Author Topic: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem  (Read 293 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« on: December 13, 2013, 10:52:19 PM »
http://www.newsmax.com/Viguerie/GOP-Ryan-Problem-Republican/2013/12/13/id/541786

 The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem

Friday, 13 Dec 2013 04:48 PM

By Richard Viguerie

From the Conservative HQ website.
 
Back in 2011, when Paul Ryan’s name was floated as a possible Republican presidential candidate we said, “Not so fast, Paul” and pointed out that his much ballyhooed “Path to Prosperity” budget plan allowed spending to rise to $4 trillion over the next five years.
 
Even worse in the minds of fiscal conservatives and limited government constitutional conservatives, Ryan's proposal reduced deficits, but it did not eliminate them until 2040, 27 years from now, according to the CBO analysis.
 
Quote
The Path to Prosperity document included projections for the public debt between 2011 and 2021, and it showed debt going up every single year. Ryan's budget showed the debt increasing to $16.2 trillion in 2012 (we’ve already blown past that) and rising every year after that up to $23.1 trillion in 2021 — and the latest projections show it rising even faster than those made back in 2011.

 
Despite Ryan’s command of the budget numbers he seems incapable of grasping — or more likely simply ignored — the basic law of Washington spending and politics: for every dollar of revenue raised, spending inevitably goes up more than a dollar.
 
Back in the late 1980s, Richard Vedder, and Lowell Gallaway of Ohio University, co-authored a study for Congress’ Joint Economic Committee that found that every dollar of new taxes imposed led to more than one dollar of new spending. Over the ensuing years that study has been updated and the results are always the same.
 
In November 2010, Vedder and The Wall Street Journal’s Stephen Moore released an updated and more sophisticated version of the study showing that “over the entire post-World War II era through 2009 each dollar of new tax revenue was associated with $1.17 of new spending. Politicians spend the money as fast as it comes in — and a little bit more.”
 
What Moore and Vedder found was that no matter how you controlled for the economic variables, spending always went up faster than revenue. The alternative models produce different estimates of the tax-spend relationship — between $1.05 and $1.81. But no matter how they configured the data and no matter what variables they examined, higher tax collections never resulted in less spending.
 
As Vedder and Moore noted, “The only era in modern times that the budget has been in balance was in the late 1990s, when Republicans were in control of Congress. Taxes were not raised, and the capital gains tax rate was cut in 1997. The growth rate of federal spending was dramatically reduced from 1995-99, and the economy roared.”
 
The sequester worked because it was aimed strictly at the spending side of the federal budget, which is why Democrats hated it.
 
The problem we have today is that, led by Paul Ryan, John Boehner, Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy, and the rest of the current House Republican “leadership,” Republicans refuse to hold to the conservative principles that were proven to work back in the late 1990s.
 
If we were inclined to be charitable we would say that today’s House Republican “leaders” don’t seem to understand that liberals and the Democratic Party exist solely to divide up the spoils extorted from producers by the welfare state and that cutting federal spending undermines their very reason for being.
 
However, the unholy alliance of House Appropriations Committee members, military industrial complex do-boys, and principle-free professional politicians who came together behind the Ryan spending deal, shows us that deep down inside establishment Republicans are ready to enter into “grand bargains” to raise taxes and increase spending not because they don’t understand, but because they share those same impulses.

The slogan, “Bad, but not as bad as Obama,” isn’t going to elect another Republican president or garner many liberty-minded votes in a congressional election, but that’s where Paul Ryan is taking those House Republicans who drank the Kool-Aid and voted for the deal he “negotiated” with the Democrats.

 
Paul Ryan’s record of supporting TARP, supporting the Bush administration’s spending binge, supporting the 2011 debt ceiling deal, and now leading the effort to undo the one conservative element of that deal that was actually working, shows that, despite the evidence that he lives his personal life according to conservative principles, he cannot be trusted to lead Republicans to govern America according to limited-government constitutional conservative principles.

“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2013, 10:53:46 PM »
Our political structure is irretrievably broken. Despite what they want people to believe, our two political parties are very much on the same page about most issues.   In the meantime:

$17,229,291,835,680.58.. 
« Last Edit: December 13, 2013, 10:55:51 PM by Rapunzel »
“The time is now near at hand which must probably determine, whether Americans are to be, Freemen, or Slaves.” G Washington July 2, 1776

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2013, 11:05:55 PM »
Richard Viguerie is still struggling to live off his halcyon Reagan days.  Since the 80s, Viguerie hasn't contributed anything but bile and vitriol to the Republican Party. 

And he hasn't been right about anything either.

He's another who'd rather lose on principle than win on compromise.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 43,483
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2013, 11:25:14 PM »
Richard Viguerie is still struggling to live off his halcyon Reagan days.  Since the 80s, Viguerie hasn't contributed anything but bile and vitriol to the Republican Party. 

And he hasn't been right about anything either.

He's another who'd rather lose on principle than win on compromise.

At one level, I agree with the essential point of your last sentence; however, what I find lacking in the premise as stated thus is any recognition of the fact that compromise solely for the sake of winning is equally false because one who pursues that avenue will inevitably, and necessarily, end up compromising one's own fundamental principles, becoming that which one opposes.

