At least Paul Ryan has a plan

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guest Ryan and romney will restore the 700 million cut?

It is not a "cut". It is savings realized by Obamacare. The Ryan plan contains the same reductions. Romney will abolish Obamacare. Hence, the savings will not be there. Republicans have so distorted language that "not saving" has become "restore funding".

Jeff, you must be a liberal; you keep quoting facts as though they have relevance to tea party rhetoric.

A guy can dream. But, reality does have a well-known liberal bias.

[Anonymous]

I dont think we are comparing apples to apples here.

If we want to talk about what to do about Medicare, then both sides do the same "cutting" but there are differences in assumptions and actual revisions that both sides differ on.

In regards to a budget, Ryan is the only one with a budget plan. It just so happens that part of that plan involves the meedicare changes along with a host of other things.

Obama doesnt really have a budget plan to speak of and this is what republicans are arguing and attacking him on. Were so focused on medicare right now that we dont see through all his back and forth junk.

Im a dem so I have no real business defending ryan but I think when you are talking budgets, the romney team has a plan (agree or not) while obama just has general themes and ideas.

I am still waiting on the debate on getting the economy in order to happen.

[Anonymous]

We had a plan: Simpson Bowles. We had more plans. Now the plan is big cuts trigger immediately until the tea party wipes the foam off their mouths and get ready to work on compromise.

I can live with this plan either way. Can you?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:I dont think we are comparing apples to apples here.

If we want to talk about what to do about Medicare, then both sides do the same "cutting" but there are differences in assumptions and actual revisions that both sides differ on.

In regards to a budget, Ryan is the only one with a budget plan. It just so happens that part of that plan involves the meedicare changes along with a host of other things.

Obama doesnt really have a budget plan to speak of and this is what republicans are arguing and attacking him on. Were so focused on medicare right now that we dont see through all his back and forth junk.

Im a dem so I have no real business defending ryan but I think when you are talking budgets, the romney team has a plan (agree or not) while obama just has general themes and ideas.

I am still waiting on the debate on getting the economy in order to happen.

I'm sorry, but you are terribly uniformed. The President submits a budget annually to Congress.This is normally a big event with plenty of media coverage. People line up to get one of the printed copies. The budget for Fiscal Year 2013 which begins Oct. 1 is right here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

This is far more detailed than anything Romney/Ryan have produced.

I understand that all of us are inundated with talking points. But, once in a while it is worth stopping and thinking about things. Would Obama really be able to serve almost a full term as President without having a budget?

[Anonymous]

Quote New Repbulic 8 15

Tea Party members are AARP-eligible. Surveys have shown 70 to 75 percent of Tea Party supporters to be 45 or older (compared to about half the overall population). Tea Partiers aren’t against government benefits. They’re against government benefits for other people. They just dress it up in antigovernment rhetoric and convince themselves that Medicare and Social Security benefits are different because they’ve already paid for them through payroll taxes (when in fact beneficiaries take out far more than they put in; that’s why both programs need periodic adjustments). Hence the nonsensical slogan, “Keep government out of Medicare.” The fact that Medicare and Social Security account for most of the welfare-state spending that Tea Partiers profess to despise (and about one-third of all federal spending) is something that Tea Partiers either don’t grasp or choose to ignore.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont think we are comparing apples to apples here.

If we want to talk about what to do about Medicare, then both sides do the same "cutting" but there are differences in assumptions and actual revisions that both sides differ on.

In regards to a budget, Ryan is the only one with a budget plan. It just so happens that part of that plan involves the meedicare changes along with a host of other things.

Obama doesnt really have a budget plan to speak of and this is what republicans are arguing and attacking him on. Were so focused on medicare right now that we dont see through all his back and forth junk.

Im a dem so I have no real business defending ryan but I think when you are talking budgets, the romney team has a plan (agree or not) while obama just has general themes and ideas.

I am still waiting on the debate on getting the economy in order to happen.

