The Ryan Budget

[DontBeStupid]

Every elected Republican in Washington is in favour of this budget. Romney has praised it in the past and many on this board have praised it as well. Both liberals and conservatives talk about wanting to discuss the issues, so okay, lets discuss an issue. Lets discuss the Ryan Budget.

If you're in favour of it, why? Specifically, how will it help the country?

If you're not in favour of it, why? Specifically, what don't you like and what would you do instead?

Everyone says they want to talk about the issues, so lets talk.

If you haven't had the chance to read the budget yet, here it is: Fiscal Year 2013 Budget | Budget.House.Gov

This is why I support thr Ryan budget. Though it does not go far enough. So what does Obama have? How long has it been since democrats proposed a budget? Who voted for Obamas budget?

The Ryan Budget proposes trillions in tax cuts for those making over $250K a year. We would balance the budget faster without those.

 

[courseofhistory]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:

1) Cutting spending means laying off workers, and we don't need to be firing people in this economy. Ryan's Budget would cut government spending as a percentage of GDP from 12% to about 3%. That's a lot of lay offs.

2) Asking future seniors to pay more money out of pocket for health care will limit the disposable money those seniors have. This will reduce their purchasing power and demand for goods will drop and that will hurt the economy. The CBO projected the Ryan Budget would have future seniors paying their Medicare voucher plus all their Social Security just to get coverage.

3) Eliminating virtually all support for all levels of education will not assist people in achieving the American Dream. Education is the #1 way to advance higher in life. The Ryan Budget cuts spending on education, head start programs and student financial aid for college.

4) Cutting taxes for those making over $250K a year will not lead to an explosion in revenue, which is what the Ryan Budget is predicting. The last three times taxes have been cut, revenue has dropped.

So is Romney!

 

[kiwiman127]

Here's what the Tax Policy Center has to say about Ryan's Budget.
The Tax Policy Center is a non partisan tax think tank. From Wiki: In 2002, tax experts who had served in the Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton administrations established the Tax Policy Center to provide unbiased analysis of tax issues. The following year TPC developed a comprehensive tax simulation model to analyze the federal income tax and proposals to change it. That model has evolved to incorporate new and additional data, changes in federal tax law, and other aspects of the tax system and the economy
Tax Policy Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Ryan’s Budget Plan: More Big Tax Cuts for the Rich
No surprise here, but the tax cuts in Paul Ryan’s 2013 budget plan would result in huge benefits for high-income people and very modest—or no— benefits for low income working households, according to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center.
TPC looked only at the tax reductions in Ryan’s plan, which also included offsetting–but unidentified–cuts in tax credits, exclusions, and deductions. TPC found that in 2015, relative to today’s tax system, those making $1 million or more would enjoy an average tax cut of $265,000 and see their after-tax income increase by 12.5 percent. By contrast, half of those making between $20,000 and $30,000 would get no tax cut at all. On average, people in that income group would get a tax reduction of $129. Ryan would raise their after-tax income by 0.5 percent.
Nearly all middle-income households (those making between $50,000 and $75,000) would see their taxes fall, by an average of roughly $1,000. Ryan would increase their after-tax income by about 2 percent.
Ryan would extend all of the 2001/2003 tax cuts, and then consolidate individual rates to just two—10 and 25 percent. In addition, he’d repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, reduce the corporate rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, and kill the tax provisions of the 2010 health reform law.
Earlier this week, TPC projected the tax cuts in Ryan’s budget would add $4.6 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade, even after extending the 2001/2003 tax cuts, which would add another $5.4 trillion to the deficit.
For more go to: TaxVox » Blog Archive » Paul Ryan

======================================

So in the end;
* We get an additional 4.6 trillion dollars added to the deficit;
**The millionaires would see an additional 12.5 increase in their income after the Ryan tax reductions while the middle class would only see a 2% increase in their income after Ryan's tax cuts. The working poor would see of only a half percent increase in their income after the cuts.

