The Ryan budget plan, Part III: More trickle-down
In “The Path to Prosperity,” House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan makes it clear that tax increases will not be part of the solution to the nation’s fiscal problems. He intends to address the problem solely through budget cuts, most of them focused on programs affecting the elderly, the sick and the poor. After all, that’s where the money is in the federal budget, especially when you exempt the Pentagon from spending cuts, as Ryan proposes to do.
“The U.S. government is not running sustained deficits because Americans are taxed too little,” the plan states. “The government is running deficits because it spends too much.”
However, that sentiment doesn’t mean that Ryan intends to leave the tax code untouched. Among other things, he proposes to reduce the number of tax brackets from the current six, which would make the income tax flatter and less progressive. He also intends to lower the top tax bracket on individuals and corporations from the current 35 percent to 25 percent.
Inevitably, such changes would have the effect of lowering taxes on corporations and the wealthy, while shifting more of the burden to working and middle-class Americans. When combined with the payroll tax, which Ryan concedes is a surtax on earned income below $106,000, a large number of working class and middle-class Americans would probably end up paying a significantly higher percentage of their income in federal taxes than their wealthier counterparts.
I say “probably” because as far as I can tell, Ryan hasn’t released specifics of his tax reform proposal to the public. He did, however, provide considerable detail to the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis to allow it to project the economic impact of the proposed changes. So let’s see what they have to say.
Overall, Heritage projects, the Ryan budget proposal would produce an outcome that frankly would be nothing short of miraculous, including an increase in economic output of $1.5 trillion over the next ten years. That in turn would help drive down the federal deficit considerably.
But how real is it? Unlike projections by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the Heritage analysis relies on what is called “dynamic scoring.” In other words, it programs its computer models to assume that tax cuts on the wealthy and corporations produce enormous economic growth.
For example, let’s take a look at what dynamic scoring does to the projected unemployment rate. The CBO projects that the unemployment rate next year will average 8.4 percent. The Heritage Foundation, using dynamic scoring, projects that if the Ryan plan passes, unemployment would plummet next year to 6.4 percent.
By 2015, the CBO projects, unemployment will be down to 5.9 percent. Under the Ryan plan, Heritage projects it will fall to a remarkable 4.0 percent, declining still further to 2.8 percent in 2021.
2.8 percent?
Who believes that? Nobody believes that. In fact, those projections are so embarrassingly absurd that Heritage itself has gone back into its study and removed them. They were there in the version I downloaded yesterday; they are gone from the version available today.
In this case, Heritage can make ridiculous claims for the economic benefits of Ryan’s plan — claims that help account for the supposed deficit reduction — without fear of those claims being tested against reality. Nobody believes that the plan will ever be adopted.
Ten years ago, however, the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis ran similar projections for President Bush’s plan to cut taxes, using the same computer model it used to analyze Ryan’s plan.
Heritage claimed that if the Bush tax cuts were approved, the economy would grow so quickly that by 2010, the entire federal debt would effectively be eliminated.
Not only that, “The plan would save the entire Social Security surplus and increase personal savings while the federal government accumulated $1.8 trillion in uncommitted funds from FY 2008 to FY 2011, revenue that could be used to reform the Social Security and Medicare systems and reduce the payroll tax,” Heritage claimed.
Well ….
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
970 comments Add your comment
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
4:36 pm
Thirty straight years of the fiscally irresponsible trying to, and generally succeeding, in destroying the working American middle class.
And the answer? MORE of the exact same!
As the modern American corporatocracy rolls merrily along…
Bosch
April 6th, 2011
4:36 pm
“jconservative-could not agree more with your 4:14.”
That’s because he/she is smart — he/she is always right on in the “Bosch World of what is Right On”
Just saying.
Rational
April 6th, 2011
4:37 pm
Bosch, you make a good point. However, I would counter that the services provided by the government that are likely to be cut, would probably then have to be taken care of at the private sector level, and those people with experience would be able to find work in that manner. Now, I recognize this wouldn’t take care of all of those people, but it is a start. I personally don’t care what they cut, just leave my taxes alone and balance the budget.
