The Ryan budget proposal: at first glance
Three caveats here.
One is that I am unusually pressed for time today, and so this will be quick. I’m pretty certain, though, that this is only my first visit to a topic that is big and will be lasting.
The second is that, as with most budgets offered by either side, it’s the details that are most important, and those details will only emerge over time.
The third is that, as with most budgets offered by either side, some of the projections for cost savings are going to be based on guesses and unknowns.
Here’s Paul Ryan’s statement. Here it is in another form:
Here’s another look at what’s being proposed. Allahpundit provides some other links here.
It can safely be said that the left will hate it and start digging into it with vigor; they already have. It can be safely said that even the right will fight it in various ways; after all, cutting benefits is bound to be unpopular, even with people who are all for a more balanced budget. Another thing that can safely be said is that this budget is not a mere echo of Obama’s; the differences are very stark and very real.
To be continued…
As has been pointed out by many, democracy lasts until the electorate realizes they have the keys to the treasury. The Democrats will continue to offer free stuff for all until we crash.
“”democracy lasts until the electorate realizes they have the keys to the treasury.””
Mr. Frank
People have always realized its mathematical possibilty since our founding. I contend it took a corresponding drop in the morality of enough people to see it reach this point of threatening the republic. No republic can survive too many people without shame for living off the sweat of their fellow man’s brow.
“It can safely be said that the left will hate it and start digging into it with vigor; they already have.”
This is the winner take all part of the future. This is our main battle. This is do or die, thunderdome cage match, no prisoners. This is EVERYTHING.
Of course the left will fight 24/7. Of course they will lie, distort, slander, malign and use every dirty trick possible.
We had better not only match them slander for slander; we’d better double it and go on the attack first. And when I say we should slander I mean that we should tell the truth. The truth is slander to the left.
If we lose this one, America is over. We cannot lose because that prospect is unthinkable.
But let there be no civility. This is not a civil argument we are in. It is whether there will be a civil-ization or not. Politeness is a moral defect in this case. We win or we have failed. We fight as hard as possible and as dirty as allowable.
The Left are monstrous destroyers of souls and civilizations. If we forget that for a minute, no matter how sweet they look, we lose.
They are to America what the Muslim Brotherhood is to Egypt. There is no shared vision here. There is a winner and loser; a victor and vanquished.
Thanks God for Paul Ryan. I said a prayer for him today. We know who our enemies are – anyone who does not support his relatively modest proposal.
You won’t believe this, but the Weelky Standard reports: Nancy Pelosi Attacks Paul Ryan’s Budget
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/nancy-pelosi-attacks-paul-ryans-budget_556812.html
She makes Mike Mc’s point. She attacks the very idea of controlled spending, using sophomoric slogans.
Paul Ryan is my hero.
The democrats have entered the stage of Alice in Wonderland. They actually believe the crap they are putting out there.
Look, I’m on Social Security and Medicare. I’ve known for a long time that the benefits were shaky and have prepared myself for reductions and means testing. We are going to see means testing and reductions in benefits. There is no other way to remain solvent as a nation. If Congress can’t get this done, we are going to be the next Argentina. Apparently the dems have never heard of what happened there.
I’m with ya, Mike. No more compromises. The hand that reaches across the aisle to Dems should be amputated.
Erskine Bowles, remember him? Used to work for Mr. Clinton, co-chaired the Deficit Commission, whose report Baraq has ignored. Said in Senate testimony last month, grossly under-reported, words to the effect that it’s not about the future for our kids and grandkids; the $ crisis is here now.
It’s here NOW, and it is bad, it is monstrous.
This is our last stand. Lose this and we are done.
Here is a summary of Federal 2010 finances.
$ 2,200 Federal Tax Revenue (billions)
$ 1,300 Borrowing (the deficit)
—————
$ 3,500 Total Spending
$ 0 Total Saving
$14,500 Entire economy (GDP)
15.2% Taxes as % of Economy
9.0% Borrowing as % of Economy
24.2% Total spending as % of Economy
What if (say) Bob’s family budget operated like the government, in proportion? That gives a feeling for our situation:
$50,000 What Bob can spend from his income
$29,900 Bob borrows this
—————
$79,900 Bob’s spends it all
60% more than Bob’s income
$ 1,400 The GOP cut in proportion
The proposed GOP cut in spending of $61 billion is just 1.8%. For Bob, it would be $1,400.