Ever since the 80's the working middle class has been spinning it's wheels when it comes to wage growth after inflation. Since the recession started in December of 2007, the middle class has loss wealth that is a long ways to ever being recovered. Their share of the National Income is at record low levels. In other words, the middle class is being left behind. But those who would reap a windfall with the Ryan Budget in most cases, have already recovered their lost wealth from the recession and gained even more and their share of the National Income naturally increased.
Ryan's budget is a slap in the face of 90% or more of Americans. It's plutocracy in action.

 

[francoHFW]

Oblivious Idiot Greedy Millionnaires 2012!! Smelling landslide...

 

[Too Tall]

Here's what the Tax Policy Center has to say about Ryan's Budget.
The Tax Policy Center is a non partisan tax think tank. From Wiki: In 2002, tax experts who had served in the Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton administrations established the Tax Policy Center to provide unbiased analysis of tax issues. The following year TPC developed a comprehensive tax simulation model to analyze the federal income tax and proposals to change it. That model has evolved to incorporate new and additional data, changes in federal tax law, and other aspects of the tax system and the economy
Tax Policy Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Ryan’s Budget Plan: More Big Tax Cuts for the Rich
No surprise here, but the tax cuts in Paul Ryan’s 2013 budget plan would result in huge benefits for high-income people and very modest—or no— benefits for low income working households, according to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center.
TPC looked only at the tax reductions in Ryan’s plan, which also included offsetting–but unidentified–cuts in tax credits, exclusions, and deductions. TPC found that in 2015, relative to today’s tax system, those making $1 million or more would enjoy an average tax cut of $265,000 and see their after-tax income increase by 12.5 percent. By contrast, half of those making between $20,000 and $30,000 would get no tax cut at all. On average, people in that income group would get a tax reduction of $129. Ryan would raise their after-tax income by 0.5 percent.
Nearly all middle-income households (those making between $50,000 and $75,000) would see their taxes fall, by an average of roughly $1,000. Ryan would increase their after-tax income by about 2 percent.
Ryan would extend all of the 2001/2003 tax cuts, and then consolidate individual rates to just two—10 and 25 percent. In addition, he’d repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax, reduce the corporate rate from 35 percent to 25 percent, and kill the tax provisions of the 2010 health reform law.
Earlier this week, TPC projected the tax cuts in Ryan’s budget would add $4.6 trillion to the federal deficit over the next decade, even after extending the 2001/2003 tax cuts, which would add another $5.4 trillion to the deficit.
For more go to: TaxVox » Blog Archive » Paul Ryan

======================================

So in the end;
* We get an additional 4.6 trillion dollars added to the deficit;
**The millionaires would see an additional 12.5 increase in their income after the Ryan tax reductions while the middle class would only see a 2% increase in their income after Ryan's tax cuts. The working poor would see of only a half percent increase in their income after the cuts.

Ever since the 80's the working middle class has been spinning it's wheels when it comes to wage growth after inflation. Since the recession started in December of 2007, the middle class has loss wealth that is a long ways to ever being recovered. Their share of the National Income is at record low levels. In other words, the middle class is being left behind. But those who would reap a windfall with the Ryan Budget in most cases, have already recovered their lost wealth from the recession and gained even more and their share of the National Income naturally increased.
Ryan's budget is a slap in the face of 90% or more of Americans. It's plutocracy in action.

So much for that BS. This at your link.

Posts and Comments are solely the opinion of the author and not that of the Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute, or Brookings Institution.

 

[DontBeStupid]

I should add.

5) The Ryan Budget repeals the Affordable Care Act, with no plan for keeping any of the popular elements. As a result, millions of Americans who currently have (and pay for) health insurance would lose their coverage overnight.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Fiscal Year 2013 Budget | Budget.House.Gov

This is what I've found:

For years, both political parties have made empty promises to the American people. Unfortunately, the President refuses to take responsibility for avoiding the debt-fueled crisis before us. Instead, his policies have put us on the path to debt and decline.

Very partisan and clearly a half-truth. A Republican Congress with Bush in the White House put our economy on a fast track to crisis. TARP was signed by President Bush (see: Troubled Asset Relief Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and was necessary do to policies in effect before Obama was elected to the office of president.