There is truth to both sides of this argument:  a few too many conservative republicans seem to have crossed over from a stand on principles to mere martyrdom, which seems to be the gist of many moderate complaints against conservatives.  At the same time, a few too many moderate republicans seem to have forgotten that compromise is merely a tool to be used in accomplishing other, substantive, ends, it is not an end in itself, and that one who will compromise on anything and everything solely for the sake of being on the "winning" side will have accomplished nothing other than making one's self inconsequential or worse, becoming that which one claims to oppose, which seems to be the gist of many conservative complaints against moderates.

People like Boehner and McCain appear to have made a Golden Calf out of compromise for the sake of compromise.  People like Cruz appear to have flirted a little too often with martyrdom.  Both sides need to get real and need to apply the art of compromise to the ongoing arguments they have between themselves.  Certain it is that moderates should be practicing the art of rational compromise with their conservative brethren in the republican party before they try the far more perilous task of trying to reach a rational compromise with the democrats/liberals.  Certain it is that the moderates need to do a lot more practicing with the art of compromise before they continue trying to compromise with the democrats/liberals because to-date they seem to have simply been engaged in giving the farm away rather than getting something valuable back from the democrats/liberals in exchange for their compromises.

Offline sinkspur

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 28,599
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2013, 11:28:15 PM »
At one level, I agree with the essential point of your last sentence; however, what I find lacking in the premise as stated thus is any recognition of the fact that compromise solely for the sake of winning is equally false because one who pursues that avenue will inevitably, and necessarily, end up compromising one's own fundamental principles, becoming that which one opposes.

There is truth to both sides of this argument:  a few too many conservative republicans seem to have crossed over from a stand on principles to mere martyrdom, which seems to be the gist of many moderate complaints against conservatives.  At the same time, a few too many moderate republicans seem to have forgotten that compromise is merely a tool to be used in accomplishing other, substantive, ends, it is not an end in itself, and that one who will compromise on anything and everything solely for the sake of being on the "winning" side will have accomplished nothing other than making one's self inconsequential or worse, becoming that which one claims to oppose, which seems to be the gist of many conservative complaints against moderates.

People like Boehner and McCain appear to have made a Golden Calf out of compromise for the sake of compromise.  People like Cruz appear to have flirted a little too often with martyrdom.  Both sides need to get real and need to apply the art of compromise to the ongoing arguments they have between themselves.  Certain it is that moderates should be practicing the art of rational compromise with their conservative brethren in the republican party before they try the far more perilous task of trying to reach a rational compromise with the democrats/liberals.  Certain it is that the moderates need to do a lot more practicing with the art of compromise before they continue trying to compromise with the democrats/liberals because to-date they seem to have simply been engaged in giving the farm away rather than getting something valuable back from the democrats/liberals in exchange for their compromises.

A very good and thoughtful post.  Thanks very much.
From  "A Shining City on a Hill"

To "A global laughingstock"

Offline Oceander

  • Technical
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 43,483
  • #NeverTrumpForever
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2013, 11:30:34 PM »
A very good and thoughtful post.  Thanks very much.

Every once in a while I try to stir things up.  I'll probably be back to my curmudgeonly self soon enough! ;^)

Offline Luis Gonzalez

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 7,502
    • Boiling Frogs
Re: The GOP's Paul Ryan Problem
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2013, 11:47:48 PM »
At one level, I agree with the essential point of your last sentence; however, what I find lacking in the premise as stated thus is any recognition of the fact that compromise solely for the sake of winning is equally false because one who pursues that avenue will inevitably, and necessarily, end up compromising one's own fundamental principles, becoming that which one opposes.

There is truth to both sides of this argument:  a few too many conservative republicans seem to have crossed over from a stand on principles to mere martyrdom, which seems to be the gist of many moderate complaints against conservatives.  At the same time, a few too many moderate republicans seem to have forgotten that compromise is merely a tool to be used in accomplishing other, substantive, ends, it is not an end in itself, and that one who will compromise on anything and everything solely for the sake of being on the "winning" side will have accomplished nothing other than making one's self inconsequential or worse, becoming that which one claims to oppose, which seems to be the gist of many conservative complaints against moderates.

People like Boehner and McCain appear to have made a Golden Calf out of compromise for the sake of compromise.  People like Cruz appear to have flirted a little too often with martyrdom.  Both sides need to get real and need to apply the art of compromise to the ongoing arguments they have between themselves.  Certain it is that moderates should be practicing the art of rational compromise with their conservative brethren in the republican party before they try the far more perilous task of trying to reach a rational compromise with the democrats/liberals.  Certain it is that the moderates need to do a lot more practicing with the art of compromise before they continue trying to compromise with the democrats/liberals because to-date they seem to have simply been engaged in giving the farm away rather than getting something valuable back from the democrats/liberals in exchange for their compromises.

 blij26
“[Euthanasia] is what any State medical service has sooner or later got to face. If you are going to be kept alive in institutions run by and paid for by the State, you must accept the State’s right to economize when necessary …” The Ministry of Fear by Graham Green (New York: Penguin Books [1943] 2005, p. 165).


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf