Quite a guy this paul ryan

[r3020]

Big city dem mayors are proposing much deeper cuts than Ryan. There is simply not enough money to pay the bills.

[dagwud]

Bart, you're slipping.  You forgot to mention all the talking points such as "wants to starve children and old people and wants the sick to just die." 

Did you see the Dem Gov. from the richest state in the union hates the sick, poor and elderly in his state?

LA Times

Gov. Jerry Brown's May budget revision leaves blood all over the Capitol walls. The era when California governors could make their cuts with a scalpel ended before Brown took office, so he does his trimming with a chain saw. The results are cuts in Medi-Cal payments to hospitals and nursing homes, cuts to those who care for the disabled, cuts to state courts and cuts in hours and pay for state employees. So far schools have been largely spared from this grisly exercise, but that will probably change in November if voters fail to approve a tax-hike initiative.

The simple fact is we can no longer afford to pay for all the entitlement programs created over the last few decades without constantly raising taxes.  Either way one day the sh!t will hit the fan and it will not be pretty.  Some tough decisions need to be made sooner rather then later.  Simply blaming the other side and refusing to work together only compounds the problem so many wish to ignore.

[kraft-t]

Special circumstances Dag. California has all these ballot initiatives where the electorate votes to limit taxes. Then the legislature votes for social programs for the people without adequate means to pay for it.

So obviously the "people" want those programs but don't want to pay for them. Similar to our national war mongers that don't want to open their checkboods when we go to war.

Thus with a large debt and short revenues, the target becomes social programs by people that never favored social programs. I hope your doctors do not diminish your health care benefits in order to balance their budgets.

Be assured those health insurance companies are not bashful about raising premiums to keep their social programs viable. Yet somehow some folks seem to think that raising tax revenues is a criminal act of scriptural proportions.

We just have to pay for stuff DAG and you have to decide whether that stuff is worth paying for. Perhaps there are folks in California that are relying dearly on those services.

[schnurrbart]

Dag, I think it is you who is slipping.  Did you even read the votes he made on many issues?  I agree that spending must be backed off but I also think we ALL have to sacrifice.  The perfect example just happened.  Obama's budget called for a huge cut in the defense budget.  Ryan disagreed with the cut and proposed to cut Medicaid and do away with food stamps as a way to be able to keep the money in the war machine.  I am sick of seeing these hypocrites calling for spending cuts but when it is suggested that some of the cuts should come from a favored source, they immediately say "stick it to the poor and the seniors" instead.  Of course, these asssholes on here figure that anyone not working to make something or grow something or just doing something and drawing a paycheck are nothing but parasites so they would wish that anyone who has the audacity to retire and try to enjoy their so-called "golden years" really should just have the decency to die so that there will be more left for them.

I will take this opportunity to inquire about your treatment.  You are still having treatments aren't you?  Just try very hard to maintain a positive attitude  and good luck.

[kraft-t]

Aren't you enjoying historical low tax rates? Raising the tax rates back to Clinton levels would not destroy you. In fact a lot of millionaires became multimillionaires under those tax rates.

Do you think Mitt is paying too high of tax rates when you may well pay rates that are twice as high. Do you think you should be able to depreciate a $200K tractor in one year when it may not actually depreciate that much in ten years. It's not just the tax rates but the tax incentives that promote tax avoidence.

The so called Job creators are not creating jobs. It's not even their objective. Their objective is weath creation and they can and will do that with or without creating jobs.

[kraft-t]

Pure Neocon. You don't want to pay labor and you don't want to pay the benifits that they have earned. I'll bet you don't want to pay the taxes that you owe either. You don't believe in the scantity of contracts. You would certainly screw someone over after they have contributed for 50 years.

Without a blink of the eye, you would screw anyone over that you don't "think" is deserving.

You would be the last guy I would want to initiate a contract with.

FSA Programs ? Are you a paracite?

[cotman03]

Well no, I don't enjoy any tax rate actually.  The government is not my charity like it is yours.  If they do something to get rid of the fraud and abuse then maybe I'll feel differently but right now I will try to enjoy every possible tax break I can get.

The reason a $200,000 tractor can be depreciated in one year is to stimulate sales of those tractors which creates jobs for those individuals who manufacturer them.  I would say it's been a successful program but have no hard numbers to back that statement up.  I would predict that you would have a hard time finding numbers to dispute that this tax incentive hasn't had a net benefit to every aspect of our economy including increasing the tax base.  If that tax incentive was not there, I don't think  those $200,000 tractors would be as hard as they are to get right now. 

Speaking of those "Job creators," I guess I am one of those since I employ 4-6 people.  My objective in hiring those individuals is absolutely to create wealth for myself so you are correct when you say that job creation is not my objective.  I ask you what's the problem you have with that?  You did it too.   In my pursuit of wealth for my family, my employees reap the benefit of a relatively good paying job though. Three of them also farm land, a total of 1600 acres, on their own and have the full use of my farm equipment as part of their package.  I have no retirement or health package available but alot of those job creators you are so disgusted with still do.       

[dagwud]

Bart, I've long been in favor of reducing military spending in this country.  The point was made even more clear to me about a year ago when Bill Maher one night on his show asked his panel who was the second biggest air force in the world after the US Air Force?  The answer, the US Navy.

Trouble is it isn't only Repubs that fight against military cuts.  Many Dem Congressmen from states with companies that benefit from our massive military spending also are against many of the suggested cuts.

The Air Force has proposed closing numerous Air Guard bases across the country as part of a cost saving measure.  My state's lone Dem Senator, Tom Harkin as well as Dem Congressman Boswell have come out against the Air Force's decision to close the Air Guard's unit in Des Moines.  They called the Air Force's decision misguided and doubted if it would save much money

So while I'll agree that Rebubs are more typically the "strong defense" party and generally favor more spending on our military, I think the problem with cutting defense spending is more complicated then just blaming it on one party.

[schnurrbart]

I don't know how else to say this but I'll try one more time.  Spending cuts are needed immediately.  My problem is that people like ryan refuse to cut spending on the military and wish to save those cuts by cutting programs that millions of people depend on and these aren't the upper income folks.  We have a military right now that is head and shoulders above anyone in the world.  We have technology that allows us to destroy you without putting a single boot on the ground.  Our nuclear arsenal could wipe out the world 10 times over.  We have the largest mercenary force in the world.  We could cut a few $30 million planes and why does every soldier need a battleground laptop.  They still have radiomen.  Slimming down the technology and waste would go a long way to fill the budget needs without sacrificing food stamps and medicaid.  BUT I see it as only an excuse to cut those programs.  They wanted to do this for years.  BTW, my original post was about all the bills that he has voted for or against that deal with women, the economy, seniors, federal retirees (which also btw are soldiers who retire)  I would like to see one of these heros on here like hawk walk up to some military retiree face to face and call him a parasite for accepting taxpayer money because he retired from the military.

[cotman03]

Just because a congressman wants to cut some program for retirees doesn't mean he thinks they are parasites.  It means he thinks this country can't afford it.  I doubt seriously Mr. Ryan, even privately, has said government retirees are parasites.  Why do you put words into his mouth unless you actually have heard him say that?  Dagwud correctly states that both parties are guilty of protecting military spending particularly if a spending cut involves something closing in their own state.  It's not just "people like ryan."  Its most all of them, from both parties.  Even your beloved Democrats.