The federal government has made big promises, far above what it will collect in taxes at current rates.
$75,100 billion ($75.1 trillion) is the amount of a fund which would pay for the unfunded part of promised entitlement programs over the next 75 years, if available today and invested at 3% interest. Of course, there is no such fund, so meeting those promises would require immediately increasing tax revenues by 76% to pay off that “mortgage”, or those promises will be broken.
Don’t take comfort from the 75 year time frame. We are already falling short, being made up by huge borrowings (the deficit). The result of the 75 year analysis is that things will steadily become worse.
Collecting 76% more in taxes might cause or deepen unemployment. Or, increasing tax rates might actually decrease tax revenues if people decided to earn less and pay less. Or, it may be impossible to convince younger people to give up their savings in exchange for the right to charge their children high taxes in turn. I think the promises will be broken.
This problem is huge. The retirees of today and in the future have paid into Social Security thinking that their “insurance premium” will fund part of their retirement. Actually, all of the cash (real resources) has been spent. What remains is only the promise to now tax the non-retired to pay for the retired, at much higher rates. That is not what people thought Social Security would deliver to them.
Promises for Medicare and Medicaid are worse; they are bigger and just as unfunded. What is more kind: to face reality now, or to default on these promises at the last minute?
Unfunded Promises (billions)
7,900 Social Security
22,800 Medicare
35,300 Medicaid
9,100 Federal Debt
75,100 Total Unfunded Promises (billions)
above curent tax collections
2,100 Federal Pensions
3,700 Veteran Benefits
1,600 All Other
—————
7,400 In current budgets (billions)
$82,500 Total Promises (billions)
The unfunded promises of $75,100 billion are 34 times the $2,200 billion in taxes estimated to be collected in accounting year 2010 (the year ending Nov 30, 2011). There is nothing saved or set aside to satisfy those promises, and there is no tax revenue now collected or saved to pay those amounts now and during the next 75 years; that is the meaning of “unfunded”.
Bob’s unfunded promises (in proportion) would be $1,736,00 increasing at 3% yearly, to be paid off in 75 years, over and above Bob’s current, spendable (and already spent) income of $50,000 (current tax collections).
EasyOpinions -> Family Budget
Make me czar`for a day and my plan will be every govt employee with an odd number birthday gets laid off. Sure we’d have to adjust and listen to five years of whining but something tells me we would actually function just fine.
One thing in our favor is Paul Ryan’s personality. He comes across as quiet, sincere, and hard working–not the racist, uncaring, neanderthal social conservative that the Dems would probably love to have on the other side. In contrast to Obama’s flashiness on the basketball court and at White House sing-a-longs, to say nothing of the grandiose promises about Gitmo, I think Ryan is more likely to be trusted. He is apparently making some cuts in farm subsidies, so the charge of protecting the Rep base also can’t be made. He also doesn’t seem like the kind of guy who would put his grandma on a dogfood diet.
We don’t need a screaming battle right now. We need quiet determination and faith that the American people will find ways to cope and to help one another through the difficult times ahead. We need someone to remind us of how our parents and grandparents made it through the Great Depression and WWII and that we have an obligatio to this heritage to show the same strength of character they showed.
Yup, kinda like furloughing “non-essential” Federal employees in the event of a (I hope for) shutdown.
I just love being taxed to pay for non-essentials, don’t you?
People have always realized its mathematical possibilty since our founding. I contend it took a corresponding drop in the morality of enough people to see it reach this point of threatening the republic. No republic can survive too many people without shame for living off the sweat of their fellow man’s brow.
you mean consciousness raising mass movement liberation at one shot without exceptions and no turning back was a bad idea?
you mean all the women sold us all out for what? magic beans? slavery? infertility? the right to be a disease vector and be proud of it?
and that’s exactly what they did, as the condition above was known, and the communists went about creating that condition, and what group made the most sweeping changes to family, law, business, childcare, psychology, and on and on?
America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within. Joseph STALIN
and that’s exactly what the movements did.
patriotism is bad, its what made hitler. nope, patriotism made america, the abuse and perversion of it made hitler.
conciousness raising and liberation visa vis equality, and all that kind of stuff.
when i was a kid, bra burning, when i was a teen, it was bra wearing on the outside of your clothes, and when an adult, public exposure sans bra and proud your in a slut parade…
get that morals one done, and you kill two birds, as those moms aint going to instill morality.
especially when they have been taught to respond to any impingement on their idea of behavior or action, as oppression.
“Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism.” – Catharine A. MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (First Harvard University Press, 1989), p.10
well, isn’t that what we are about to have? and isn’t that who obama just paid off with a signing statement putting tons of agencies in charge of insuring where work goes? mancession? no good men on tv?
there was only TWO ways to do this. defeat the US in war, and impose. Or whisper in the ear and turn the women against their own society. and do it in such a way that no matter what you say, point to, look to outcome, etc… wont change it…
the wake up moment is when the decline is so bad someone attacks or some circumstance when we are thin, happens…
then there isnt enough order to defend oneself, enough health to fight, enough independent cooperative ability and skill, no factories or skilled population to resupply, no motivation given treatment towards those who are disposable and go off.
look down the road… the young and virile USA is senile and weak, and walking full tilt down the road into a bad neighborhood…
but whatever you do, dont blame the victim…
Here’s Veronique de Rugy’s cautious take at PJM:
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/paul-ryans-budget-the-path-to-prosperity/
I am at sea when it comes to budgeting, one of the most difficult and occult aspects of legislating. By no means do I say this with chest puffed-out, so if I’m wrong, by all means correct me – understanding this stuff is the main thing, not being right.
So here we go:
1) The “trigger” thing for Social Security seems iffy to me. Politically, it’s very clever, and had I been on Ryan’s staff I may even have recommended it. But from a stern citizen judge’s perspective, it looks like a gimmick, one that could easily be got around by an amped up future Democratic majority.
2) The actual cut in the deficit by 2021 is Obama’s $774b – Ryan’s $385b = $389b reduction.
I don’t know. That seems sort of good. Does the damn thing ever balance? What’s the practical meaning of that kind of reduction? Maybe a lot – I’m just uncertain.
3) Spending is $800 billion less (nominal) in 2021 under Ryan’s plan than under Obama’s budget. That sounds like a lot, but when you look at the actual numbers it’s $1.1 trillion versus $1.9 trillion. That has to be good, but is it good enough?
4) I can’t say anything about the Medicare/Medicaid proposals. Responsible commentators like de Rugy think they’re good, so I’ll accept that for now.
5) Those entitlement reforms, it would appear, are what principally drive the debt and deficit reductions. The deficit reductions are noted above. According to de Rugy the debt is reduced from 90% GDP to 67.5% GDP by 2021. Again, that looks good – but isn’t it more like holding the line? What’s to stop a future Democratic majority from blasting it all apart?
I guess it’s a rock and hard place deal. If Ryan went in slashing and burning, then the aggrieved would really feel some pain. Ryan is trying to cut what he can, as much as he can, while introducing pain subtly and gradually.
But politics aside, would a knowledgeable fiscal conservative be pleased in 2021 with a near 70% GDP debt? We’re alarmed by that now, why not in 2021? Am I not accounting for some factor?
6) Finally, a broader question. Virtually every conservative I’ve read commenting on the proposal today has been either mildly supportive (de Rugy) to ecstatic (Pete Wehner), but they all say these not insignificant words: “It’s a good start…”
A good start to what? What’s the end? How close does Ryan’s proposal get us to it? Is no one answering that question because it’s impossible to answer? But if it’s impossible to answer, then how is the plan “a good start”?
There’s basically two questions there: First, what is the Platonic Form of a budget plan that we’re measuring this “good start” against (and are conservatives mostly agreed on what that Form is)? Second, lets stipulate that all reform ends with Ryan’s plan – it goes into law as written, but nothing more is done until 2021 – – would that be ok? Or would the good start then turn into another “part of the problem,” a kind of prolonging of the inevitable?
Alright, that’s all for now. Hopefully better informed heads will come in and clear up some of this Delphic stuff.
I know it’s off topic, but I cannot repress my jubulation at the Dems having picked Debbie Wasserman Schultz as their party leader.
I find her to be the least compelling, compassionate politician I have ever encountered – well, maybe Nancy Pelosi gets that billing, but Wasserman Schultz is right up there. She is angry, negative, moronic, blind, and illogical – and strongly those things.
Neo says, “… as with most budgets offered by either side, some of the projections for cost savings are going to be based on guesses and unknowns.”
