The GOP Path to Prosperity — 6 TRILLION in Budget Cuts

[hortysir]

Ryan's idiocy is the same rightwing radical nonsense that the crackpots who surrounded Reagan in 1980 wanted to pull.

Economic freedom, personal responsibility, etc.

Conservatism is economic enslavement by the money interests. Do you think further privatizing healthcare where private for-profit interests have already inflated the cost of healthcare to all but intolerable levels is a formula for economic freedom? Do you think taking the oppressive cost of a grossly bloated defense budget off the table is a asset to economic freedom?

While progressive liberalism is enslavement to the federal government.
Do you think the government can do anything better than a private business?

 

[shintao]

Destroying medicare is the path to prosperity? Not quite sure how sticking it to the people who don't fund republican campaigns is good for the country.

Increasing joblessness in the face of a fragile economy is the path to prosperity?

I hope Ryan gets smacked down.

Let me know when you want to talk about cutting military expenses.

Let me know when Liberals want to cut do anything but the military and raise taxes (oh Obama Started another war don’t forget) everything has to be cut, Ryan proposes solutions, your sides push everything down the road, no solutions only demonization of people trying to do something about our SPENDING problems

Be f=good if you knew what the hell you were talking about.............

Our budget, which we call The Path to Prosperity, is very different. For starters, it cuts $6.2 trillion in spending from the president's budget over the next 10 years

That is down the road............

 

[editec]

The founders are relevant because they designed the fucking government, moron. If you don't think it is important to take them into consideration when going forward than by that logic you might as well drive through red lights because that law is really old. Get a grip. The founders got it right.

Do your masters REALLY want to act like the founding fathers, Lib?

Ask YOUR MASTERS IN THE GOP how they feel about imposing tariffs to insure that the USA has industrial base.

And then, just for yucks and giggles, read your history to see how diametrically opposed the founding fathers were to the kind of FREE TRADE we have in place.

Time to wake up, kid.

Everything you have been lead to believe about the founding fathers is a lie.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

That's almost the entire defense industry.

I agree that we should cut back on defense spending - but there is a difference between the government's purchase of legitimate goods and services and funneling taxpayer dollars into failing companies facing bankruptcy.

When was Post Office bailed out?

Can the Postal Service be Saved? - CBS News
This is just a recent example....
They lost 3.8 billion last year.....so tell me how a non subsidized bussiness could operate with loses like that?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

No.

I guess the Founders were against having a Post Office?

lololololol

The USPS is a relic... 95% of mail goes right in the shredder. A book of Forever stamps will last me, well, forever. All my bills are on auto pay and i have these new fangled things called e-mail, text and a phone.

Who the hell is mailing letters?

The Post Office is constitutionally mandated and self funded.

and viewed favorably by 83% of Americans.

Please let the radical Republicans try to destroy the Post Office.

Self funded? The USPS has been losing billions a year for a long time. If you mean funded by the american tax payer.......then youd be right.
It's no differant then our rail system. A loser....

 

[editec]

Economic freedom, personal responsibility, etc.

Conservatism is economic enslavement by the money interests. Do you think further privatizing healthcare where private for-profit interests have already inflated the cost of healthcare to all but intolerable levels is a formula for economic freedom? Do you think taking the oppressive cost of a grossly bloated defense budget off the table is a asset to economic freedom?

While progressive liberalism is enslavement to the federal government.
Do you think the government can do anything better than a private business?

Yes, of course I do.

Government can govern better than businesses.

The business of business isn't to govern, it's to generate profits for its owners.

Seriously...you didn't know this?

 

[editec]

The USPS is a relic... 95% of mail goes right in the shredder. A book of Forever stamps will last me, well, forever. All my bills are on auto pay and i have these new fangled things called e-mail, text and a phone.

Who the hell is mailing letters?

The Post Office is constitutionally mandated and self funded.

and viewed favorably by 83% of Americans.

Please let the radical Republicans try to destroy the Post Office.

Self funded? The USPS has been losing billions a year for a long time. If you mean funded by the american tax payer.......then youd be right.
It's no differant then our rail system. A loser....

Of course when the Founding FAthers created the postal system they never envisioned it would ever be anything BUT a cost generating service that the government would have to support.

I find it odd how often you right wing cranks impose your new vision of what government is supposed to do on the founding fathers who did exactly the opposite of what you imagined they had in mind.

When it comes to channeling the spirit and intention of the founding fathers, you guys aren't very perceptive.

Maybe some of you ought to at least consider opening up book to learn your history, cause the talking heads you're counting on are leading you astray.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

The Post Office is constitutionally mandated and self funded.

and viewed favorably by 83% of Americans.

