Is it "real"....lol

. . . So congratulations goes to Donald Trump for "making" Obama release the long form of a document that was certified authentic and released three years ago.

And what did he accomplish?

Make the entire Republican party look like a bunch of buffoons just as the Republican party is getting to negotiate on the debt limit?

Or was it getting a Republican house vote on a bill that simultaneously eliminates Medicare while cutting taxes for the "wealthy"? Oh wait. . it was other Republican leaders that handed the democratic party their 2012 campaign platform.

Look. . .I have a pretty low opinion of Democrats. They are setting the bar for excellence so low that the Republicans literally have to DIG to get under it. . .but digging themselves into a hole is what they are doing.

Trump got the WH to respond because he was winning folks over in polling raising the question. Die hards either way were not moved but BO was losing or he wouldn't have responded. Trump elevated Trump and his show, he has no official ties nor has he bee elected by Republicans.

BO eliminated medicare with his health care plan by pulling billions out of a program going broke, double counting the money to pay for other peoples HC. The Ryan plan leaves near and current seniors on medicare as they know it. Younger folks, most of whom don't think the current plan will be there for them anyway, will be I a new voucher type program. The Dems will try to demagogue this by erroneously trying to pedal the falsehood Repubs will end medicare.

Most politicians only focus on the most important issue to them: re-election, closely followed by their lust for power and money. We probably agree on this one.

Good to exchange thoughts with you again, MM
 
. . . So congratulations goes to Donald Trump for "making" Obama release the long form of a document that was certified authentic and released three years ago.

And what did he accomplish?

Make the entire Republican party look like a bunch of buffoons just as the Republican party is getting to negotiate on the debt limit?

Or was it getting a Republican house vote on a bill that simultaneously eliminates Medicare while cutting taxes for the "wealthy"? Oh wait. . it was other Republican leaders that handed the democratic party their 2012 campaign platform.

Look. . .I have a pretty low opinion of Democrats. They are setting the bar for excellence so low that the Republicans literally have to DIG to get under it. . .but digging themselves into a hole is what they are doing.

What he accomplished is exactly what he set out to - force Obama to pony up - and relatively quickly at that. He showed he can get things done where others have failed. Many voters could see that as a new and much needed concept in Washington. I doubt many thinking people will consider this a defeat for the Repubs (birthers maybe), but do expect the msm and the rest of the leftists to try to spin it as such.

That said, I have to wholeheartedly agree with your last point.
 
BO eliminated medicare with his health care plan by pulling billions out of a program going broke, double counting the money to pay for other peoples HC. The Ryan plan leaves near and current seniors on medicare as they know it. Younger folks, most of whom don't think the current plan will be there for them anyway, will be I a new voucher type program. The Dems will try to demagogue this by erroneously trying to pedal the falsehood Repubs will end Medicare

Ok. Take a deep breath.

Then, re-read the double talk in your post.

Squeezing money out of a system is NOT eliminating a system.
Replacing a single payer program with a voucher system is NOT preserving it.

Bottom line: the current program pays for healthcare. The proposed change pays for a portion of health care. Call it what you will: that is the bottom line difference.

The Ryan plan proposes a plan for the elderly that is similar to the congressional health plan; with a difference: the congressional plan requires a small % co-pay. The Ryan plan proposes a large % co-pay - with zero provisions to insure the co-pay won't increase over time.

Black is not white. Green is not blue.

We won't even address the minor detail that the rep/tea party specifically campaigned on not changing Medicare.
 
Ok. Take a deep breath.

Then, re-read the double talk in your post.

Squeezing money out of a system is NOT eliminating a system.
Replacing a single payer program with a voucher system is NOT preserving it.

Bottom line: the current program pays for healthcare. The proposed change pays for a portion of health care. Call it what you will: that is the bottom line difference.

The Ryan plan proposes a plan for the elderly that is similar to the congressional health plan; with a difference: the congressional plan requires a small % co-pay. The Ryan plan proposes a large % co-pay - with zero provisions to insure the co-pay won't increase over time.