True, as are their projections for minor details like government revenues. That is one reason why I think Ryan’s proposal is merely the starting point for the discussion of how we stop digging and begin filling the hole. Ryan went back to the 2008 FY budget as his starting point, I would have preferred he had chosen the 2000 FY budget. (Asking for 1960 would never fly.) 😉
expat says, “We need someone to remind us of how our parents and grandparents made it through the Great Depression and WWII and that we have an obligatio to this heritage to show the same strength of character they showed.”
Yes, and we need that someone to get the message across to the under 40 crowd, and if only it were possible, the unborn and yet to be conceived. They are the ones who will bear the long term burden if we don’t change our ways.
J.J. says, “If Congress can’t get this done, we are going to be the next Argentina.”
I’m more of a Zimbabwe guy.
Tom says, “This is our last stand. Lose this and we are done.”
The window is indeed closing… IMO we have no more than 3 years to turn the ship around before TSHTF. Harare here we come.
Artfldgr says, “the wake up moment is when the decline is so bad someone attacks or some circumstance when we are thin, happens…”
1 small nuke in the port of LA or Houston or NYC (take your pick or do all 3 just to be sure) is all it would take to utterly crash the economy of the USA for decades and thus a new dark age is born, civility and hard work being so ‘old school’ in the 21st century.
kolnai says, “I am at sea when it comes to budgeting, one of the most difficult and occult aspects of legislating. By no means do I say this with chest puffed-out, so if I’m wrong, by all means correct me – understanding this stuff is the main thing, not being right.”
IMO Ryan’s proposal is merely just a starting point, so no, I don’t think you are wrong. A first step that would show me Ryan is truly serious would be cutting 10% ($360 billion) from Obama’s 2011 budget proposal. As we can see, the majority of the republicans inside the beltway are pretending to be brave budget cutters by demanding a cut of somewhere between $60 to 100 billion which is a baby step. I do give Ryan credit for at least beginning the discussion and for putting entitlements on the table. A crust of bread is better than nothing.
If you want to know how people are betting on the dollar check out the gold and silver markets. In the last twelve months silver prices have doubled and gold is up 20%. The dollar is shrinking, but the Democrats say all is well. We can’t make cuts because that’s not fair.
Mr. Frank,
Currently the price of silver remains below its historical ratio to the price of gold. I’ve been buying small amounts of silver ($200 or so) once a month for the last 18 months. Its been a good investment so far and stores well in my safe. I like looking at it. 🙂 I also have an investment in the currency market and per the advice of my advisor I’ve been betting against the greenback ever since Obama took the oath of office. That too has done well.
Here is a recent article that may interest you:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-silver-to-hedge-against-global-turmoil-2011-04-04
Ryan’s is a start, but it merely adjusts, tweaks the basic false foundations of Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security. A caring Federal redistributive safety net would remain. The tweak to Medicare is the best of his proposals.
The only true structural change is in decoupling Fannie and Freddie from the Federal government, but there is no backup to this abstraction in his article, and they are gargantuan money holes in present form.
Even if the Ryan plan is fully adopted for FY 2012, there will be no graphic change until ~2020. Steady-state assumptions, as Ryan seems to be making, are fraught with error over real time. What are his contingency plans, if any?
It is impossible to turn the enormous supertanker that is the Federal ship of state on a dime.
All that said, I’m with Ryan.
Tom says, “Ryan’s is a start, but it merely adjusts, tweaks the basic false foundations… ”
Yes.
“… decoupling Fannie and Freddie from the Federal government, but there is no backup to this abstraction in his article, and they are gargantuan money holes in present form.”
Notice how desperate the FED is trying to re-inflate the real estate market?
“Even if the Ryan plan is fully adopted for FY 2012, there will be no graphic change until ~2020.”
Too late IMO. 2015 is my deadline.
“It is impossible to turn the enormous supertanker that is the Federal ship of state on a dime.”
Granted, but as I noted up stream, I want the republicans in the house to show me they are serious by cutting 10% from the current Obama 2011 FY budget proposal. The House holds the purse strings, use them or lose them. Anyone who can’t cut 10% is not trying. My sweet wife & I can cut 10% from our monthly budget on the drop of a dime and I think the same goes for everyone who comments at neo-neocon.
“All that said, I’m with Ryan.”
Count me as a reluctant yes.