The President and his party’s leaders refuse to take action in the face of the most predictable economic crisis in our nation’s history. The President’s budget calls for more spending and more debt, while Senate Democrats – for over 1,000 days – have refused to pass a budget. This unserious approach to budgeting has serious consequences for American families, seniors, and the next generation.

Again, more partisanship and lies by omission. The President has taken actions in the face of the economic crisis which he inherited from the prior administration and Congress. Yes, the President's budget likely did call for more spending, spending necessary because 1) banks resuced by TARP refused to make loans; 2) focused on profit first, not the nations; and 3) continue on the path which lead to the crisis of October 2008. More partisan hyperbole in final sentence.

We reject the broken politics of the past. The American people deserve real solutions and honest leadership. That’s what we’re delivering with our budget, The Path to Prosperity. House Republicans are advancing a plan of action for American renewal.

Complete and total demagoguery.

Our budget:
•
Cuts government spending to protect hardworking taxpayers;
How will cutting government jobs - the only way to cut government spending to have a meaningful impact on the dept. Yet, what are the consequences when government employees lose their jobs and health insurance? How will this impact the community's in which they live and work?

•
Tackles the drivers of our debt, so our troops don’t pay the price for Washington’s failure to take action;
"drivers of our debt"? That would be The Congress; using the troops in this manner is nothing but emotional hyperbole.

•
Restores economic freedom and ensures a level playing field for all by putting an end to special-interest favoritism and corporate welfare
I'll believe this when the Congress passes legislation taking away their benefits.

•
Reverses the President’s policies that drive up gas prices, and instead promotes an all-of the-above strategy for unlocking American energy production to help lower costs, create jobs, and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

A shout out to the oil cartel; green and renewable energy policy and respect for our environment does not drive up gas prices. Green $ renewable energy sources will lower costs in time, crate jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

•
Strengthens health and retirement security by taking power away from government bureaucrats and empowering patients instead with control over their own care;

Total misrepresentation, a shout out to Big Pharma and Big Health Care Insurance Agencies.

•
Reforms our broken tax code to spur job creation and economic opportunity by lowering rates, closing loopholes, and putting hardworking taxpayers ahead of special interests.

More demagoguery, sure taxes will go down for all, but fees will rise across the board. Fees are regressive, and will impact the many and not the few.


At its core, this plan of action is about putting an end to empty promises from a bankrupt government and restoring the fundamental American promise: ensuring our children have more opportunity and inherit a stronger America than our parents gave us.

Oh, what a bunch of crap.

 

[Publius1787]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:

1) Cutting spending means laying off workers, and we don't need to be firing people in this economy. Ryan's Budget would cut government spending as a percentage of GDP from 12% to about 3%. That's a lot of lay offs.

Oh how I long for the Calving Coolidge days when government spending war far less than 1% of GDP, taxes were dramatically lowered and gave rise to the roaring 20’s. Or perhaps the post WWII days when all the Keynesian economist said that reducing spending would lead us in to another depression, but instead, we got a 50’s boom.
Nevertheless, more spending means more printing/borrowing, which means, higher inflation. Sure, government workers will keep their inefficient and unnecessary jobs, no doubt making the public sector unions happy, however the rise in inflation means a rise in prices, and therefore, a pay reduction for everyone else who works a real job and whose pay is not taken in to consideration with respect to the increase in inflation. Hardly a benefit to the middle class huh? This prevents economic recovery as the inflation out paces the ability of businesses to adapt and any workers hired get much less than a liveable wage.
Just look what happened to the stimulus. The stimulus went to projects the states were going to implement with or without that money. So instead of the extra spending that was supposed to bring us out on this recession, (below 8% remember?) the stimulus fell flat. Did you understand that?
As for long term stimulus projects and investments like high speed rail, the states cannot afford to operate them when completed and the costs are way over initial estimates.

As far as bailing out/ granting privileged loans companies who fail to compete in the open market without government assistance like GM or Solyndra, such measures on delay the inevitable. Besides, the U.S. Constitution, (Not that you’ve ever read it) says that bankruptcies shall be uniform throughout the United States. Such a bankruptcy, (remember that bankruptcy does not mean to go out of business) would have allowed restructuring, private investment, and renegotiation of union contracts. Make no mistake about it, the GM bailout was done in order to preserve the unions, not to make the industry stronger. That why Obama put the union members in front of investors.

And then there is Obamacare. I could write forever on this one and no serious person now disputes that it is and will be way over its initial budget. However, you would be hard pressed to find anyone who seriously believes that (1) you will be allowed to keep your insurance if you want when it is more cost effective to dump healthcare for your employees, (2) The cost of insurance will go down when people cannot be denied for preexisting conditions and spend waaaaay less on the individual mandate than an actual insurance policy, and (3) It is sustainable when it is full of double counting and gimmicks.
Finally, government incentives like cash for clunkers showed us all, that while there is a temporary increase in car buying, it is offset by the temporary dip in car sales after the program has ended, thereby, accomplishing nothing that the market would not have done itself. I will stop here but theres waaaay more!

In the end, government cannot bring us out of a recession or create a single job. People do this despite government, not because of it. Any politician who says that government can create private jobs is full of it. Any politician who says that government can create an environment of liberty and individual prosperity, and therefore, an environment that encourages job creation, should be given a shot. Does Obama do this? No. Barriers to entery, regulation, taxation, wealth redistribution, and deamonization, is no way to foster prosperity.

 

[Publius1787]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:

2) Asking future seniors to pay more money out of pocket for health care will limit the disposable money those seniors have. This will reduce their purchasing power and demand for goods will drop and that will hurt the economy. The CBO projected the Ryan Budget would have future seniors paying their Medicare voucher plus all their Social Security just to get coverage.

I think printing the money to make Medicare possible (It is completely insolvent) does more to reduce income through inflation than will ever be gained via sticking extra money in the pockets of seniors via failing to adjust for the rising debt it creates. Not to mention the half a trillion dollars raided form Medicare to make Obamacare possible. Though I know you would rather take money from me in order to take care of someone else’s parents, I prefer to help my own parents. And if your mother has to pay more for her health insurance to keep me from paying for it then so be it. She is not my responsibility and if she was worth anything she should have invested her money properly instead of looking toward government to grant her a retirement. But then again, in some circumstances, government schemes can work. In fact, it worked so well in Galveston County, Texas that Democrats voted to prevent every other city/state from being able to do the same, thereby, keeping seniors dependent on Democrats. Which is why they hate the Ryan plan so much. It not only takes away part of the necessity to depend on government, but it works a thousand times better, effectively destroying the ability for Democrats to court the senior vote by making commercials of Ryan dumping them off a cliff.

 

[GWV5903]

The Ryan Budget is an attempt at the very least to control our out of control spending, what has O'Dummy proposed with any support from anyone?

The subject isn't about Ryan or Romney, it's about how little O'Dummy has accomplished...

That would be a big fat ZERO!!!

 

[Publius1787]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:.

3) Eliminating virtually all support for all levels of education will not assist people in achieving the American Dream. Education is the #1 way to advance higher in life. The Ryan Budget cuts spending on education, head start programs and student financial aid for college.

If funding for education was tied to success then Detroit Michigan would have the best students in the world and America would be # 1 in education. If Barack Obama had not blocked vouchers for poor DC students to choose their own school in order to protect the teachers unions perhaps,…. no ….absolutely they would get a better education. On the other hand, I can go to my wife’s home country where students learn on dirt floors, pick a random middle school student, and put them up against any high school student in any unionized liberal run district in the United States. Why? Because unlike America where an education is taken for granted and people feel that they are not only entitled to it, but the government can do a good job in teaching the students in lieu of the parents, these countries view a school as a supplement to what is taught at home and the parents, the ones ultimately responsible for the education of a child. Instead, we incentivize the poor to mooch off of the government and have children they can’t afford and lack the education to teach. Therefore, the children mimic the behavior of the welfare mom that spawned them creating more idiots, drug dealers, illegitimate children, and democrats who vote for their own welfare interests. How can a child in that environment be expected to learn his way out of poverty?

