The GOP Plan

[Sage_Rat]

@Ravenman

ah, yes. You can’t be wrong, therefore there must be a conspiracy.

Powerful, unrebuttable argument. But you’re still wrong.

I’m not advancing any particular opinion, I’m offering a hypothesis for why the CBO would change its mind by 180 degrees in the space of two months. What is yours?

[Ravenman]

@Sage_Rat

I’m not advancing any particular opinion, I’m offering a hypothesis for why the CBO would change its mind by 180 degrees in the space of two months. What is yours?

My theory is that you selectively read CBO publications – err, press coverage of the spin on CBO publications to suit your own political views.

[Enderw24]

Can I ask why only the Reps weighed in on this budget? Do Republican Senators not care about our fiscal spending?
In particular, I found John McCain’s signature from this document to be glaringly absent. Especially when he was asked on yesterday’s Meet the Press what he thought about it!

[Merijeek]

@Enderw24

Can I ask why only the Reps weighed in on this budget? Do Republican Senators not care about our fiscal spending?
In particular, I found John McCain’s signature from this document to be glaringly absent. Especially when he was asked on yesterday’s Meet the Press what he thought about it!

Maybe, apart from the Palin situation, McCain doesn’t see the value of chaining himself to a poorly-constructed anchor?

-Joe

[Sage_Rat]

@Ravenman

My theory is that you selectively read CBO publications – err, press coverage of the spin on CBO publications to suit your own political views.

Yes, to suite my own views, I selectively chose to read them as agreeing with me once and not agreeing with me once. :dubious:

Or perhaps they didn’t agree with me in either instance since I have no particular opinion on the issue as I said.

[DanBlather]

@Enderw24

Can I ask why only the Reps weighed in on this budget? Do Republican Senators not care about our fiscal spending?
In particular, I found John McCain’s signature from this document to be glaringly absent. Especially when he was asked on yesterday’s Meet the Press what he thought about it!

All spending bills are required by the consitution to emanate from the House of Representatives.

[Squink]

Well, the GOP came out with a few details yesterday:

After getting blasted last week for presenting a budget plan light on details, House Republicans yesterday unveiled a more complete proposal that would cut taxes for businesses and the wealthy, freeze most government spending for five years, halt spending approved in the economic stimulus package and slash federal health programs for the poor and elderly.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the senior Republican on the House Budget Committee, said the plan would stabilize the rising national debt by requiring the nation to borrow about $6 trillion over the next 10 years, $3.3 trillion less than would be required under the budget request submitted by President Obama.

Annual deficits also would be slightly lower than under the revised budget plans that emerged last week from the House and Senate budget committees. The revised Democratic proposals would require the nation to borrow about $4 trillion over the next five years, compared with $3.1 trillion in new borrowing under the GOP alternative.

House Republicans Unveil Revised Budget Proposal

[MilTan]

That WaPo article left out some, shall we say, interesting flim-flammery in the Republican budget. The centerpiece of their budget is a massive tax-cut on the wealthy, reducing the number of brackets to 2, and the top marginal rate to 25% (starting at the low, low price of $100K!). Now, sure, there’s a spending freeze thrown in, too, but how could you possibly lower tax rates that much and not blow up the deficit? By making the new rates optional, and assuming that no one will pay the lower tax rates:

But the real way that Republicans offer the tax cut without factoring it into the budget’s revenue is to suggest that Americans won’t actually take advantage of the lower rates. Instead, the GOP budget permanently extends President Bush’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. A Republican budget committee aid said that the revenues assumed in the GOP budget are based on the current tax structure that resulted from those cuts.

In other words, Republicans are assuming that given the choice between a higher rate and a lower rate, Americans will choose the higher rate. During the presidential campaign, Republicans slammed Joe Biden for suggested that paying taxes was a patriotic act in a time of economic crisis.

Genius!

[Frodo]

@MilTan

That WaPo article left out some, shall we say, interesting flim-flammery in the Republican budget. The centerpiece of their budget is a massive tax-cut

Nobody could have predicted…

[SteveG1]

@Frodo

Nobody could have predicted…

As Gandalf would say, your words have a Ring of truth

[elucidator]

Recession? Tax cuts! Depression? Tax cuts! Nueritis, neuralgia, psoriasis? Tax cuts! Black Water fever, Ebola and Creeping Crud? Oh, yeah, them’s a tax cut!..

[Squink]

@elucidator

Recession? Tax cuts! Depression? Tax cuts! Nueritis, neuralgia, psoriasis? Tax cuts! Black Water fever, Ebola and Creeping Crud? Oh, yeah, them’s a tax cut!..

Wall street is impresssed with your wisdom:
Dow jumps above 8,000 for first time in 2 months

[MilTan]

@Squink

Wall street is impresssed with your wisdom:
Dow jumps above 8,000 for first time in 2 months

So where are Larry Kudlow and all the other pundits who were judging Obama by the daily rise (but mostly fall) of the DJIA a month ago?

[Digital_Stimulus]

@Squink

Wall street is impresssed with your wisdom:
Dow jumps above 8,000 for first time in 2 months

I expect this is due to revising mark-to-market rules (as is vaguely referenced in your link).