Parker,
Good article. I’m a silver fan as well. The problems with silver are it’s heavy in large amounts relative to value, it must be stored safely, and the mark up from spot is high. Some of the PM miners have done very well(e.g., First Majestic). Silver coins could come in very handy when TSHTF because the Democrats won’t stop spending.
On the Mark Levin show tonight , a young electrician from Houston called to say that things were great under Clinton, turned some under Bush, so he voted for Baraq but things are no better so he won’t do that again. Had heard a little bit about…who? Oh, some Ryan, so he might vote for him.
The electorate sure is scary. An electrician! He might, just might, know the difference between an ohm and an amp, but maybe not.
Oh good grief. How many times am I going to read that “Ryan is just a start”?
Ryan has come up with a solid plan that can be sold politically. Let me repeat those last four words, “that can be sold politically”. It behooves every American to stop sniping, and start supporting and selling. Today, I emailed everyone in my address book portions of Ryan’s speech; and thoughtful comments on his proposal from here: http://blogs.reuters.com/james-pethokoukis/
Make it five words–or ignore the superfluous “that”. Shades of Biden.
Mr. Frank says, ” Silver coins could come in very handy when TSHTF because the Democrats won’t stop spending.”
Agreed, and be ready with a metal snip to cut them into pieces of 8. 😉
“… it’s heavy in large amounts relative to value, it must be stored safely… ”
That is what a safe and a centerfire rifle & plenty of ammo are for. I reload so I also invest in brass, primers, bullets, and powder. My eyesight is the crucial factor. 😉
Debt, like a Nightmare on Elm street, won’t be real to the Democrats until it’s too late.
Debbie Stevens: I don’t believe in you.
Freddy Krueger: I believe in you.
So there will be a consolation prize!
Parker said, “I’m more of a Zimbabwe guy.”
We have too many productive people and infrastructure to be Zimbabwe, which drove their productive people out. Except for the size of the countries we are very similar to Argentina. Productive land, productive people, good infrastructure, and lots of educated people. Argentina did a prolonged dive into national insolvency. We are on that road, but it can be turned around.
Ryan’s plan is, as Oldflyer says, “politically possible.” That is important. What is even more iimportant is turning the economy around. Getting growth up to 3.5 – 4% per annum for five or six years would cure a lot of problems. That means drill, drill, drill, ease EPA regs on new factories and power plants, make it easier for small business people to plan ahead and give them confidence to hire. A secular bull market of ten years would also cure a lot of retirement and pension plans. (We’re in our eleventh year of a secular bear) We cannot ignore how important economic growth is and that the Obamans have done just the opposite of what needs to be done to get things moving again.
If we do go the Argentina route we will all suffer, but those with real estate, precious metals, and marketable skills will do better than most. There is a website (which I can’t find or would link to it) that explains how people coped. Small silver coins were more useful for day to day needs than gold coins. Barter became a mainstay of the economy and, though people were poorer, life went on. There was some crime initially, but people in urban areas organised self defense units that served as ex-officio police. Guns, ammo and the ability to use same were pluses. Those in the country had to be ready to defend their property, but large scale looting did not become a huge problem. Those who know how to find a need and fill it in the economy do well. I hope we don’t have to go there.
I did the same thing Oldflyer did today. E-mailed Ryan’s plan to everyone on my list. Spread the word and counter the fear and class warfare message being spread by the dems.
Oldflyer says, “Oh good grief. How many times am I going to read that “Ryan is just a start”?”
Because it is merely a start. With regard to Biden’s 5 words: We are f*%ked, get serious.
“Ryan has come up with a solid plan that can be sold politically. Let me repeat those last four words, “that can be sold politically”. It behooves every American to stop sniping, and start supporting and selling.”
IMO, it remains merely a start. Unfunded liabilities for SS and most importantly Medicare-Medicaid +Obama-care + interest payments are in the 100+ trillion range over the next 30 years. If that doesn’t pull panty hose uptight, what else does it take to make Main Street wake up?
As far as sold politically goes, we need a Churchill: “If you are going through hell, keep going.”
Oldflyer, IMO we are in a much deeper swamp than it appears you recognize. We are at the cusp. Drastic measures are needed, or we perish sooner rather than later. Personally, I prefer my children & grandchildren go on to produce great & great-great grandchildren. They are my potential legacy. I get rather fierce about my legacy.
Karl Denninger is not very hopeful about Ryan’s plan.
