Republicans should embrace Paul Ryan's Road Map
Yes, Please, Run on a platform Based on Rep. Paul Ryan's "Road Map" to Bankruptcy.
Pinch me, I must be dreaming.
Washington Examiner: For Republicans, the road map authored by Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin is the most important proposal in domestic policy since Ronald Reagan embraced supply-side economics in the 1980 presidential campaign. It's not only the freshest, boldest, and most comprehensive Republican thinking, it's also the most relevant. If Republicans adopt the road map as their basic ideological blueprint, it offers them the prospect of a landslide in the midterm election this year, followed by victory in the presidential election in 2012.
CBO concluded the plan would "make the Social Security and Medicare programs permanently solvent [and] lift the growing debt burden on future generations, and hold federal taxes to no higher than 19 percent of GDP." Pretty impressive results, I'd say.
The road map is sweeping and politically risky. It would overhaul popular programs like Medicare, relying on individuals to make decisions now made by government.
"…relying on individuals to make decisions now made by government" simply means families are left to make health care rationing decisions instead of insurance and government bureaucrats. Insurance companies are already doing that unfortunately, and the government wouldn't dare do that without a public revolt. But when left to individual tragedies through out the country, who's going to notice? It's a form of divide and conquer. How would that make you sleep at night? A vile and ruthless choice advocated by you know who, Paul Ryan.
Paul Ryan, Dickensian spiritualist part 2:
The Atlantic: Rep. Paul Ryan was on CNBC this morning to plug his bold plan for America's budget. Ryan outlined his plan, the hosts cooed ... Ryan actually finds an additional $1.6 trillion of government revenue every year by creating a 8.5% national consumption tax and eliminating $800 billion in tax expenditures (the money the government purposefully leaves untaxed, like mortgage interest). But he eventually slashes overall taxes by killing the corporate income and capital gains tax and moving the top one percent's effective tax rate down by 14 percentage points.For future reference, check out these facts: Here, and here.
One of the CNBC hosts quotes a report from Citizens for Tax Justice that found Ryan's plan loses $2 trillion over a decade while raising taxes on 90 percent of taxpayers. Ryan laughs, and the host apologizes and throws his hands up in the air as if to say, "Hey I wouldn't invite those wackos over for chips and pinot, I'm just quoting their report in the interest of fairness!" Too bad. There are some really good questions to ask Ryan about his Roadmap, including:
1) You said you disagree with the CTJ methodology. But the Urban Institute also found that the Ryan Roadmap would raise effective tax rates on the middle 60% of the country. What do your numbers say? .....… According to the Tax Policy Center, the richest 0.1 percent of Americans -- those whose incomes exceed $2.9 million a year -- would receive an average tax cut of $1.7 million a year under your plan. Would it be wrong to describe this outcome as anything other than a windfall gain for the rich? …........ Under your plan, the richest 1 percent of Americans see their tax burden cut in half even as the nation struggles to balance spending obligations with
tax revenues. How would you defend that outcome?
By eliminating the capital gains tax, would your plan make hedge fund managers' salaries almost entirely untaxable? Would you consider that an acceptable outcome? …........ By cutting capital gains taxes from 15 percent to zero, might you also introduce a rash of income reclassification across industries that could cost the federal government even more tax revenue? …...... You replace Medicare with a voucher program that grows slower than medical inflation. In other words, the belt size stays the same, but the belly it's trying to contain keeps growing. Would you call this rationing?
No comments:
Post a Comment