"Ryan’s Budget Would Cut $5 Trillion in Spending Over a Decade"

[applegrove]

Ryan’s Budget Would Cut $5 Trillion in Spending Over a Decade

By JONATHAN WEISMAN at the NY Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/us/politics/paul-ryan-budget.html?_r=0

"SNIP.......................


The new budget violates some tenets that both parties have tried to observe since the budget fights of 2011 and 2012. Those fights preserved a practice of cutting defense and nondefense programs almost equally while sparing the poorest Americans from the worst of the belt-tightening.


Mr. Ryan’s plan does not strike that balance.

In his plan, military spending through 2024 would actually rise by $483 billion over the spending caps established in the 2011 Budget Control Act “consistent with America’s military goals and strategies,” while nondefense spending at Congress’s annual discretion would be cut by $791 billion below those strict limits.

In all, Mr. Ryan said, spending would be cut by $5.1 trillion over the next decade. More than $2 trillion of that would come from repealing Mr. Obama’s health care initiative, the Affordable Care Act, a political move that has become much more difficult with the closing of the first enrollment period. More than 10 million Americans have gotten health insurance through the law, either through private policies purchased on insurance exchanges, through expanded Medicaid or private policies purchased through brokers but subsidized by the law.


.......................SNIP"

[MindMover]

1. Not a shred of evidence ....

""

[okaawhatever]

2. What's interesting is that Paul says he will cut over $2 Trillion by repealing the ACA. Since the

Congressional Budget Office has already shown that the ACA saves money, one can only imagine that Ryan's plan probably includes keeping the taxes collected for the ACA but not using them for the health care initiative. His previous budgets have been big lies, I doubt this one is much different. If he keeps the ACA taxes but dumps all the benefits he may be much closer to reality.

[applegrove]

3. I don't really understand what you are saying. Would not the taxes saved be part of the

2 Trillion Ryan is talking about? I'm not saying he isn't a big fat liar. I just don't know much about the ACA and how it is funded.

[okaawhatever]

6. The ACA saves money in a number of ways, such as cutting costs and putting a cap on insurance

company profits, but there aren't enough cost savings to pay for the subsidies and Medicaid expansion. Those items are being paid for with an increased Medicare tax for high earners and adding a Medicare tax to capital gains income above a certain amount. There are also new taxes on medical devices and removal of some tax exemptions.

The only way for Ryan to "save" money on the ACA is if he keeps those new taxes and doesn't provide the benefits. The entire package is shown to save money, so how else could he "save" money by repealing the ACA?

As to your statement, "would not the taxes saved be part of the 2 Trillion Ryan is talking about?" No, because Ryan is talking about the budget. If the taxes aren't collected revenue is less. If you don't collect $2 Trillion in taxes, you have to cut $2 Trillion in spending just to keep the deficit the same. The only way to reduce the deficit is to collect the taxes and then not spend the money.

I don't know if I've done a good job of explaining myself. My brain isn't working at full speed right now.

[applegrove]

7. You did an excellent job explaining everything. I sometimes don't go into

depth studying some issues....to save brainspace.

[Cha]

4. ryan is so sickening.

[madinmaryland]

5. ... and would increase the deficit by $10 trillion dollars over the same period of time.

What a fucking snake oil salesman.

[gulliver]

8. And he ran a "two-fifty something" marathon too.

Ryan's just a liar by nature. He belongs in the party he is in and with the company he keeps.

[Gman]

9. That would cause a long recession

if not depression