Paul Ryan: A Swing And (Unfortunately) A Miss
J.J.,
There are many ‘ifs’ in your statements. I don’t feel comfortable with ifs. Ifs are promises from politicians. I have little confidence in promises from politicians regardless of the R or D after their names.
I use Zimbabwe instead of Argentina as an analogy because we are not the same nation we were in 1930s. Back then 50+% were rural and knew how to grow and preserve food. Back then society was (for the most part) civil.
If (a persistent little word) or when we face a collapse similar to (or worse) than the 1930s there will only be isolated pockets of social cohesion. We’ll survive in Iowa, ND, SD,NE, WY, and perhaps a few other states, but for the majority who reside in the states with large urban populations it will be a dog eat dog situation as the vast majority will be looking for handouts from the beltway and all the beltway will be able to provide are IOUs backed by the full faith of what? To put this in perspective: imagine Detroit today and then imagine Detroit circa 1930.
Sorry to rain on anyone’s parade, but Ryan’s plan (IMO) remains but a start. Unfunded liabilities are like unintended consequences. Murphy rules. 3 years max, and I’m sticking to it. 🙁
“We can solve these problems, but first we have to stop lying to the American people. And despite my hope that such was forthcoming from the Republicans I see no evidence of that in Paul Ryan’s proposal.”
If I was a religious man I would say amen, but I’ll say ‘amen’ anyway. 😉
Parker, you seem to have lost alll faith in our sytem. If we can’t solve these problems through proper governance, what do you suggest? Show me a better plan than Ryan’s. It is what we have to work with and we need to support it or Zimbabwe/Argentina becomes more likely. The dems are playing the fear, class, and race cards and their communications arm, the MSM, will run with it. We, who are opposed to such must get behind anyone with the guts to stand up and propose something that can be passed, such as Ryan’s plan. Even more important is to vote Obama out in 2012. Instapundit said it first, but I will repeat it, “I’ll vote for a syphlitic camel before I’ll vote for Obama.” It is that important to get rid of him.
Jimmy J – You have said it.
At this point the naysaying Parkers of the world are as much enemies of America as Nancy Pelosi. Parker may as well be Harry Reid for all the good people like him will do. Which is zero.
The Parkers of the world insure defeat. Therefore, they have no place in the debate in my book. Anyone anytime on any issue can be a defeatist. There is no obligation to pay any more attention to them than one would a 3 year old in temper tantrum mode. They need naps. They should shut up and get lost, or get in the fight.
The rest of us need to move on beyond them. We should be both praising Ryan’s plan to the rafters, and damning the Dem opposition to it non stop.
Someone once said something along the lines of (sic) “Perfection is the enemy of the good”. I could probably find the quote, but why bother?
The Oldflyer corollary: “Conservatives will usually form circular firing squads to kill the good in search of ephemeral perfection”.
Parker, et al, you embody the idea. But, I have read enough in this thread to feel just a little confrontational at this moment, so I ask: “Just who are you to criticize Ryan’s product?”. We know that Ryan is an acknowledged budget expert–even the hostile press admits that. He has slaved over this for months, maybe years. He has studied the “Debt Commission” and every available source of budgetary wisdom. He has produced a major proposal; some would say a gargantuan proposal. So, let’s hear it. How did you arrive at your critique? Did you bring comparable expertise and effort to the problem?
While we are at it. Why don’t the critics on the forum propose an alternative, along with the political arguments to make it feasible? Adults know that brilliance is meaningless without the will and the means to act upon it at hand.
Oldflyer:
The fretting seems to bother you, but it is OK. Important is the common acknowledgement that it is a start, which we here all seem united in supporting.
As I said earlier, the ship of state is a supertanker; it tacks sluggishly even with the right captain and the right helmsman. That is necessarily frustrating when one is aboard the Exxon Valdez, headed toward a rock.
I also suggest to you that critics do not make good products; book reviewers do not, cannot write good novels. Ain’t their job to produce novels, it’s their job to criticise, hopefully constructively. We are critics here.
Criticize all you want Tom. I stand by my comments.
My initial post stated that Conservatives need to get behind this proposal and help sell it. Then I read post after post talking about the deficiencies of Ryan’s plan.
As part of my past I went to sea on very large ships. One thing we knew was that if you stood on the bridge, debating a course of action as the ship steamed into harm, your tardy action would turn out to be moot.
It is time to start turning the damn ship.