As far as the bailouts are concerned, I believe that if left alone, the companies would have been split up or swallowed by other companies and yes, some would have lost their jobs, but we wouldn’t have ended up with the government owning a controlling stake in so many companies, especially ones it had no business of dealing with in the first place.
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:37 pm
“Are they going to go out and buy that new vacation home? Or that mansion in Buckhead? Or are they going to be more likely to save it or buy an extra meal or two at a decent restaurant”
Your 2 questions are at odds with each other. First of all, even if they save it, that’s money available to be borrowed by someone else who WILL spend it. It still circulates through the economy.
As for buying a meal or two – that’s SPENDING the money, which then circulates through the economy.
One rich person buying a mansion in Buckhead has only a limited, local effect that soon ends. A million people spread out over the country with a 100 milllion burning a hole in their pockets has a much wider effect.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:37 pm
“Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:26 pm
“go read an Econ 101 textbook”
“why, so I can be one of the so-called “experts” that got us INTO this mess?”
No, so you don’t bore the rest of us with uneducated opinions.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:38 pm
“Thirty straight years of the fiscally irresponsible trying to, and generally succeeding, in destroying the working American middle class.”
Oh look…there goes another red herring swimming by…
Dave R.
April 6th, 2011
4:39 pm
“Do show us where in the past 10 years voter fraud has been rampant”
Any precinct in Chicago, NYC or Boston.
You know – machine towns.
Del
April 6th, 2011
4:39 pm
Sorry but you good folks on the left really don’t have much to say until your party of irresponsibility comes up with a budget plan of their own. Throwing stones at Ryan or the Heritage Foundation isn’t going to win you this argument in the real world you’ll need a competing plan.
larry
April 6th, 2011
4:40 pm
HEADLINE: Georgia’s Tax Reform could cost 220 million or more…………..
For the life of me , i cant understand why i would want to trust any Repub with money.
Especially since they have been in office for every recession this country has had with the exception of two.
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:40 pm
“would probably then have to be taken care of at the private sector level, and those people with experience would be able to find work in that manner. ”
but WILL the private sector take care of them? Remember, government steps in where the private sector won’t. Just for an example: check into why the government has to guarantee loans for nuclear reactors – here’s a clue: insurance companies won’t touch them with a 10 foot pole
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
4:41 pm
Dave R…..just because you say it is so does not make it true…where are the convictions? Where are the cases (even thouse without convictions)? Where are the arrests?
Rational
April 6th, 2011
4:41 pm
Bosch – you make an excellent point with the credit card supplementing the income. I made that mistake when I was in college…now I’m digging myself out. But the end is in site.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:42 pm
Libertarian. Ryan cuts spending (not quite a Trillion more like $700 or $800 B) compared to Obama.
See chart halfway down page.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703806304576244522761581288.html?mod=WSJ_WSJ_US_News_3
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:43 pm
(military spending)
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
4:43 pm
There is only now a very tiny nascence by the Party of Permanent War to the sheer folly of leaving the Defense Budget out of the equation.
But given, Ryan’s brand new 1980s “plan”, why would doing something truly significant and courageous, factor into it anyway?
These reactionary Republicans remind of when the USSR had their The Five-Year Plans for the National Economy of the Soviet Union…
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:43 pm
“No, so you don’t bore the rest of us with uneducated opinions”
I’m so sorry to hear you scroll bar and mouse wheel are both broken. Sound like you could really use a computer upgrade. Modern computers are quite a good bargain these days. Why not help stimulate the economy by going out and buying one?
Bosch
April 6th, 2011
4:43 pm
Rational @ 4:37 –
I agree with that mostly, but there are some services that the government provides better than the private world. I know, I know “Boooooooooooooo” from the right, but it’s true — at least in what I think to be real.
In my opinion, that’s where many people err in judgement. They think that everything can be done by the private world, and that’s simply not so (again, in my opinion) because they wrongfully think that the government and businesses are the same thing when actually they are polar opposites of each other.
