New at WSJ: Paul Ryan announces that GOP’s 2012 budget would cut $6.2 trillion in spending over 10 years

posted at 8:37 pm on April 4, 2011 by Allahpundit

It’ll be big news all day tomorrow after they formally roll it out on the Hill so familiarize yourself with the broad strokes now. Paul Ryan was coy yesterday when Chris Wallace pressed him for a firm number, but here it is: $4.4 trillion less in spending over 10 years if we’re going by CBO’s numbers or, if you prefer to use Obama’s cynical, unserious, catastrophic budget proposal as the baseline, it’s $6.2 trillion over the next decade. Just a few hours ago, the Treasury Department warned that the U.S. will hit the debt ceiling no later than May 16, with a do-or-die date of July 8 if the first deadline is missed and Treasury has to use “extraordinary measures” to extend it. So at long, long, long, long last, we’re finally going to have that “adult conversation” on entitlements that both parties have been promising us for decades — with a federal default bearing down on us, no less.

How long do you suppose the tenor of the conversation will stay “adult”? Over/under is 36 hours.

The president’s recent budget proposal would accelerate America’s descent into a debt crisis. It doubles debt held by the public by the end of his first term and triples it by 2021. It imposes $1.5 trillion in new taxes, with spending that never falls below 23% of the economy. His budget permanently enlarges the size of government. It offers no reforms to save government health and retirement programs, and no leadership.

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, reduces the debt as a percentage of the economy, and puts the nation on a path to actually pay off our national debt. Our proposal brings federal spending to below 20% of gross domestic product (GDP), consistent with the postwar average, and reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion.

A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year, bring the unemployment rate down to 4% by 2015, and result in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade. It spurs economic growth, with $1.5 trillion in additional real GDP over the decade. According to Heritage’s analysis, it would result in $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average of $1,000 in additional family income each year…

This budget would focus on growth by reforming the nation’s outdated tax code, consolidating brackets, lowering tax rates, and assuming top individual and corporate rates of 25%. It maintains a revenue-neutral approach by clearing out a burdensome tangle of deductions and loopholes that distort economic activity and leave some corporations paying no income taxes at all.

Read it all. Everything is on the table: Medicare, Social Security, even “Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s plan to target inefficiencies at the Pentagon.” Peter Robinson calls it “the most important domestic proposal of our lifetimes” and “the first concerted, credible effort to shrink the federal government since the birth of the welfare state seven decades ago.” TPM calls it, well, you can guess. I keep hoping against hope that The One will gradually realize that signing on to this plan, or some version of it, is actually in his interest politically. There’s literally nothing he could do to alienate the left to the point where they won’t vote for him — most of them trust his judgment more than they trust their own, an unforeseen side effect of Hopenchange messianism — so he could win over independents by coopting Ryan’s plan and have nothing to fear about losing liberals in the general election. There’d be nothing much to fear from seniors, either: I think Ryan and Boehner are so sincere about tackling this problem that they’ll give O whatever bipartisan cover he needs to get this done. (Boehner has promised as much.) And needless to say, whoever the GOP nominee ends up being, there’ll be no complaints from him/her that Obama and the GOP have cut too much. Take the deal, champ.

Via Breitbart and Right Vid, here’s Rush Limbaugh not trying to contain his excitement about the proposal.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Caught him on the talking head shows on Sunday; well in command of the facts, as usual. Calm, assertive, poised.

massrighty on April 4, 2011 at 8:40 PM

Over/under is 36 hours.

Ahaha. No, seriously, it will take way less time than that.

Emily M. on April 4, 2011 at 8:41 PM

Who will use the “extremist” word first…?

d1carter on April 4, 2011 at 8:42 PM

This could be a modern Magna Carta.

SouthernGent on April 4, 2011 at 8:42 PM

I keep hoping against hope that The One will gradually realize that signing on to this plan, or some version of it, is actually in his interest politically.

And yet, you know that hope is in vain…because Obama doesn’t want this. He’s has a very ‘different’ vision for American and prosperity and a role as a major global power aren’t part of that vision. All that’s left is golf and vacations.

AUINSC on April 4, 2011 at 8:43 PM

Over/under is 36 hours.

How long until Chuck Schumer’s next conference call?

