This is scary!!

[Mr. Sandman]

[spence]

I think there's a lot of truth in there, but he also misses a few things.

The US isn't Greece. While our total debt may be 32 times larger our GDP is still freaking gigantic. Greece's problem was spending combined with a loss of cash flow...

Entitlements can be contained although it will take some sacrifice. A big part of the problem when they project out 10-20 years is the demographic issue.

The bottom line is the problems are solvable because we have an innovative economy, but some of these challenges will take really big solutions that are impossible in the current political climate.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Entitlements can be contained although it will take some sacrifice.

-spence

Spence, I agree with you. But it's funny, because when someone like Paul Ryan says the exact same thing, Obama accuses Ryan of proposing "social Darwinism".

Spence, the only thing liberals are proposing to fix entitlement reform is tweaking tax rates on the jillionaires. Do the math. That won't get us 1% of what we need, and that's IF you concede that the tax hikes will be followed by increased tax revenue (which is a very big "if").

Our curreent operating debt is $16 trillion-ish. That excludes another $40 - $60 trillion that Medicare and Social Security need to fund current benefits. There are 300 million Americans. Do the math.

Spence, you nailed it, this problem is solvable, but it will involve sacrifice. Painful sacrifice. The longer we wait, the more painful the sacrifice will be.

Where is the Democratic solution to this? I follow this stuff closely, and I have seen nothing. As far as I can tell, the only idea Democrats have is to call Paul Ryan "mean" for suggesting the exact kind of sacrifices that you youself said are required.

Last year, when Ryan proposed a plan to address entitlement reform, he specifically said this his plan would not reduce benefits for current seniors. No matter. The next day, liberals released a commercial of Paul Ryan pushing a wheelchair-bound senior citizen off a cliff.

Spence, that's as dishonest as it gets. Actuaries have been predicting this tsunami since the baby boomers were in diapers, that's sixty years. No one has done anything to fix it, because it's been considered political suicide to propose the sacrifices you refer to.

Spence, where is the Democratic plan to call for these sacrifices? Obama had Democrat majorities in both houses for 2 years, and what did he do to address entitlement programs? ZERO. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Bupkus. And Obama has the balls to attack Ryan's character for proposing the exact sacrifices you say are necessary?

As I've said, liberalism is a mental disorder. Liberals refuse to admit that major sacrifices are necessary here. The only thing they propose is insignificant tax hikes. Those hikes won't even cover the deficit for next year, let alone help address entitlement programs.

Spence, I just don't see how you can understand this situation the way you do, and even CONSIDER voting Democrat.

Because a generation of politicians chose to kick the can down the road, we have tens of trillions in shortfalls. Paul Ryan is proposing a budget to start fixing it. Do Democrats challenge Ryan's math? Nope. Do Democrats offer different data that suggests Ryan is exaggerating the severity of the situation? Nope. Do Democrats propose an alternative? Hell no. So what do they do? They do what they always do, the only thing they can do (because they sure as hell cannot talk about the issue). They attack Ryan's character.

Is Ryan's plan the fairest way to address these issues? I have no idea. But he's admitting the problem exists, and proposing a solution. He deserves to be called a hero for that.

What is the liberal alternative solution? That we all put our fingers in our ears and stick our heads in the sand? Is that decisive leadership? Is that honest? Is that fair to the next generation?

I don't get it. I don't see how anyone sides with Democrats on this.

Spence, you seem to grasp the mathematical realities here. Given that, how can you defend your side's behavior on this vital issue, an issue that literally effects all of us?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

these challenges will take really big solutions that are impossible in the current political climate.

-spence

Not impossible if you vote for conservatives. Impossible only because liberals would rather get re-elected (by promising not to cut anything) than roll up their sleeves and do what unfortunately needs to be done.

Spence, it's not easy to look someone in the eye and tell them that they're going to get less than they thought. No one likes to hear that.

Paul Ryan says that's what's required to solve this. You seem to agree by recognizing the need for sacrifice. Your fellow liberals are the huge majority of politicians who will not take that path.

The way I see it, on this issue, liberals either...

(1) deny that we are in the hole by tens of trillions, or

(2) admit that we are in the hole by that much, but don't feel compelled to address it, or

(3) admit that the problem warrants fixing, but they have a more "humane" solution than Paul Ryan's

Which is it? If it's #3, fine. But let's hear a solution that's better than Paul Ryan's plan, I don't want to hear personal attacks, because that solves nothing.

Spence, which do you think it is?

Calling Paul Ryan a supporter of social Darwinism (which is precisely what Obama did) does exactly nothing to address this massive threat to our prosperity.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not impossible if you vote for conservatives.

That's precisely what people did in the last election and it made the problem worse by forcing out moderates that would actually seek compromise solutions.

The Ryan plan is a joke. Massive tax concessions to the wealthy is not going to magically drive GDP. It's estimated the Ryan plan in conjunction with an extension of the Bush tax cuts adds another 10 Trillion to the debt over the next decade.

Gutting entitlements while you give tax breaks to the rich isn't a solution.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

That's precisely what people did in the last election and it made the problem worse by forcing out moderates that would actually seek compromise solutions.

The Ryan plan is a joke. Massive tax concessions to the wealthy is not going to magically drive GDP. It's estimated the Ryan plan in conjunction with an extension of the Bush tax cuts adds another 10 Trillion to the debt over the next decade.