The government is the people — all the people — even all the people we don’t like and the government must represent all of them — even the ones we don’t like. Yes, even those. Businesses don’t have to do that — they are completey profit based and can pick their own customers, based on their own business models, etc. The government can’t do that, or at least, we as a society have decided we don’t like to see people starve in the streets and such.
So anywho……..
Rational
April 6th, 2011
4:44 pm
If government would get out of the way of the rates, would insurance companies find it profitable to insure the reactors? Just like with health insurance, if the government got out of the way, I have a feeling insurance companies could take care of stuff themselves.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:44 pm
Hey AmVet, I’m middle class, and they didn’t destroy me. Am I just smarter than most?
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:44 pm
Del 4:39 – amen.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:45 pm
Jay will do cartwheels. Beck is going to leave Fox (mostly)
see politico
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:46 pm
“If government would get out of the way of the rates, would insurance companies find it profitable to insure the reactors?”
Got any proof that government is in the way if insurance rates on nuclear reactors?
Del
April 6th, 2011
4:47 pm
Dave R, I think that keep, may be doing a little bit of dodo in one hand, while wishing in the other and when he rubs his hands together he may not like seeing what’s all over his wishes. At any rate it’s too close to call but we’ll see.
Rational
April 6th, 2011
4:47 pm
Well, its been fun, but I must go sit in traffic to start my second job. Have fun. I’ve enjoyed debating people that are actually providing counter points to my arguments instead of name calling/dismissing my opinions because they don’t match theirs or because I’m a “kid.”
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:47 pm
“There is only now a very tiny nascence by the Party of Permanent War to the sheer folly of leaving the Defense Budget out of the equation.”
By “Party of Permanent War” I assume you mean the Democrats? Because, 26 months into his presidency, surely the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are Obama’s wars, as is the one he jumped into in Libya?
Bosch
April 6th, 2011
4:47 pm
“Got any proof that government is in the way if insurance rates on nuclear reactors?”
Or health insurance?
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:48 pm
I will say moving the “goal” from $33B to $40B is kind of bogus, but I think that’s what TPers said Boehner had to get. C’est la vie. Seal the deal, let’s get on to 2012.
Jay
April 6th, 2011
4:48 pm
On defense spending:
The Ryan budget incorporates the same Pentagon spending levels now projected by the administration. It accepts the cuts already identified by Obama and Gates in the next fiscal year, but proposes no other ones.
Go to Table S-4 on the Ryan document — http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/PathToProsperityFY2012.pdf — on Page 65, labeled “FY2012 Chairman’s Mark vs. President’s FY2012 Budget by Major Category.
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
4:48 pm
jm, that chart has exactly zero in regards to military spending.
Rational
April 6th, 2011
4:48 pm
Doggone – one last comment. Nope, just assuming because they get in the middle of the rest of the rates, I have to assume they are in the middle of those rates too. Just my (un)educated guess.
Bosch
April 6th, 2011
4:48 pm
“but I must go sit in traffic to start my second job.”
The ultimate booooooo.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:49 pm
You know, if Dems don’t want a shutdown, they can pass the House spending measure, annnnnnnnnnytime they want…
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:50 pm
“There is only now a very tiny nascence by the Party of Permanent War to the sheer folly of leaving the Defense Budget out of the equation.”
AmVet, can you tell us why dumping billions into GM and Chrysler creates jobs and stimulates the economy while dumping billions into defense contractors does not?
Thanks in advance.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:50 pm
AmVet 4:48 – under security spending. of course, if that includes DHS, etc., then the data gets fuzzier.
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:50 pm
“Nope, just assuming because they get in the middle of the rest of the rates, I have to assume they are in the middle of those rates too. Just my (un)educated guess”
Well, you know what “they” say about assumptions. Do you have any proof that government “gets in the way” of ANY insurance rates?
Dave R.
April 6th, 2011
4:50 pm
“Dave R…..just because you say it is so does not make it true…where are the convictions? Where are the cases (even thouse without convictions)? Where are the arrests?”
Perhaps you need to be acquainted with the term “machine towns”?
They control the voter rolls, they control the courts, they control the media. Case in point, Boston, MA. They just finished re-electing their mayor for the fifth or sixth time in a row. The guy is completely and totally incompetent. The city is in a fiscal shamble. He is as inarticulate as any human being can be. His nickname is “Mumbles” Menino. He’s nothing to look at, either.
Longest-serving mayor in the history of Boston. Every election he has opposition. Every poll just before most election days show a close race. Every election won by 10 points or more.
‘Splain THAT!
Lil' Barry Bailout
April 6th, 2011
4:50 pm
Libertarian: I don’t understand how you can lower the top tax rate to 25% and have no cuts to defense but still manage to reduce/eliminate the deficit.
———————————-
Simple. By slowing the growth of parasite maintenance programs.
1811/1801 - 0311/0317
April 6th, 2011
4:51 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPIYMCSDk44
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
4:52 pm
You know, after promising downstairs to answer our questions, AmVet has been remarkably consistent in AVOIDING questions all afternoon…
Del
April 6th, 2011
4:52 pm
Off to pick up my daughter. Maybe later Jay will have a Ryan Budget Plan Part IV.
Lil' Barry Bailout
April 6th, 2011
4:53 pm
If you don’t like Ryan’s plan to reduce deficit spending by $5.8 trillion over the next decade, support a political party that accomplishes as much in some other way.
Oopsies, there isn’t one. The Democrat party proposes to increase the debt by $9.5 trillion over the same time frame.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:53 pm
RE military spending. There are many that argue (accurately) that military spending is at an all time low as a % of GDP, relative to historic measures. (See USA Inc.)
However, I’m not wholly sold that that is the proper metric. The proper metric is simply what is necessary to keep us at the vanguard, to protect our country, and protect our allies (as is necessary). That to me, suggests we could spend a good deal less.
Lil' Barry Bailout
April 6th, 2011
4:53 pm
Jay, where is Part I of your critique of the Democrat plan?
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
4:54 pm
jm, after further review the ruling on the field stands as you called it.
I can only surmise that the euphemism *security* includes defense spending…
Paul Ryan Monster
April 6th, 2011
4:55 pm
Coooooooookies!! Yum yum.
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
4:55 pm
“There are many that argue (accurately) that military spending is at an all time low as a % of GDP, relative to historic measures. (See USA Inc.)”
And what do those “many” say in regard to our debt ratio to GDP?
Paul Ryan Monster
April 6th, 2011
4:57 pm
AmVet 4:54 – thanks. Likewise. However, as I mentioned, if it includes “all security spending”, who knows what he is cutting. INS, DHS, border security, who knows…..
Point is, the guy’s cutting “security” spending. And he’s obviously signed up for the DOD cuts. I think they could go further, but that’s just me. The DOD wants to be able to fight two regional wars, or defeat a “China”. I personally don’t know what that requires.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:58 pm
whoops.
jm
April 6th, 2011
4:59 pm
Doggone 4:55 – that it is on the edge of being totally out of whack. Approaching ludicrous speed.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
4:59 pm
Well I guess Del concedes the lack of proof for the voter fraud claim made without fact but since Dave R wants to try to make claims without facts — here are the facts:
Fake the Vote –Why would anyone commit voter fraud? … In 2002, the Bush administration made cracking down on voter fraud a top priority. Five years later, the effort had yielded 86 convictions. About 30 convictions were linked to vote-buying schemes in races for small offices like sheriff or judge. Only 26 were attributable to individual voters, and most of those were misunderstandings about voter eligibility, such as felons who voted without knowing it was illegal. The prosecutions provided little evidence of organized fraud. A 2007 study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University reached a similar conclusion. The vast majority of “fraud” cases, it found, were due to typographical errors in poll books and registration records, bad matches between voter databases (for example, you could be listed as John Smith in one database and John T. Smith in another), and voters registering at new addresses without deleting old registrations. Much of the alleged “voter fraud,” it turns out, is just poorly filled out registration cards. And even if someone purposely files a fraudulent form by writing the name “Mickey Mouse,” it doesn’t affect the election. “Mickey Mouse doesn’t vote,” says Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Institute. Actual voter fraud—a voter pretending to be someone he’s not—is, according to the study, less common than getting struck by lightning.
From the NY Times, a nice chart
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud_graphic.html
and the article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
4:59 pm
I wish y’all would quit stereotyping Buckhead! “Buckhead mansions…” Shhheeesh…this is a very diverse part of town…probably THE most diverse…room for everybody…
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:00 pm
“The Democrat party proposes to increase the debt by $9.5 trillion over the same time frame.”
…after ridiculing Cheney for saying deficits don’t matter…
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
5:01 pm
One would think that the fiscally irresponsible, who want to make individuals pick up even more of the tax liability, would at a minimum start reigning in some of the massive corporate welfare to help we the people out, just a little.
But nope.
Prepare for even more handouts, giveaways, subsidies and market manipulation to protect the wealthy who buy the ear of our representatives…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:01 pm
oh the fake the vote segment is from http://www.slate.com/id/2272405 which also included:
Perhaps the strongest evidence against claims of widespread voter fraud is that it would make no sense. Imagine what you’d have to do to perpetrate such a scheme. You’d first have to recruit a large number of voters willing to cooperate, each of whom would risk five years in prison and a $10,000 fine. Then you’d have to get them all registered, which would require fake IDs and mailing addresses. (The mailing address would have to be real so they could receive their registration cards.) The names and addresses would then get checked against a central state database. If the database fails to find a match, the voter’s registration gets flagged for a follow-up check of their Social Security Number or driver’s license number. Then on Election Day, they’d have to show their fake ID again and lie to a poll worker’s face. At each point—registration, the database check, voting—they’d run the risk of getting caught. And the more people involved in the scheme, the more likely someone slips up. All it would take is one unlucky person for the whole plan to unravel.
Lil' Barry Bailout
April 6th, 2011
5:02 pm
Buckhead is no longer safe after dark.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:02 pm
Jay, how many columns did you write during the Bush presidency attacking and ridiculing him for running budget deficits, and what was the size of those deficits reletive to the current Obama deficits?
Thanks in advance…
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:02 pm
Harry – 1
Bookman – 0
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:03 pm
RE Wisconsin vote: sounds like Walker should (A) just repass the legislation in compliance with open meetings laws or (B) since the judge vote was essentially 50/50, give half of government workers collective bargaining power, and not the other half.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:03 pm
” would at a minimum start reigning in some of the massive corporate welfare”
Oh look…another red herring just went swimming by…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:04 pm
Harry agains say “I’m winning”! — what a Sheener
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:05 pm
Buckhead is quite safe…even here in Buckhood!
Dave R.
April 6th, 2011
5:05 pm
Ahhh, slate.com. Now there’s an unbiased source!
Lil' Barry Bailout
April 6th, 2011
5:05 pm
It only takes one Democrat to stuff a ballot box.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:07 pm
Dave…. waiting for you to post a single credible site to support your claim…and btw, the DOJ numbers are not credible? Sorry, you can divert but you have yet to back up any of your claims with evidence. Did you also look at the Brennan Center report?
Dave R.
April 6th, 2011
5:07 pm
Keep. . . .
Machine.
Town.
” At each point—registration, the database check, voting—they’d run the risk of getting caught.”
Not when the whole lot of them are your “buddies”.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:08 pm
LBB, you made a claim…now do back it up with real evidence.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:08 pm
“Harry agains say “I’m winning”!