 

[Avorysuds]

Every elected Republican in Washington is in favour of this budget. Romney has praised it in the past and many on this board have praised it as well. Both liberals and conservatives talk about wanting to discuss the issues, so okay, lets discuss an issue. Lets discuss the Ryan Budget.

If you're in favour of it, why? Specifically, how will it help the country?

If you're not in favour of it, why? Specifically, what don't you like and what would you do instead?

Everyone says they want to talk about the issues, so lets talk.

If you haven't had the chance to read the budget yet, here it is: Fiscal Year 2013 Budget | Budget.House.Gov

Wrong, 5 GOP members voted against it in the Senate.

One was Rand Paul.

Next!

I never said they all voted for it.

Every elected Republican in Washington is in favour of this budget.

Either say something and don't twist it or don't say anything at all. Either you go by the actual votes or you pretend you know everyones personal opinion of Rayn's budget.

 

[Publius1787]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:

4) Cutting taxes for those making over $250K a year will not lead to an explosion in revenue, which is what the Ryan Budget is predicting. The last three times taxes have been cut, revenue has dropped.

Every time in our history where we cut taxes the economy boomed (See Calvin Coolidge, Post WWII, JFK, Bush etc.). What do you think those wealthy people do with their money? Stuff it under a mattress? They invest it. If they put it in the bank the inflation would eat them alive. The last three times revenue has dropped? No, revenue was raised if you take in to account the dot com bubble, September 11th, etc. in fact, marginal gains rates, despite having a cut in taxes, showed an increase in revenue.

Watch at 6:09 [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0Ocv8aMBjk&feature=relmfu]Milton Friedman on Donahue 1979 (4/5) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Dick Tuck]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsHw92j9P0Q]Gingrich: GOP Budget Plan Is "Right-Wing Social Engineering" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Truthmatters]

We don't need to worry about Ryan's budget because Romney is distancing himself from it after he once said it was "marvelous", proving he'll say anything for votes and making one wonder why the hell he picked Ryan then!??? Yikes!

because he was told to

 

[francoHFW]

I know- let's cut taxes on the bloated rich and destroy Medicare! LOL Welcome to NY 26th, Dem for the first time ever...

 

[Publius1787]

I know- let's cut taxes on the bloated rich and destroy Medicare! LOL Welcome to NY 26th, Dem for the first time ever...

here, here, because we all know that those dirty rich owe you healthcare.

 

[hortysir]

Fiscal Year 2013 Budget | Budget.House.Gov

This is what I've found:

For years, both political parties have made empty promises to the American people. Unfortunately, the President refuses to take responsibility for avoiding the debt-fueled crisis before us. Instead, his policies have put us on the path to debt and decline.

Very partisan and clearly a half-truth. A Republican Congress with Bush in the White House put our economy on a fast track to crisis. TARP was signed by President Bush (see: Troubled Asset Relief Program - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) and was necessary do to policies in effect before Obama was elected to the office of president.

The President and his party’s leaders refuse to take action in the face of the most predictable economic crisis in our nation’s history. The President’s budget calls for more spending and more debt, while Senate Democrats – for over 1,000 days – have refused to pass a budget. This unserious approach to budgeting has serious consequences for American families, seniors, and the next generation.

Again, more partisanship and lies by omission. The President has taken actions in the face of the economic crisis which he inherited from the prior administration and Congress. Yes, the President's budget likely did call for more spending, spending necessary because 1) banks resuced by TARP refused to make loans; 2) focused on profit first, not the nations; and 3) continue on the path which lead to the crisis of October 2008. More partisan hyperbole in final sentence.

We reject the broken politics of the past. The American people deserve real solutions and honest leadership. That’s what we’re delivering with our budget, The Path to Prosperity. House Republicans are advancing a plan of action for American renewal.

Complete and total demagoguery.

Our budget:
•
Cuts government spending to protect hardworking taxpayers;
How will cutting government jobs - the only way to cut government spending to have a meaningful impact on the dept. Yet, what are the consequences when government employees lose their jobs and health insurance? How will this impact the community's in which they live and work?

•
Tackles the drivers of our debt, so our troops don’t pay the price for Washington’s failure to take action;
"drivers of our debt"? That would be The Congress; using the troops in this manner is nothing but emotional hyperbole.

•
Restores economic freedom and ensures a level playing field for all by putting an end to special-interest favoritism and corporate welfare
I'll believe this when the Congress passes legislation taking away their benefits.

•
Reverses the President’s policies that drive up gas prices, and instead promotes an all-of the-above strategy for unlocking American energy production to help lower costs, create jobs, and reduce dependence on foreign oil.

A shout out to the oil cartel; green and renewable energy policy and respect for our environment does not drive up gas prices. Green $ renewable energy sources will lower costs in time, crate jobs and reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

•
Strengthens health and retirement security by taking power away from government bureaucrats and empowering patients instead with control over their own care;

Total misrepresentation, a shout out to Big Pharma and Big Health Care Insurance Agencies.

•
Reforms our broken tax code to spur job creation and economic opportunity by lowering rates, closing loopholes, and putting hardworking taxpayers ahead of special interests.

More demagoguery, sure taxes will go down for all, but fees will rise across the board. Fees are regressive, and will impact the many and not the few.


At its core, this plan of action is about putting an end to empty promises from a bankrupt government and restoring the fundamental American promise: ensuring our children have more opportunity and inherit a stronger America than our parents gave us.

Oh, what a bunch of crap.

Just because you reply in Technicolor doesn't mean that you've supported anything you claim.

Ryan's budget .pdf is 99 pages long and full of sources to support it's claims.
You linked Wiki......

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm sure it will come as no surprise that I am against the Ryan Budget, even if it is a rough draft or first pass. Here's why:

1) Cutting spending means laying off workers, and we don't need to be firing people in this economy. Ryan's Budget would cut government spending as a percentage of GDP from 12% to about 3%. That's a lot of lay offs.

2) Asking future seniors to pay more money out of pocket for health care will limit the disposable money those seniors have. This will reduce their purchasing power and demand for goods will drop and that will hurt the economy. The CBO projected the Ryan Budget would have future seniors paying their Medicare voucher plus all their Social Security just to get coverage.

3) Eliminating virtually all support for all levels of education will not assist people in achieving the American Dream. Education is the #1 way to advance higher in life. The Ryan Budget cuts spending on education, head start programs and student financial aid for college.

4) Cutting taxes for those making over $250K a year will not lead to an explosion in revenue, which is what the Ryan Budget is predicting. The last three times taxes have been cut, revenue has dropped.

I am sure it comes as no surprise that you are an idiot, here is why.

1. The Ryan budget does not cut spending. It projects an increase in spending of $1 trillion over the next 10 years. That is less than what Obama's budget calls for,m but that does not equal a cut.
2. The CBO projected no such thing. What they projected, which may or may not be right, is an increase in medical spending. No one knows how accurate that projection actually is, nor do they know how the shared spending will fall out vis a vis government spending and individuals.
3. Since the federal government started throwing money at our schools we have gone from one of the best school systems in the world to one of the worst. Why, exactly, do you think spending federal dollars on education is a good thing?
4. The last three times taxes were cut there was an immediate drop in tax revenue, and an increase in GDP, which led to total revenues actually increasing within a few months.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Every elected Republican in Washington is in favour of this budget. Romney has praised it in the past and many on this board have praised it as well. Both liberals and conservatives talk about wanting to discuss the issues, so okay, lets discuss an issue. Lets discuss the Ryan Budget.

If you're in favour of it, why? Specifically, how will it help the country?

If you're not in favour of it, why? Specifically, what don't you like and what would you do instead?

Everyone says they want to talk about the issues, so lets talk.

If you haven't had the chance to read the budget yet, here it is: Fiscal Year 2013 Budget | Budget.House.Gov

This is why I support thr Ryan budget. Though it does not go far enough. So what does Obama have? How long has it been since democrats proposed a budget? Who voted for Obamas budget?

The Ryan Budget proposes trillions in tax cuts for those making over $250K a year. We would balance the budget faster without those.

That is complete bullshit.