Ted Torgerson on April 4, 2011 at 8:46 PM

This is really good news. I’m looking forward to the Dem’s. reaction. I’d loooooove to have some reporter *cough cough TAPPER cough* ask Sec. Clinton if she’d vote for it were she still a Senator.

Weight of Glory on April 4, 2011 at 8:48 PM

Will this be enough?

Does it eliminate the deficit? I would like to at least stop adding problems on a yearly basis.

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 8:48 PM

This is all just lip service. Just like cutting $100 billion from the fy2011 budget was. All talk, nothing they are actually going to do.

paulsur on April 4, 2011 at 8:48 PM

Echoes of Clinton reluctantly signing on welfare reform and then taking credit for it. If Obama pulls the same move, his reelection is a lock.

John the Libertarian on April 4, 2011 at 8:48 PM

This is really good news. I’m looking forward to the Dem’s. reaction. I’d loooooove to have some reporter *cough cough TAPPER cough* ask Sec. Clinton if she’d vote for it were she still a Senator.

Doesnt matter, you wont get enough republicans to vote for it to matter.

paulsur on April 4, 2011 at 8:49 PM

How many years will it take to balance the budget using this plan?

FloatingRock on April 4, 2011 at 8:49 PM

“It’s going absolutely nowhere,” said David Kendall, of Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank.

“(Ryan’s) budget comes from the ideological backwaters of the debate,” he said.

artist on April 4, 2011 at 8:50 PM

This is history books time.

Who would have thought that an unassuming representative from Wisconsin might end up saving this nation from utter financial ruin.

gophergirl on April 4, 2011 at 8:51 PM

Who will use the “extremist” word first…?

d1carter on April 4, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Click on TPM link. They already used the r-word.

John the Libertarian on April 4, 2011 at 8:51 PM

Hmmmmm, just wonder if he has volunteered to stand up on the ridgeline while someone else works their way around the flank. Dunno, but kudos to him for speaking forbidden words.

Limerick on April 4, 2011 at 8:52 PM

How many years will it take to balance the budget using this plan?

They wont actually use this plan. It is just show and tell. Smoke and mirrors. All gittery kinda crapola for the tea partiers.

They would never seriouslt do it. They cant even cut a measely $100 billion from the current budget.

paulsur on April 4, 2011 at 8:52 PM

so, 620 Billion per year, not bad

jp on April 4, 2011 at 8:53 PM

Obama kills it, then Ryan is elevanted to a VP contender on a budget/entitlement/tax reform ticket.

DaveS on April 4, 2011 at 8:53 PM

I keep hoping against hope that The One will gradually realize that signing on to this plan, or some version of it, is actually in his interest politically.

That would mean that he would be showing some vestiges of leadership – not gonna happen, I’m thinking.

Chip on April 4, 2011 at 8:53 PM

so, 620 Billion per year, not bad

jp on April 4, 2011 at 8:53 PM

It’s definitely a giant step in the right direction for a change

gophergirl on April 4, 2011 at 8:54 PM

BHO has been so courageous on his budget, he might just go for this…./

d1carter on April 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM

Ryan 2012 with Palin’s endorsement.

milemarker2020 on April 4, 2011 at 8:55 PM

My dream ticket remains the same:

Palin/Ryan 2012

miConsevative on April 4, 2011 at 8:56 PM

I keep hoping against hope that The One will gradually realize that signing on to this plan, or some version of it, is actually in his interest politically.

You still believe in Santa, don’t you?

ButterflyDragon on April 4, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Now this is what you force a shutdown over, not a measly $30 billion.

Mark1971 on April 4, 2011 at 8:56 PM

I like the chart and the title.

The chart puts it all out there in red and green. Good color choices.

“A Choice of Two Futures”

INC on April 4, 2011 at 8:58 PM

They wont actually use this plan. It is just show and tell. Smoke and mirrors. All gittery kinda crapola for the tea partiers.

They would never seriouslt do it. They cant even cut a measely $100 billion from the current budget.

paulsur on April 4, 2011 at 8:52 PM

Not true and you’re not paying attention. There IS no current budget to cut from, since the Dems couldn’t pass one last year. What’s happening now with the $30 billion in cuts is not what Ryan is talking about. Ryan’s proposing an actual budget here.