Trying to provoke Bookman into debating deficits with me, but no way he will bite. He has ZERO credibility, and he knows it. I would take him out behind the woodshed…
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
5:10 pm
“Sorry, you can divert”
that’s SOP. When you can’t refute the data…attack the source instead.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:12 pm
Here’s Bookman’s thoughts on deficits when a republican was in the White House…
Bookman: No deficit of horror in this movie
By JAY BOOKMAN
Cox News Service
Thursday, August 21, 2008
ATLANTA — Over the past few years, millions of homeowners borrowed more money than they could repay. They were living beyond their means, hoping that sometime in the future, something would come along to bail them out.
They’re now paying for that lack of responsibility. In the second quarter of 2008 alone, more than 700,000 homes went into foreclosure, driving housing values lower and gutting the nation’s construction industry.
There’s an important lesson in that tragedy, not just for Americans as individuals but as citizens of the United States of America. As a nation, we are living well beyond our means and behaving just as irresponsibly as those individual homeowners who mortgaged their family’s future for a plasma TV or European vacation. Our national debt — the accumulation of year after year of deficit spending by our government — is approaching $10 trillion and growing, with almost 45 percent of it owed to foreigners.
And just as overextended homeowners lost their homes, we Americans may lose our country, or at least the prosperous, powerful country as we’ve known it. The debt is growing so large that last month alone, interest payments totaled $24 billion. Again, that’s a single month.
To see where that will inevitably lead, “we only need to look at the fate of other countries who have lived beyond their means for a long time,” warns former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill, who was fired from his Cabinet post by President Bush for daring to insist that deficits matter. “When you get extended to the point you can’t service your debt, you’re finished.”
O’Neill issues that warning in “I.O.U.S.A,” a documentary about our nation’s pending fiscal crisis that opens tonight, for one night only, in 400 movie theaters around the country. (For a list of theaters, go to http://www.iousathemovie.com/).
As the movie points out, a country deep in debt to the rest of the world loses control over its future. Most of our foreign-held debt is owned by Japan, China and the oil-exporting countries, giving them enormous potential leverage not just over our foreign policy but over our domestic economic policies as well.
In addition to O’Neill, the movie features financier Warren Buffett, former Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin and others. But its two stars are David Walker, until recently head of the Government Accountability Office, and Robert Bixby, head of the Concord Coalition, who have been traveling the nation trying to stir up grass-roots concern about the problem.
The Concord Coalition, founded in 1992 by a Democrat and two Republicans, has been studiously nonpartisan. As Walker puts it, “The facts aren’t Democrat or Republican. The facts aren’t liberal or conservative. The facts are the facts.”
But facts being facts, two presidents in particular come in for pointed criticism. In one clip, Ronald Reagan is seen pointing out correctly that “for decades we have piled deficit upon deficit, mortgaging our future and our children’s future, for the temporary convenience of the present.”
But as he speaks, graphics point out that in Reagan’s eight years as president, our national debt almost tripled, from $909 billion to $2.6 trillion.
The current President Bush is given similar treatment. In a press conference, he is seen proudly awarding himself “an A for keeping taxes low and being fiscally responsible with the people’s money.” But as graphics demonstrate, our national debt was $5.7 trillion when Bush took office; it will be almost twice that when he leaves. There is no curve in the world on which that performance merits an “A.”
The film does not offer a detailed solution, but it does express restrained outrage at the immorality of one generation of Americans — you and I — willing to mortgage the futures of our children and grandchildren to satisfy our own selfishness.
It’s the scariest movie you are likely to see this summer, not least because we play the villains.
Jay Bookman writes for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:13 pm
okay…time to get back on topic. Dave R, Del and LBB have no evidence just wild unsupported stories. I bet it was that woman with the designer bag who shops in Whole Foods with food stamps and drives a brand new Caddy who is doing it…either that or Santa Claus.
Dave R says its a conspiracy…. let’s see, we have birther, truthers and now…fraudsters?
Abrazos
April 6th, 2011
5:13 pm
Interesting that none of the Paul “Eddie Munster” Ryan’s fan base has mentioned that in 2008, he voted FOR TARP, FOR the Wall Street bailout and FOR the bailout of GM and Chrysler. Maybe he’s trying to make amends for his own spending profligacy.