Please let the radical Republicans try to destroy the Post Office.

Self funded? The USPS has been losing billions a year for a long time. If you mean funded by the american tax payer.......then youd be right.
It's no differant then our rail system. A loser....

Of course when the Founding FAthers created the postal system they never envisioned it would ever be anything BUT a cost generating service that the government would have to support.

I find it odd how often you right wing cranks impose your new vision of what government is supposed to do on the founding fathers who did exactly the opposite of what you imagined they had in mind.

When it comes to channeling the spirit and intention of the founding fathers, you guys aren't very perceptive.

Maybe some of you ought to at least consider opening up book to learn your history, cause the talking heads you're counting on are leading you astray.

At least you admit it. When some clown tries to convince me that the USPS runs in the black I feel the need to correct said clown. Simple as that.

 

[Liberty]

The founders are relevant because they designed the fucking government, moron. If you don't think it is important to take them into consideration when going forward than by that logic you might as well drive through red lights because that law is really old. Get a grip. The founders got it right.

Do your masters REALLY want to act like the founding fathers, Lib?

Ask YOUR MASTERS IN THE GOP how they feel about imposing tariffs to insure that the USA has industrial base.

And then, just for yucks and giggles, read your history to see how diametrically opposed the founding fathers were to the kind of FREE TRADE we have in place.

Time to wake up, kid.

Everything you have been lead to believe about the founding fathers is a lie.

That's fucked up since everything I know is based on their own words.

 

[Big Fitz]

Destroying Medicare for starters.

and it does this how, exactly?

Read the plan.

Sound financial goals and respect for the constitutional powers is often a threat to economic and budgetary retards and their willing idiots who vote for them.

I find it a hoot that you quote Thom Hartmann's "Everything that's wrong in the world can be linked back to Reagan/Conservatism" radical hysteria.

Makes you look oh so much more sane.

 

[boedicca]

What NYC fails to grok is that Medicare is destroying itself via unlimited demand unchecked by individual responsibility.

Taxes would need to be increased by nearly 90% in order to cover projected benefits - and as we have seen so dramatically in public education, increased spending does not equate with improved results.

The Ryan Plan would enable seniors to purchase an insurance plan of their choice based upon their own needs. But somehow, the Left is terrified of millions of individuals making their own decisions instead of being under the control of a few DC "experts".

 

[Big Fitz]

What NYC fails to grok is that Medicare is destroying itself via unlimited demand unchecked by individual responsibility.

Taxes would need to be increased by nearly 90% in order to cover projected benefits - and as we have seen so dramatically in public education, increased spending does not equate with improved results.

The Ryan Plan would enable seniors to purchase an insurance plan of their choice based upon their own needs. But somehow, the Left is terrified of millions of individuals making their own decisions instead of being under the control of a few DC "experts".

A la carte insurance. The death knell of socialized/universal healthcare. Pay for what you want. Now if we could do that with the cable TV industry, I'd actually be interested in getting it.

 

[boedicca]

What NYC fails to grok is that Medicare is destroying itself via unlimited demand unchecked by individual responsibility.

Taxes would need to be increased by nearly 90% in order to cover projected benefits - and as we have seen so dramatically in public education, increased spending does not equate with improved results.

The Ryan Plan would enable seniors to purchase an insurance plan of their choice based upon their own needs. But somehow, the Left is terrified of millions of individuals making their own decisions instead of being under the control of a few DC "experts".

A la carte insurance. The death knell of socialized/universal healthcare. Pay for what you want. Now if we could do that with the cable TV industry, I'd actually be interested in getting it.

If a la carte insurance is Good Enough For Federal Employees, it's certainly Good Enough For Private Citizens.

 

[Liberty]

What NYC fails to grok is that Medicare is destroying itself via unlimited demand unchecked by individual responsibility.

Taxes would need to be increased by nearly 90% in order to cover projected benefits - and as we have seen so dramatically in public education, increased spending does not equate with improved results.

The Ryan Plan would enable seniors to purchase an insurance plan of their choice based upon their own needs. But somehow, the Left is terrified of millions of individuals making their own decisions instead of being under the control of a few DC "experts".

Exactly.

"pro choice only counts for abortions, everything else, YOU DO WHAT WE SAY!!!" -left wing ideology

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The GOP Path to Prosperity — 6 TRILLION in Budget Cuts

Yeah, it's.....

....the CHRISTIAN-Thing-To-Do!!

"And so it is that capitalism and charity can cohabitate. The one lets you indulge, and the other lets you get away with it."

 

[ScreamingEagle]

The GOP Path to Prosperity — 6 TRILLION in Budget Cuts

Yeah, it's.....