MikeknaJ on April 4, 2011 at 8:59 PM

As Rush sometimes says:

New York Times headline:

Ryan to Cut Six Trillion–Women and Minorities Hardest Hit

predator on April 4, 2011 at 8:59 PM

Now this is what you force a shutdown over, not a measly $30 billion.

Mark1971 on April 4, 2011 at 8:56 PM

Exactly.

MikeknaJ on April 4, 2011 at 9:00 PM

OT: Why do SEIU and assorted socialist vermin organizations have to be marching outside every freakin’ time I’m forced to work from my company’s San Francisco office? I’m on the 23rd floor and I swear I can hear all of their hoodlum chanting as clear as if they were in the next office over. There must be thousands of them down there. It’s been going on for well over an hour now. Don’t they have real jobs?
/Rant

steebo77 on April 4, 2011 at 9:00 PM

I’m not sure if this is thee latest revised edition!

A Road Map of America’s Future (Version 2.0)
********************************************

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/Roadmap2Final2.pdf

From
=====

The Roadmap Plan Share(PDF)

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/Plan/#Intro

canopfor on April 4, 2011 at 9:00 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Wishfull dreams, as this plan is what is actually needed it is merely being thrown out as the “retail” price and massive concessions will follow, “R’s” will be able to say they tried, “D’s” will get to call the plan Draconian and tout how many childeren it will kill. Meanwhile they will be handing over the pink slip and the keys to the chinese.

Koa on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

“A Choice of Two Futures”

INC on April 4, 2011 at 8:58 PM

-
Yup… That about boils 2012 down to the nut.
-

RalphyBoy on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

I really like the tax reforms, individually and corporately. Limit the highest bracket to 25% and watch the magic!

knob on April 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Transcript from Rush:

Now, I spoke with Congressman Ryan on the phone this morning, and one of the things that he made clear to me, which I think is very wise, by the way, he’s very much aware how they’re gonna demagogue this. He’s very much aware how they’re gonna lie about it. He wants them to. They’re throwing so many balls in the air at this thing that they’re not gonna know which to attack first. Virtually every sacred belief, every one of their talking points of criticism, is met here.

INC on April 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Screw the debt ceiling, monetize intra-governmental holdings. Stop paying interest on loans we made from ourselves.

clement on April 4, 2011 at 9:03 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Krugman is a joke. The only reason he ever gets published is that he is the economic lapdog for the Democrats. They tell him what they want and he dutifully barks on command.

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 9:04 PM

I keep hoping against hope

And that’s exactly what it’ll take...odds: <0

winston on April 4, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Sides. Hurt. Can’t. Stop. Laughing. Oww.

steebo77 on April 4, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Sounds like a good start.

Revenant on April 4, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Uh huh…you and his 3 other readers have something to look forward to.

AUINSC on April 4, 2011 at 9:05 PM

Krugman’s having a fit today because T-Paw used him in his new ad.

Mark1971 on April 4, 2011 at 9:07 PM

T-Paw / Ryan 2012…

mjbrooks3 on April 4, 2011 at 9:08 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Gawd you’re nothing if not absurd!!!

capejasmine on April 4, 2011 at 9:08 PM

OT: Why do SEIU and assorted socialist vermin organizations have to be marching outside every freakin’ time I’m forced to work from my company’s San Francisco office?

steebo77 on April 4, 2011 at 9:00 PM

steebo77:Try this!!
===================================

The Live Wire
SEIU 1021′s daily blog on California political action.
******************************************************

http://www.seiu1021.org/Politics/Default.aspx

canopfor on April 4, 2011 at 9:09 PM

What does it mean to “cut 6.2 trillion over 10 years”? Are we spending 6.2 trillion less over the next decade than we did over the past decade? Are we cutting 6.2 trillion from the national debt?
Or, or, or are we cutting 6.2 trillion from Obama’s budget proposal which was intended as a starting point for GOP-Dem negotiations rather than a serious plan?

Raisedbywolves on April 4, 2011 at 9:09 PM

We need a very strong, serious, conservative presidential candidate who can effectively communicate why we must have this budget.

We’re screwed.

pedestrian on April 4, 2011 at 9:09 PM

While we are at it…

… why not open up all that Federal land to drilling so we can generate some revenue?

Seven Percent Solution on April 4, 2011 at 9:10 PM

capejasmine on April 4, 2011 at 9:08 PM

I think she says that stuff just to get us stirred up. Even she can’t be so gullible as to believe his BS.

