming the accelerator like P-BO wants. Any decrease in speed towards disaster only increases our chance of economic survival.

Really? Then why did Government spending decrease from 2009 to 2010?

Because he hit the accelerator so hard the year before that it broke for a second, but worry not he's back on the path to spending us into oblivion, which any big gov't supporter would approve of.

If true, why'd the deficit shoot up another trillion plus?