....the CHRISTIAN-Thing-To-Do!!

"And so it is that capitalism and charity can cohabitate. The one lets you indulge, and the other lets you get away with it."

Another witless jab from the anti-Christian left....

 

[M14 Shooter]

it privatizes medicare, instead giving seniors vouchers which are to be used toward private health insurance, thereby putting more $ into insurance company coffers. the problem is that the vouchers are not intended to go up in value every year while the costs of insurance will... leaving seniors to carry greater and greater a share of their health insurance.

i'd say that's destroying medicare, wouldn't you?

granny votes and is she ticked off...

Not really, it revamps it, a rose by another name and all that, the issue is will seniors get the coverage they require. I'll wait to hear from NY carb. before I plate my view thx.

privatizing is not revamping. and no, they will not get what they require. they can't.

Prove this.

the GOP has tried to destroy social security and medicare since Roosevelt.

Normally, I'd say this is a lie, but a lie is willfully preseting something that you know is not true as the truth.

Given that are clearly ignorant of the fact that Medicare did not exist until 1965 - 21 years after FDR died - your statement that the GOP has been trying to destroy Medicare "since
Roosevelt" could not posisbly be a lie.

No, it's just -another- example of you illustrating how much of an under-educated, bigoted, partisan fool you really are.

 

[Old Rocks]

I approve. Come on guys, buck up, let's get out of debt. It is going to take sacrifice, Obama himself said as much. Don't be scared. *pats the socialists on the head*

Right on, cuts for everyone that is in the position of not being able to defend themselves. In the meantime, the great shift of wealth from the working poor and the middle class continues.

Any cuts without increases in taxes is just an exercise in ideology and there will be no gain on the deficit or the debt. When has a Republican ever cut either?

The last Republican President that had the national debt decline as a percentage of the GDP was Nixon. Under Ford, Reagan, and both Bush's it has gone up. It went up in Roosevelt's last term because of WW2, but under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, it went down as a percentage of the GDP.

Given the economic situation that President Obama was handed, second only to that FDR started with, it is hardly surprising that we have an increasing debt-GDP ratio at present. What is surprising is that so many retards cannot bring themselves to blame the drunken sailor spending policies of the GOP from 2001 to 2009. Drunken sailor spending and at the same time cutting the income of the government for the benefit of their wealthy base.

 

[boedicca]

I approve. Come on guys, buck up, let's get out of debt. It is going to take sacrifice, Obama himself said as much. Don't be scared. *pats the socialists on the head*

Right on, cuts for everyone that is in the position of not being able to defend themselves. In the meantime, the great shift of wealth from the working poor and the middle class continues.

Any cuts without increases in taxes is just an exercise in ideology and there will be no gain on the deficit or the debt. When has a Republican ever cut either?

The last Republican President that had the national debt decline as a percentage of the GDP was Nixon. Under Ford, Reagan, and both Bush's it has gone up. It went up in Roosevelt's last term because of WW2, but under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, it went down as a percentage of the GDP.

Given the economic situation that President Obama was handed, second only to that FDR started with, it is hardly surprising that we have an increasing debt-GDP ratio at present. What is surprising is that so many retards cannot bring themselves to blame the drunken sailor spending policies of the GOP from 2001 to 2009. Drunken sailor spending and at the same time cutting the income of the government for the benefit of their wealthy base.

If you truly are against this "transfer of wealth", then you should support eliminating the Big Government programs which enable it, including the Federal Reserve. One of the most destructive "transfers" is inflation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Right on, cuts for everyone that is in the position of not being able to defend themselves. In the meantime, the great shift of wealth from the working poor and the middle class continues.

I tire of this.

The left goes after the rich because they are the haves, and the middle class are the have-nots -- and then, in the same breath, argue that the rich are getting their wealth from thos ehave nots. Make up your mind - the wealth cannot get wealth from those that have no wealth

Never mind that reducing spending doesnt transfer wealth to anyone.

Any cuts without increases in taxes is just an exercise in ideology and there will be no gain on the deficit or the debt. When has a Republican ever cut either?

Ant tax hikes without decreases in spending is... exactly the same thing.

The last Republican President that had the national debt decline as a percentage of the GDP was Nixon. Under Ford, Reagan, and both Bush's it has gone up. It went up in Roosevelt's last term because of WW2, but under Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, and Clinton, it went down as a percentage of the GDP.

Don't worry - The Obama will make up for all of that, in like and kind.

Given the economic situation that President Obama was handed, second only to that FDR started with, it is hardly surprising that we have an increasing debt-GDP ratio at present.

Ah.... The Excuse. What a surprise.