I'm sorry, but you are terribly uniformed. The President submits a budget annually to Congress.This is normally a big event with plenty of media coverage. People line up to get one of the printed copies. The budget for Fiscal Year 2013 which begins Oct. 1 is right here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget

This is far more detailed than anything Romney/Ryan have produced.

I understand that all of us are inundated with talking points. But, once in a while it is worth stopping and thinking about things. Would Obama really be able to serve almost a full term as President without having a budget?

i believe we havent had a budget passed by congress in two years now? weve been on continuing resolutions and the like for a while. i get thats not all his fault and i know what the budget process involves so i dont need you to tell me how that works. thanks.

so the real question then becomes, why isnt the media comparing and contrasting any of the budgets the administration has submitted to ryans budget? if we want apples to apples compare budget to budget. dont compare one piece of ryans budget (medicare) to a piece in a different bill (affordable care act) and say its the same thing. its not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree or disagree its more than you can say for Obama and the democrats. Alas I live in DC so the electoral college math doesn't matter but I like the republicans for coming out with their solutions for the future. Obama where art thou?

I don't call a plan that vaguely balances the budget in 2030 a "solution." I don't have a lot of confidence in a guy who spends his career voting for budget busters and then suddenly gets God (or Grover Nordquist) and says he wants to cut the deficit but gives a plan that doesn't really explain how and when he is going to do it. If Paul Ryan has his way, I think we will end up with a huge deficit, worse than now.

[Anonymous]

Paul Krugman on Ryan's alleged "plan":
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/the-ryan-role/

Look, Ryan hasn’t “crunched the numbers”; he has just scribbled some stuff down, without checking at all to see if it makes sense. He asserts that he can cut taxes without net loss of revenue by closing unspecified loopholes; he asserts that he can cut discretionary spending to levels not seen since Calvin Coolidge, without saying how; he asserts that he can convert Medicare to a voucher system, with much lower spending than now projected, without even a hint of how this is supposed to work. This is just a fantasy, not a serious policy proposal.

[Anonymous]

Ryan does not have a plan, anymore than I do. He does not specify ANY of the tax deductions/loopholes that he will have to eliminate to pay for his tax cuts. I am so tired of hearing about how "serious" Ryan is. His "plan" is a joke. He is also NOT a "deficit hawk" either. He is a simple supply-side, trickle down "voodoo' ( in the words of Bush 41) economist and idealogue.

[Anonymous]

I ain't buyin' Ryan.
Romney ain't MY nom'nee.

[Anonymous]

Ryan's plan: more everything off budget, then spend more! Clap, clap, clap, this guy is sooo smart!

[Anonymous]

Obama's plan, government spending, blame bush!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama's plan, government spending, blame bush!

Actually, the spending makes a lot of sense, but he didn't even make a strong attempt to do enough, and Congress cut back on what he did try. And anyone who has forgotten when this started has a severe case of Rip van Winkle.

As for "at least Paul Ryan has a plan", he needs to learn the doctor's oath "First, do no harm!"

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guest Ryan and romney will restore the 700 million cut?

It is not a "cut". It is savings realized by Obamacare. The Ryan plan contains the same reductions. Romney will abolish Obamacare. Hence, the savings will not be there. Republicans have so distorted language that "not saving" has become "restore funding".

Yes, it is a cut. Ask providers and hospitals what the end result will be. By the way, it is $716 BILLION. I notice you misstated it and then did not correct others when they repeated your figure in subsequent posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I guest Ryan and romney will restore the 700 million cut?

It is not a "cut". It is savings realized by Obamacare. The Ryan plan contains the same reductions. Romney will abolish Obamacare. Hence, the savings will not be there. Republicans have so distorted language that "not saving" has become "restore funding".

Yes, it is a cut. Ask providers and hospitals what the end result will be. By the way, it is $716 BILLION. I notice you misstated it and then did not correct others when they repeated your figure in subsequent posts.

And it's in Ryan's plan, too -- except instead of forcing providers to control their costs, he's asking seniors to pony up the difference.