Just one more thought on your last. I trust that the “Ship of State” does not “TACK”. I do hope that it is not subject to the winds, but that it moves under its own power, and in the direction we choose.
As I said, we need to chart a course, because we are underway. An analogy could be to moving through ice. We cannot stop, or we will be trapped. The various Navigators of this ship have let it drift too long. We are deep in the ice (euphemistically speaking). Ryan has given us a course to open water, and we better keep steam up and hold steady.
I was not asking you to stand down, Oldflyer. I intended no criticism either, except for your demand for critics to come up with alternatives. That was the intended point of my ‘book critics do not good authors make.’
I support the Ryan plan, as I posted, and am happy to seize the helm with you!
Jeez, sailor! I used ‘tack’ as a shorter form of ‘change course!’ But maybe we are on a motorsailer!
Those that broke it, did it by neutralizing who would stand up and save it or conserve it. only the ones who broke it can help fix it, and they wont do that… no way, no how, as everything they have been taught says every scare story that is happening will be the result of returning.
Pingback:Learn Internet Marketing Mistakes So You Can Avoid Them | Infomine - The web directory
Oldflyer says, “It is time to start turning the damn ship.”
Agreed. And I acknowledge it will take a a few years to do just that.
Oldflyer says, “Just who are you to criticize Ryan’s product?”. We know that Ryan is an acknowledged budget expert—even the hostile press admits that. He has slaved over this for months, maybe years. He has studied the “Debt Commission” and every available source of budgetary wisdom. He has produced a major proposal; some would say a gargantuan proposal. So, let’s hear it. How did you arrive at your critique? Did you bring comparable expertise and effort to the problem?”
Oldflyer,
I’m just me, a human being born in America possessing my inalienable rights. I do not feel I have a quarrel with you, we simply see things differently. I see a much bigger problem than you see & you see a smaller problem than I see.
Andrew_M & kolnai point to what I see as the BIG problem. IMO — an inalienable right 🙂 — Ryan’s proposal kicks the can down the road for about 10 years as opposed to Bernanke who has been kicking it down the road with a series of 6 month punts. That is progress, but feeble progress IMO.
Again, if they can’t cut a bloated 3.6 trillion annual budget by 10% they are not showing me what I require to be confident that they are truly serious. I realize its all ‘politics’ but we will soon be beyond the point of politics as usual. The American people need to be told the truth per the items Andrew_M & kolnai discussed.
Parker,
I’m with J.J. It’s Argentina we should look at because I don’t truly think that we’d slip into a tribal savagery that is Zim.
My go-to prepper/”survivalist” site isL
http://ferfal.blogspot.com/
I STRONGLY recommend his book, poor English and all. It’s part of his charm.
His take is that we’re on the exact same road as the one they went down. He doesn’t subscribe to ‘TEOTWAWKI’, zombie hoards, etc. I’ve mentioned his site before and will do so to anyone who listens.
His real-world advice based on personal experience is fascinating. He’s also had some foreign (Japan, Kosovo – I think…., etc) guests on telling what life is like once everything changes. No running to the hills, but how to handle a life where crime is rampant, services non-existent, and money inflating by the day.
While his words don’t fill me with hope, I am lifted from possible despair that one gets when reading other blogs about surviving hard times. It makes this former Girl Scout who didn’t earn all that many badges, and who still has never changed a tire (in all my 44 years) feel like things are survivable for those with brains, foresight and a bit of luck.
JuliB says, “I’m with J.J. It’s Argentina we should look at because I don’t truly think that we’d slip into a tribal savagery that is Zim.”
First of all, I would like to believe you & J.J. are right. Nonetheless, from my POV we have devolved into a tribal society to a certain extent. I see little cohesion and a lot of collision aside from local pockets of sanity in the less populated, more homogenous midwest, I want to be optimistic, but I’m at a 50-50 state at best.
Thanks for the link, I will check it out.
Parker, you may not have a quarrel with me, but you do live in a different universe if you really think there is chance of any action bolder than Ryan’s proposal.
I do have a quarrel with people who, as I said originally, fight the good and possible in the name of the perfect and unattainable.
Ryan has done a magnificent job for us. If Conservative chip away at it, they simply enable the opposition.
It may be just a start; I am not competent to predict the future. I am convinced that we need to get behind it and support it anyway we can.-
Could we please start turning the ship now before we hit the damn iceberg!