JeffWeimer on April 4, 2011 at 9:11 PM

NOW we see why the WRECKING BALL wants a “BUDGET SUMMIT”.

Disgusting.

PappyD61 on April 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

crr6: Ahahahahahahaha…..yur killin’n me…oh..oh..can’t
breath…..and when Krugman…opens da door……
Sarah Palin,will be waiting….with _____________in
hand….haha…..

canopfor on April 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

You can cut it out of the New York Times and hang it in a frame next to Krugman’s paper from the ’80s arguing that the decrease in the inflation rate during the first Reagan administration was merely a transient phenomenon that would be reversed when the economy improved.

DKCZ on April 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM

I love what Ryan is doing, but we gotta look at the numbers. The Chart shows the green (the Ryan budget plan’s) profile staying at near 80% of GDP debt till 2020. Yeah, growth projections for the next 40 years can do magic.

I assert we don’t have that much time.

This plan may not be enough.

What’s Monty’s phrase on Ace? Oh yeah – DOOM.

Jimmy Doolittle on April 4, 2011 at 9:15 PM

NOW we see why the WRECKING BALL wants a “BUDGET SUMMIT”.

Disgusting.

PappyD61 on April 4, 2011 at 9:12 PM

PappyD61:D*mmitt Pappy,that will mean,”Budget Summit Part
Deux!

And,I’m stocking up on popcorn,for “Ryans Revenge
Part Deux”!!!!:)

canopfor on April 4, 2011 at 9:15 PM

Over/under: 36 minutes

Paul Ryan; the $6 TRILLION man. This is the type of thing the GOP must stand for and NEVER compromise away. THIS is the ONLY type of thinking that can save America.

michaelo on April 4, 2011 at 9:16 PM

I think she says that stuff just to get us stirred up.

JeffWeimer on April 4, 2011 at 9:11 PM

No, I’m genuinely looking forward to it. I remember you guys were getting all excited over Ryan’s “roadmap” over the summer, and then Krugman laid down the hammer. Oof.

The most hilarious part is, wignuts (and the media) hold him up as a rare example of a “smart,” “thoughtful” conservative, but Krugman regularly makes him look like a ‘tard.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

A great start! However, IMHO, spending cuts alone will not be enough. We need regulatory and tax reform as well. Get the Government boot off the neck of industries of all sizes especially manufacturing. Spending cuts coupled with growth is the prescription we need to dig our way out of this hole and restore the Republic. Unleash the American people and we will once again be the envy of the world.

DeathB4Tyranny on April 4, 2011 at 9:20 PM

I’m more interested in a balanced budget amendment. This new plan sounds like red ink to me. I’ll be waiting to find out how long it takes Paul Ryan’s plan to balance the budget. Rand Paul’s is 5 years. I think that’s a too much but it’s the best out there so far.

FloatingRock on April 4, 2011 at 9:21 PM

Two thoughts:

1, It took one guy to come up with a workable budget? How serious were the hunreds of Congrssional leaders over the past decade/

2, Why, under this plan, is there still a Dept. of energy or Ed. among other worthless crap?

FOWG1 on April 4, 2011 at 9:24 PM

The most hilarious part is, wignuts (and the media) hold him up as a rare example of a “smart,” “thoughtful” conservative, but Krugman regularly makes him look like a ‘tard.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

You’re not very bright, you poor thing.

Naturally Curly on April 4, 2011 at 9:25 PM

I think she says that stuff just to get us stirred up.

JeffWeimer on April 4, 2011 at 9:11 PM

I think she is getting paid for it. Earning her way through college by working the room for Obama.

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 9:27 PM

Even she can’t be so gullible as to believe his BS.

JeffWeimer on April 4, 2011 at 9:11 PM

You might be surprised…

AUINSC on April 4, 2011 at 9:28 PM

The most hilarious part is, wignuts (and the media) hold him up as a rare example of a “smart,” “thoughtful” conservative, but Krugman regularly makes him look like a ‘tard.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

No. The most hilarious part is that Krugman actually believes in that static tax analysis yields accurate predictions despite mountains of historical evidence to the contrary.

steebo77 on April 4, 2011 at 9:29 PM

“It’s going absolutely nowhere,” said David Kendall, of Third Way, a centrist Democratic think tank.

artist on April 4, 2011 at 8:50 PM

Man, that is an oxymoron if I ever heard one !

cableguy615 on April 4, 2011 at 9:29 PM

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Honey, if you think Krugman could take ANYONE to the woodshed, then you are the last person on earth who would know who is smart, and who is not!

Figures! Just another in the assembly line that ramps out lawyers with a rubber stamp, and forgets to install any common sense or logic.

capejasmine on April 4, 2011 at 9:31 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Oh goody, a partisan hack who admittedly reads nothing that he disagrees with is going to attack something, like clock work.

I guess you’d prefer this country to become insolvent instead? You’re younger than I am, but not by much. Aren’t you just a little bit worried that our parent’s generation is leading us to $20+ trillion in debt? In 10-15 years, what, exactly, are you expecting this country to look like under those conditions?

strictnein on April 4, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Barry planning a road trip any time soon? He’d sure be stupid to have a televised sit down with Ryan.

Heck we could even call it “The First 2012 Presidential Debate”.

GarandFan on April 4, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Under.

BKeyser on April 4, 2011 at 9:36 PM

I keep hoping against hope that The One will gradually realize that signing on to this plan, or some version of it, is actually in his interest politically. There’s literally nothing he could do to alienate the left to the point where they won’t vote for him — most of them trust his judgment more than they trust their own, an unforeseen side effect of Hopenchange messianism — so he could win over independents by coopting Ryan’s plan and have nothing to fear about losing liberals in the general election.

I’ll go one better.

There’s been a lot of talk about Obama being the liberal / Democrat version of Reagan…..we all know that’s mostly a load of horsesh…..well, you get me.

If he were to actually sign onto this, though? He might actually live up to that.

Well, not be really LIKE Reagan, but he would go down, even with the stimulus disaster and the Obamacare abortion, as a GREAT president, because he actually would be the guy to really DO something about entitlement reform. Sadly, even Ryan’s plan isn’t nearly enough, but still – Obama would CEMENT his status in the history books, and probably have a far easier time winning re-election in 2012.

So, you know, of course he won’t do it. He’ll demagogue the hell out of it for cheap political points, because he thinks that’s what he needs to do to win re-election, and it will never occur to him that signing onto this would not only make it easier for him to get re-elected but would help him go down in history as a true reformer. And it won’t occur to him that this is the right thing to do for America. So we’ll just step ever closer to the void, waiting to teeter over.

Vyce on April 4, 2011 at 9:36 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

Tell ya what, skippy – when a notable conservative economist reviews and scores it, and finds it non-credible, I’ll take that seriously. Krugman =/= not credible, by virtue of his proven biases.

massrighty on April 4, 2011 at 9:37 PM

The most hilarious part is, wignuts (and the media) hold him up as a rare example of a “smart,” “thoughtful” conservative, but Krugman regularly makes him look like a ‘tard.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Your words amuse me.

Look, I’m sorry, but we’re at the point where Krugman has become such an utter tool and so thoroughly intellectually compromised by his own politics, that I would not even entertain his opinion if he was making an impassioned argument that the sky was blue.

Vyce on April 4, 2011 at 9:42 PM

I guess you’d prefer this country to become insolvent instead? You’re younger than I am, but not by much. Aren’t you just a little bit worried that our parent’s generation is leading us to $20+ trillion in debt? In 10-15 years, what, exactly, are you expecting this country to look like under those conditions?

strictnein on April 4, 2011 at 9:33 PM

I’m guessing crr6 doesn’t think much past her cap n crunch in the morning. They think because they want to be somebody in the party, they’ll be protected. What happens though, when their desire (God forbid) becomes reality? The dems hopes and dreams of a solely democratic party rule…err excuse me…communist rule comes to be. What are lawyers going to be needed for? Defending the constitution? I’d imagine that will be the first thing to go on the bon fire. So when they dislike something, they’ll sue their own party? Not likely. Communists don’t allow such things. Their usefulness will be done. Then what?

As I said…they all have this dream that’s been fed to them, but never bother to research the reality. They’re happy being pawns for the Dems.

capejasmine on April 4, 2011 at 9:44 PM

A study just released by the Heritage Center for Data Analysis projects that The Path to Prosperity will help create nearly one million new private-sector jobs next year

Alarm bells go off in my mind when I hear either party talking about “creating jobs” and especially disappointing to hear Republicans use that line.

I expect to hear a Republican say something along the lines of “we can create an environment where the private sector can thrive and hopefully create jobs”.

Cynical about long-term projections-but they need a goal.

Bottom line is that something needs to be done, but I don’t have much faith they will. The cronies and special interest groups will still get there’s and there will continue to be boondoggles, overspending, earmarks and waste.

If this goes through, however, it sounds as if it would be great!

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 4, 2011 at 9:44 PM

I’m guessing crr6 doesn’t think much past her cap n crunch in the morning. They think because they want to be somebody in the party, they’ll be protected. What happens though, when their desire (God forbid) becomes reality? The dems hopes and dreams of a solely democratic party rule…err excuse me…communist rule comes to be. What are lawyers going to be needed for? Defending the constitution? I’d imagine that will be the first thing to go on the bon fire. So when they dislike something, they’ll sue their own party? Not likely. Communists don’t allow such things. Their usefulness will be done. Then what?
capejasmine on April 4, 2011 at 9:44 PM

Capejasmine,

I’m not too worried about that. I was assured by very high-ranking party members that after the Revolution, I’ll be given a prestigious position as Chief Prosecutor of thought-crimes.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:48 PM

Capejasmine,

I’m not too worried about that. I was assured by very high-ranking party members that after the Revolution, I’ll be given a prestigious position as Chief Prosecutor of thought-crimes.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:48 PM

Or a $50K per year public service job licking dog crap off the side walk…which is really better, by Krugman’s analysis.

AUINSC on April 4, 2011 at 9:54 PM

If the Won actually signed Ryan’s budget.
Not likely.

Kini on April 4, 2011 at 9:56 PM

A detailed plan. Actual policy. Substance that can be implemented and sold.

Nah.

We need more airheads exclaiming generic platitudes about freedom, taxes and regulations.

swamp_yankee on April 4, 2011 at 10:00 PM

So how about Dems compromise and only cut 3.2T?

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:02 PM

I guess you’d prefer this country to become insolvent instead? You’re younger than I am, but not by much. Aren’t you just a little bit worried that our parent’s generation is leading us to $20+ trillion in debt? In 10-15 years, what, exactly, are you expecting this country to look like under those conditions?

strictnein on April 4, 2011 at 9:33 PM

Nah. crr6 doesn’t worry. She thinks if we only tax the rich all will be well. Never mind that you could tax everyone making $1M at 100% and that would fund about 2 weeks of the govt.

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:04 PM

I’m not too worried about that. I was assured by very high-ranking party members that after the Revolution, I’ll be given a prestigious position as Chief Prosecutor of thought-crimes.

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:48 PM

But for which party?

LOL

Dr. ZhivBlago on April 4, 2011 at 10:04 PM

crr6,

Pop quiz for you:

In how many years did Paul Krugman predict a coming recession during the 2000s?

Answer: Every single one. Some economist.

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:06 PM

I’ll take under on the 36 hour bet. In fact, I’ll bet that this degenerates into name calling and histrionics before noon tomorrow. I win. Huffington Post is already on this, calling it “SLASH AND BURN” on the home page.

So instead of 36 hours, it was probably closer to 36 minutes.

Even before details of the plan became known, Democrats began attacking it.

Democratic Underground and Daily Kos don’t have anything yet. I guess they are waiting until they get marching orders via the daily email in the AM. Or PBS gets around to doing a bit about it, again in the morning.

Double or nothing, first person to call it extreme? I’ll put my money on Senator Shumer, but Biden is always a good safe bet.

Snake307 on April 4, 2011 at 10:06 PM

Schumer’s extremest demagogue to headline at the Apollo

Kini on April 4, 2011 at 10:07 PM

IMF: We find that, under our baseline scenario, a full elimination of the fiscal and generational imbalances would require all taxes to go up and all transfers to be cut immediately and permanently by 35 percent. A delay in the adjustment makes it more costly.”

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/imf…-future-budget

sbark on April 4, 2011 at 10:08 PM

LOL … why is anyone getting excited about the GOP proposing $6.2T in cuts?

That’s the “goin’ in” proposal. And … we’ve already seen that the GOP can only deliver (max) on about 1/3rd of it’s promises.