Black is not white. Green is not blue.

We won't even address the minor detail that the rep/tea party specifically campaigned on not changing Medicare.

Can we agree Medicare cannot survive without major restructuring?

“Squeezing money out of a system is NOT eliminating a system.
Replacing a single payer program with a voucher system is NOT preserving it.”

The point is BO and Ryan agree the current system won’t survive without changes.

“Bottom line: the current program pays for healthcare. The proposed change pays for a portion of health care. Call it what you will: that is the bottom line difference”.
We must move to a plan we can afford not the we can borrow money plan we are on today.

“The Ryan plan proposes a plan for the elderly that is similar to the congressional health plan; with a difference: the congressional plan requires a small % co-pay. The Ryan plan proposes a large % co-pay - with zero provisions to insure the co-pay won't increase over time.”
There is NO right or guarantee of receiving SS or Medicare, the courts have ruled. When we go broke congress can just say no more with NO further obligation to those who funded previous generations. What part of broke do the Dem’s/libs not get? We have behaved so irresponsibly for so long multiple generations think of it as a way of life. I heard we borrow $180 Billion a Day to pay for promises we cant keep long term.
 
Yes BUT

The Ryan plan would be much more credible if the spending cuts were not balanced by tax reductions. This cute stunt shows the fundamental unseriousness of the plan.

. . . And it's not like you have to completely GUT everything just because the scale is slightly out of whack. BUT the problem is that every one is so busy protecting their little piece of turf, that collectively NOTHING is accomplished. Case in point is the $300 million (M) budget reduction that the republicans fought for this year. I mean seriously- they really do think Americans are morons, don't they.

I have read more than one article that lays out a fairly easy path to fiscal solvency;

1) increase retirement age
2) make the medicare cuts that Obama Care calls for
3) stopping fighting unfunded wars. (Libya, Iraq, afganistan)
4) let the temporary tax cuts

You ain't gonna balance the budget by eliminating foreign aid. You got to snip at ALL the branches to prune this tree
 
Last edited:
Yes BUT

The Ryan plan would be much more credible if the spending cuts were not balanced by tax reductions. This cute stunt shows the fundamental unseriousness of the plan.

Are you a static believer? Do you think you can hit my finger with a hammer and I will never figure out why and respond by moving it? Raise taxes all you want and you will get less revenue, people will move their fingers. Make it too cheap to play the game and people will just pay it, not try to avoid it. It is not static that you can say they make so much we will tax it more and we will get more. People will use tax free bonds, cancel day care and parent themselves etc. MM
 
No. . .of course not. The natural response is to buy some politicians that will provide your business some "special incentives to promote the local economy". Why pay the government when the goverenment can pay you?

But seriously. . . . you have to start with some fundamental questions like;
1) Should seniors have government financed health care?
2) Should there be social security?
3) Should the U.S. military be larger than the military of all other countries combined?

Currently, the answer to all three questions is "yes". This was fully endorsed by the Republican Tea Party in the last elections. (now. . if they actually meant what they said is a seperate question). Once you establish those priorities, you have to ensure the revenue matches the expenditures.

Face it: NOBODY gives a rat's behind about matching expenditures. Including the Tea Party.

But let's pretend that matching income and expenditures mattered: you have to set up a tax system that supports the expenditures. Cutting $4T in medicare to match $4T in revenue reductions sounds nice. . .except considering the starting point is a deficit, you actually need to cut $4T in medicare and increase revenue by $4T to make the math work. (or thereabouts. . .I am not looking up actual numbers).

Now . . you can argue that cutting nominal rates will increase revenue: but the data doesn't support the facts. (we have been down this road before).

No => the Ryan budget is far more simple: "Let's cut all our political opponents favorite programs while advancing our own tax reduction program." ***-for-tat is proven politics.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,950
Messages
1,422,865
Members
60,932
Latest member
juliediane
Back
Top