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:14 pm
Harry
The Bruin has plenty of credibility in many areas…some others, well maybe not, but he’ll eventually come around and see the errors of his ways there…zero credibility? I give him an 88.
WOW #5
April 6th, 2011
5:14 pm
Keep Up the Good Fight! & Doggone/GA & AmVet
Do any of you have degrees in economics and have any of you ever run a business?
Have any of you ever managed other people and had to deal with a budget?
The reason I ask is because all three of you spend 90% of your time arguing with other folks about stuff you don’t seem to understand.
For instance: When Keep is asked a simple question, he responds with POOP ON YOU! Skittles POOP!! That tells me that Keep is either a teenager in a public library or has a chemical imbalance.
Vet constantly rails against capitalism yet occasionally talks about his stock portfolio.
Doggone just throws out statements that make no sense.
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:16 pm
WOW #5 – “Do any of you have degrees in economics”
not on the list, but yes.
Midori
April 6th, 2011
5:16 pm
Keep – I fess up!! It was me!! Only it was a Volvo. Got to keep those tripe stereotypes right
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:16 pm
good fight…
Did you see her? I mean that gal’s getting around…look at how many people she’s putting to work..
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:17 pm
For the record. Skittle Poop is a highly complex economic theory WOW #5. You just haven’t heard of it yet….
Midori
April 6th, 2011
5:17 pm
LOL Josef!!
I aims to please
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:17 pm
midori
Well, we know you DO spend a lot of time in Buckhead…
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:19 pm
Bookman was so concerned about deficits in 2004 he feared for his children…
“Today, the modern Republican Party no longer has a plausible claim as the party of fiscal responsibility. That legacy began to crumble under the massive deficits created by Reagan, and it suffered another hit when it took Bill Clinton, a Democrat, to bring the budget under control and produce a surplus. But the truly fatal blow to that reputation — the blow that has put it in the grave and tossed dirt on it — came just in the last few years, as a Republican Congress and a Republican president approved the largest expansion of nondefense spending in the last 40 years, blithely dismissing the exploding deficit as somebody else’s problem.
Well, I have two children, and they’re that “somebody else.”
http://crackersquire.blogspot.com/2004/08/and-winner-is-jay-bookman-very-timely.html
The 2004 deficit t hat scared Bookman so badly was $521 billion. What’s that, 1/3 of the Obama deficit?
Doggone/GA
April 6th, 2011
5:19 pm
Midori – I posted something for you last night about your panic attacks.
mystified
April 6th, 2011
5:19 pm
Well based on Cynthias post and this one… I guess the DNC talking points memo has been published.
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:19 pm
Yeah, don’t recall who is claiming Buckhead is unsafe. That perspective is outdated by about 10 years.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:21 pm
Midori — well now I wish I had said hello. I think you dropped a couple of ballots.
josef — I know she’s doing a great job. btw, if there are no mansions in Buckhead, maybe you live in Buckhead, GA and not Fulton County.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:21 pm
Back in August of 2004, Bookman wa so scared of $521 billion deficit that he feared for the lives of his children…
“Today, the modern Republican Party no longer has a plausible claim as the party of fiscal responsibility. That legacy began to crumble under the massive deficits created by Reagan, and it suffered another hit when it took Bill Clinton, a Democrat, to bring the budget under control and produce a surplus. But the truly fatal blow to that reputation — the blow that has put it in the grave and tossed dirt on it — came just in the last few years, as a Republican Congress and a Republican president approved the largest expansion of nondefense spending in the last 40 years, blithely dismissing the exploding deficit as somebody else’s problem. ”
Well, I have two children, and they’re that “somebody else.”
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:21 pm
Also, for the record, Jay. I’d hate to see you relo back to a blue state. You bring balance that every publication needs….. you and Kyle make a good pairing. Wooten and Tucker (and Barr), bluickckckc.