That moves the little needle down to $2T …

And … whatevs, little as $2T is it’s still a chunk of change and I’m willing the Dims will talk the stupid party down even lower.

Yawn.

All this is … is Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown. That’s how the GOP keeps getting votes – not on the basis of what they’ve DONE – but on PROMISES of what they will do in the future.

They never DO them.

Cynical? Oh yeah – I got 50 years of GOP promises of cutting government under my belt – and not a single GOP or Congress ever did it. Not even Reagan – Reagan grew the government.

I’m not jumping up and down. Sorry. I’ll cheer if this goes over the goal line …

It won’t.

HondaV65 on April 4, 2011 at 10:11 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

I take it back, crr. You do have a good sense of humor.

Wait, what’s that? Crr is being serious?

That’s just….so sad. So very, very sad.

Good Solid B-Plus on April 4, 2011 at 10:12 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6

What is Krugman’s plan again? Oh yeah, more stimulus spending of course!! LOL!!!!!!!! You are the real tard!!!!

JAM on April 4, 2011 at 10:13 PM

some have asked if there aren’t conservative sites I read regularly. Well, no. I will read anything I’ve been informed about that’s either interesting or revealing; but I don’t know of any economics or politics sites on that side that regularly provide analysis or information I need to take seriously. I know we’re supposed to pretend that both sides always have a point; but the truth is that most of the time they don’t.
– Paul Krugman

Gotta love a guy who criticizes things he doesn’t even read.

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:16 PM

Famous idiotic things Paul Krugman has said:

1. “Right now it looks as if the economy is stalling…” — Paul Krugman, September 2002
(right before a 5 year economic boom)

2. “We have a sluggish economy, which is, for all practical purposes, in recession…” — Paul Krugman, May 2003
(right before unemployment hit 4.3%)

3. “An oil-driven recession does not look at all far-fetched.” — Paul Krugman, May 2004
(the recession that happened 4 years later that is)

4. “A mild form of stagflation – rising inflation in an economy still well short of full employment – has already arrived.” — Paul Krugman, April 2005
(right before unemployment was in the 4% range and inflation was non-existent)

5. “If housing prices actually started falling, we’d be looking at an economy pushed right back into recession. That’s why it’s so ominous to see signs that America’s housing market … is approaching the final, feverish stages of a speculative bubble.” — Paul Krugman, May 2005
(lol, sure thing Pauly, sure thing. Except you were about 3 years off, as usual)

6. “In fact, a growing number of economists are using the “R” word [i.e., "recession"] for 2006.” – Paul Krugman, August 2005
(really, like you? Wrong again Paul)

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:18 PM

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:18 PM

Gosh…it almost seems like Krugman is just a brazenly partisan hack who is a dour pessimist when a Republican is in charge, but a relentless cheerleader when a Democrat is in charge.

But that’s not possible!

Good Solid B-Plus on April 4, 2011 at 10:20 PM

This is beyond exciting. If we can push this into law, even tho it isn’t perfect, business will take off like a rocket.

What can we do to help?

PattyJ on April 4, 2011 at 10:21 PM

AP is salivating at the prospected of his beloved messiah getting another term. I guess AP still cowers in fear in his bedroom that someone will call him a racist if he does not do everything possible to re-elect BO.

Jdripper on April 4, 2011 at 10:24 PM

I’m not jumping up and down. Sorry. I’ll cheer if this goes over the goal line …

It won’t.

HondaV65

So what’s the better plan then?

chimney sweep on April 4, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Honda,

You’re right no way 6.2T is ever passed. But at least give credit to the GOP for starting there. They could have taken the easy route and started at $200B or something.

angryed on April 4, 2011 at 10:30 PM

So what’s the better plan then?

chimney sweep on April 4, 2011 at 10:28 PM

Rice, beans and ammo?

sharrukin on April 4, 2011 at 10:31 PM

Can’t wait for Krugman to take Ryan out to the woodshed over this….

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:01 PM

You never go full retard.

Phil-351 on April 4, 2011 at 10:32 PM

crr6 on April 4, 2011 at 9:18 PM

Krugman, Krugman, he’s our man, if he can’t do it no can!! Yeeeeaaaaaaa…….KRUGMAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!

itsspideyman on April 4, 2011 at 10:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2