Gutting entitlements while you give tax breaks to the rich isn't a solution.

-spence

"made the problem worse by forcing out moderates that would actually seek compromise solutions."

Spence, first, I don't think there are any "moderate" solutions to a debt that's more than $50 trillion. Second, what "moderate" entitlement plans were proposed by the "moderate" politicians who were forced out? Please enlighten me? Those career politicians who were thrown out deserve to be thrown out (from both parties), because they were too cowardly to propose what any rational person knows is required.

Again, Spence...please tell me what moderate solutions were proposed by the moderate politicians that would raise $50 trillion in the next 50 years? I must have missed that press conference.

"Massive tax concessions to the wealthy is not going to magically drive GDP"

Similarly, when Obama proposed a healthcare plan that he said would increase coverage but save money (which we now know is bullsh*t), did you question that like you're questioning Ryan's proposal? Because history does show us (for those of us not so blinded by ideology that we can't see factual empirical evidence) that the Clinton and Bush tax rate cuts were followed by big increases in tax revenue collected. I'm not suggesting causality. I'm saying that the liberal notion that tax revenue always changes proportional to tax rates is demonstrably false.

Let's put aside Ryan's tax cuts for a moment. What about his proposed spending cuts? Spence, do you agree that we need deep spending cuts? Because most liberals passionaltyely disagree that we need cuts. But for some reason, they stop there. They don't tell us how we address the financial tsunami without deep spending cuts.

Here's how this play unfolds...

Fact: our debt, when social security and Medicare are included, is not less than $50 trillion.

Paul Ryan: "This is a threat that requires us to cut spending, I don't like it, but it's necessary".

Spence: "the Ryan plan is a joke"

Jim in CT: "Spence, if you reject the Ryan plan, what's the liberal plan to address this problem"

SILENCE.

"Gutting entitlements while you give tax breaks to the rich isn't a solution."

OK. Offer an alternative. Or admit that you don't have one...

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Not impossible if you vote for conservatives.

And all the right wing nutbags said Obama would take away all our guns and make this into socialism central.

Still waiting for it to happen.

If you actually think any politician will "help" you, you're horribly mistaken.

[Mr. Sandman]

Healthcare reform was his first socialism step, luckily this should be reformed

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

And all the right wing nutbags said Obama would take away all our guns and make this into socialism central.

Still waiting for it to happen.

If you actually think any politician will "help" you, you're horribly mistaken.

Likwid, you are correct...anyone who said Obana was going to take away their guns is a right-wing extremist. That's irrational paranoia.

When I say we have north of $50 trillion in debt, that's not irrational paranoia, that's mathematical fact. It's also mathematical fact to say that Obama has done exactly nothing to address entitlement shortfalls. Lastly, it's irrefutable fact when I say that Paul Ryan is offering a solution (maybe not the best solution, but a direct solution) to this, and for his courage, Obama attacks Ryan's character. Note that Obama doesn't say that Ryan is wrong (because he can't), he simply says that Ryan is a "meanie".

"If you actually think any politician will "help" you, you're horribly mistaken"

I could not agree more. I don't want any help. But I don't want my kids facing a 50% income tax rate when the graduate from sollege either, and unless we start making some tough choices, that's what we're facing.

Not sure what your point was. You didn't mention anything about the debt, all you did was bring up right-wing paranoid whack-jobs. Being nervous about $50 trillion in debt doesn't make one paranoid. If one continues to ignore that problem, like politicians have for 50 years, that's criminally negligent. Do you agree?

Again, you offered no solutions to the problem posed, all you did was hurl insults. Right out of page 1 of the liberal playbook.

Liberals cannot deny that we have crushing debt. Nor can they deny that deep cuts are the only way to make a meaningful impact. But they don't have the integrity or principle to say it out loud, because saying "we need cuts" doesn't play well in Peoria. So liberals wait for someone like Paul Ryan to say it, and then they accuse Ryan of not caring about poor people.

Try making anything I said here wrong.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

Healthcare reform was his first socialism step, luckily this should be reformed

Right. His party controlled everything for 2 years, there was literally nothing the Republicans could do to stop anything. And Obama's one significant legislative achievement was a healthcare reform that the vast majority of Americans did not want. And it's likely soon to be deemed illegal by the Supreme Court.

That's some record of accomplishments. His one noteworthy proposal will likely be deemed illegal this summer. As an aside, the timing of that will be awful for him. The decision will be abbounced in June, right around the time gas here (can't imagine what you pay) hits $5 a gallon.

I cannot understand how someone like Spence, who clearly understands the mathematics of the debt, can side with the liberals on this. It's stupifying. Liberals make some good points on some issues (gun control and gay marriage in my opinion), but on the federal debt, they could not be doing more damage to our country if they were paid Al Queda agents. Their behavior is mind-boggling. If they proposed solutions, I would listen hopefully. Butthey don't, all they do is attack character. That doesn't help.

[Fishpart]

Originally Posted by Mr. Sandman

Healthcare reform was his first socialism step, luckily this should be reformed

We are in the high speed lane of The Road to Serfdom. Read Hayek, we are following many of the same policies that failed for the National Socialists..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by Fishpart

We are in the high speed lane of The Road to Serfdom. Read Hayek, we are following many of the same policies that failed for the National Socialists..
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Another good read is Suicide of a Superpower by Buchanan.