Del
April 6th, 2011
5:23 pm
Well keep if you’re saying that there has never been incidents of voter fraud and you don’t believe there should be any concern, then because we all have to believe in something your belief must be in the tooth fairy and peter pan.
Midori
April 6th, 2011
5:24 pm
thanks Doggone – I’ll go back and take a look
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:24 pm
jm
And even 10 years ago it was those three or four blocks at Peachtree and Roswell…Buckhead for tourists…and since it was each other they were bothering…
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:24 pm
Back in 2006, Jay thought $1.4 trillion in deficits over THREE YEARS was outrageous. But now, apparently, $1.4 trillion in ONE YEAR is just fine…
“”So in three years’ time under President Bush and a
Republican Congress, we’ve added $1.4 trillion to our nation’s debt, largely because government revenues were reduced through tax cuts benefiting the rich,” noted Jay Bookman in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:26 pm
“largely because government revenues were reduced through tax cuts benefiting the rich,”
But…but…but…wait a minute Jay…aren’t those the tax cuts Barack Obama EXTENDED along with Reid and Pelosi?
AmVet
April 6th, 2011
5:26 pm
Interesting that none of the Paul “Eddie Munster” Ryan’s fan base has mentioned that in 2008, he voted FOR TARP, FOR the Wall Street bailout and FOR the bailout of GM and Chrysler.
Of course not Abrazos. But I have posted those facts twice today.
Apparently he has since had a fiscal epiphany. Ahem.
This latest hair-brained scheme of his is just another preposterous, misguided and counter-productive con-job…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
April 6th, 2011
5:26 pm
Del, weak. Again, you’re welcome to post some evidence to back your unsupport assertions of widespread voter fraud. I beleive in the real evidence so no need for your fairy tales.
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:26 pm
Harry — 5
Bookman – 0
Harry Callahan
April 6th, 2011
5:27 pm
Jay? HELLO??? Anybody home???
Moderate Line
April 6th, 2011
5:27 pm
One of the interesting things about the current budget battle is that if the last congress which consisted of a Dem House and Senate had done it’s job we would not have these week to week continuing resolutions. The current budget should have been passed in October.
jm
April 6th, 2011
5:28 pm
AmVet 5:26 – Bank TARP turned a profit, GM TARP, not so much. Either way, those were done in the throes of a financial crisis. GDP and inflation are progressing at a reasonable clip. Times change, time to fix the perpetual Trillion $ deficits.
Paul Ryan Monster
April 6th, 2011
5:29 pm
HC – busy working on Part 4 silly
josef nix
April 6th, 2011
5:29 pm
good fight
I never said there weren’t some nice places here, but that’s not all there is to this neighborhood and, old Buckhead is rather modest and tasteful without being ostentatious. Now, those of us who live here DO know how to identify a person as Real Buckhead, Old Buckhead, Buckhead Newcomer, Buckhead Wannabe and Tourist…
Jay
April 6th, 2011
5:30 pm
“Woodshed?” Jay thought to himself, trying to suppress a giggle.
OK, Harry. Let’s see, shall we?
My thoughts on the debt and deficit haven’t changed an iota from that 2008 column. In fact, I have written here repeatedly that our growing debt is a serious problem that must be addressed by both cutting spending and raising taxes.
However, you don’t take those actions in the deepest recession in more than 80 years, not unless you want the recession to get even deeper. Even conservative economists agree that cutting spending immediately would slow our recovery, just as tax hikes would. The economic conditions in which Obama took office — 800,000 jobs a month disappearing, Wall Street in a meltdown, etc., force his hand and a fiscal 2009 deficit already projected at more than $1.2 trillion before he even took office.
He did what he had to do, what was wise to do, and we’re now beginning to pull out of the tailspin, adding jobs, etc.
Once we return to some semblance of normality and economic stability, we absolutely do need to address the debt and deficit. In fact, we have no option but to do so. I expect Obama to lead that effort; if he doesn’t, I’ll criticize his failure harshly.
If I don’t, then and only then will you will be able to take me to the woodshed, Harry.