The proposed 2012 budget...

[CaptainHaplo]

Actually pull up the document......

This IS the 2012 fiscal budget resolution released by the House committee on the Budget. Sorry you take offense to the name - and yes the name is partisan politics. But it IS the official resolution by the committee.

Try checking page 4 for the "Statement of Constitutionality and Legal Authority"

No - its no Binding (as the full house must vote, then send it thru the senate and exec)m, but it IS a starting point.

So how come no one wants to actually read the thing? People too entrenched in their partisanship?

Sad.... Just plain sad....

People too entrenched in their partisanship?

It is because it is a shallow pice of political posturing which completely lacks any real detail. For example the spending proposals on health are completely vacant apart from cut here/spend there when the programs are interconnected and interwoven at nearly every level.
With any buget the devil is in the detail and here it is absent

[August]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

Actually pull up the document......

This IS the 2012 fiscal budget resolution released by the House committee on the Budget. Sorry you take offense to the name - and yes the name is partisan politics. But it IS the official resolution by the committee.

Try checking page 4 for the "Statement of Constitutionality and Legal Authority"

No - its no Binding (as the full house must vote, then send it thru the senate and exec)m, but it IS a starting point.

So how come no one wants to actually read the thing? People too entrenched in their partisanship?

Sad.... Just plain sad....

Of course it is Hap. The Dems are scared to death that the Republicans might actually address their run away spending habits so instead of actually considering the bill they will reject it because of who created it rather than what it contains.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by CaptainHaplo

So how come no one wants to actually read the thing? People too entrenched in their partisanship?

Sad.... Just plain sad....

What's sad is that you're so entrenched in your partisanship that you refuse to see that this is a piece of GOP propaganda and you don't even realize it. I mean it's even got a link to the GOP website on the cover. It quotes the Heritage Foundation. And you're gonna try and tell me that this is a unbiased and objective document? If I tried to link you to an analysis from MoveOn, you'd all flame me to oblivion.

Your only response to that is "it's not because it says it's Constitutional on page 4."

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Page 4, Paragraph 4

This Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2012 intends to recommit the nation fully to the timeless principles of

American government enshrined in the U.S. Constitution – liberty, limited government, and equality under the rule of law. It seeks to guide policies by those principles, freeing the nation from the crushing burden of debt that is now threatening its future.

Originally Posted by Page 5, Subtitle Header

Where the President has failed, House Republicans will lead. This budget helps spur job creation today, stops spending money the government doesn’t have, and lifts the crushing burden of debt. This plan puts the budget on the path to balance and the economy on the path to prosperity.

Originally Posted by Page 1 Footer

house.GOP.gov

It is fine to not have talking points, but what you have linked to is little other than talking points. If you want to spur discussion in a less partisan direction, I would start by linking a less partisan source.

[razark]

From glancing through it, looks to be more a policy document outlining the Republican agenda rather than a budget document.

[Bilge_Rat]

I read it.

It is the same, lame "solutions" right wing conservatives have been proposing for 30 years:

1. cut taxes;
2. cut spending;
3. balance the budget.

They will cut $178 B out of defence spending this year, but no specifics.

They will eliminate waste in government by firing 10% of all govt employess, but without affecting any services.

They will cut Medicare spending "by ending wasteful fraud", but without affecting the current level of benefits.

They will solve the Social Security crisis by forcing the President to come up with a plan.

And their magic weapon: producing untold amounts of savings by REPEALING THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN! which is repeated on a special BLUE page every few pages in case we dont get the point.

And what will this wonderful plan do for America? OMG, the cut in taxes will create an economic boom that will generate untold tax revenues to PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT!!!!

This was not written by politicians, it was written by the inmates of an insane asylum.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

I read it.

It is the same, lame "solutions" right wing conservatives have been proposing for 30 years:

1. cut taxes;
2. cut spending;
3. balance the budget.

They will cut $178 B out of defence spending this year, but no specifics.

They will eliminate waste in government by firing 10% of all govt employess, but without affecting any services.

They will cut Medicare spending "by ending wasteful fraud", but without affecting the current level of benefits.

They will solve the Social Security crisis by forcing the President to come up with a plan.

And their magic weapon: producing untold amounts of savings by REPEALING THE OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN! which is repeated on a special BLUE page every few pages in case we dont get the point.

And what will this wonderful plan do for America? OMG, the cut in taxes will create an economic boom that will generate untold tax revenues to PAY OFF THE NATIONAL DEBT!!!!

This was not written by politicians, it was written by the inmates of an insane asylum.

1. Cut taxes
2. Cut spending
3. ????
4. PROFIT!

[August]

The Democrats held both houses of Congress and the Oval office yet they still didn't address the deficit other than to massively add to it.

[Bilge_Rat]

I will make one serious comment. One of the proposed solution to the medicare/medicaid issue is to transfer responsibility to the individual states and have the federal government make lump sum payments, with limited future increases presumably capped to cost of living. Unstated, but presumably under the premise that individual states could administer Medicare/Medicaid at a lower cost by tailoring the system to local conditions.

This solution is what was implemented in Canada 30 years ago. In the late 70s, the can. federal govt. was facing ballooning deficits. At the time, the fed. govt was funding 50% of public health care and many other social programs and the other 50% was paid by the provinces. They came up with a similar plan where the responsibility for the programs would be transferred to the individual provinces and the fed. govt would only pay a lump sum annual payment, increased each year by a cost of living increase.

Well, it turned out to be a great plan for the federal government. Over the past 30 years, the federal share of health care spending has gone down from 50% to around 30% while the provinces now pay around 70%. The federal govt, up until 2008 was running surpluses while the provinces have chronic deficits and the political problem of trying to figure out what programs to cut or what taxes to raise.

So the GOP solution sounds fine on paper, but all you wind up doing is transferring the problem to the individual states.

[Onkel Neal]

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

I read it.

It is the same, lame "solutions" right wing conservatives have been proposing for 30 years:

1. cut taxes;
2. cut spending;
3. balance the budget.

Wait, how is that lame????

Cutting taxes? Yes, it's my money, not yours. You want to contribute extra to the federal govt, go for it. You have no right to induce others to do the same.
Cutting spending? Sure, who says there's not enough govt spending?
Balance the budget?

[Bilge_Rat]

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens

Wait, how is that lame????

Cutting taxes? Yes, it's my money, not yours. You want to contribute extra to the federal govt, go for it. You have no right to induce others to do the same.
Cutting spending? Sure, who says there's not enough govt spending?
Balance the budget?

I was using bullet points to summarize a 70+ page document. The GOP plan uses these three familiar slogans which no one can really say they are against, but which mean nothing in practice. Let's look at the plan.

1. Tax Cuts: the theory behind cutting taxes is that individuals/businesses will use the savings to reinvest and create additional jobs and economic growth. This has been tried under Reagan and Bush jr, but no one can say the economic situation in the USA has been growing increasingly better in the past 30 years. The Republican solution is usually to say that we have to try even deeper cuts.

However, the reality is that most economic activity in the world is controlled by multinational corporations which already pay little or no tax since they can shift most of their taxable income to tax havens. They shift their production to low cost jurisdictions which the USA no longer is. A tax cut would not bring them back to the USA.

2. Cutting Spending: it sounds good, but there are no real cuts in the GOP plan. Real cuts means cutting programs or services which does not appear here.

3. Balanced Budget. Just like Mom&apple pie, no one can be against this, but if you cut taxes without really cutting spending, how can you balance the budget? The only way, which is what they do here is by grossly overestimating future revenues while underestimating future spending.