Krugman: Saving Serious Ryan

[ProSense]

Saving Serious Ryan

There has, of course, been some pushback against my column pointing out that the Very Serious Paul Ryan is not, in fact, serious at all. Some of this pushback takes the form of assertions that he must be serious, because the Congressional Budget Office scored his plan and found that it led to lower debt.

People who say things like that evidently haven’t read any of the actual CBO analyses; the most informative is the first one (pdf). And in particular, they haven’t grasped how Ryan has gamed the system.

As I pointed out a few days ago, CBO did not score the policy provisions in the Ryan plan; there wasn’t remotely enough detail for a comprehensive assessment, and they didn’t do a partial of what was specified. Instead, they laid out the implications of revenue and spending paths that were just assumed per Ryan’s instructions — without expressing any view about whether these paths were plausible.

Indeed, I think I detect a bit of discreet snark in what the CBO report actually did say. On revenue, it declared:

The path for revenues as a percentage of GDP was specified by Chairman Ryan’s staff. The path rises steadily from about 15 percent of GDP in 2010 to 19 percent in 2028 and remains at that level thereafter. There were no specifications of particular revenue provisions that would generate that path. (my italics)

On spending, they declared:

That combination of other mandatory and discretionary spending was specified to decline from 12 percent of GDP in 2010 to about 6 percent in 2021 and then move in line with the GDP price deflator beginning in 2022, which would generate a further decline relative to GDP. No proposals were specified that would generate that path. (my italics, again)

- more -

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/23/saving-serious-ryan/

Paul Ryan admits 'We haven't run the numbers' on Romney-Ryan budget plan, but trust him, it's great
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021138336

NYT: Romney-Ryan Medicare proposal would hasten insolvency, raising costs for current retirees
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021179470

[burnsei sensei]

1. Serious?

As I pointed out a few days ago, CBO did not score the policy provisions in the Ryan plan; there wasn’t remotely enough detail for a comprehensive assessment, and they didn’t do a partial of what was specified. Instead, they laid out the implications of revenue and spending paths that were just assumed per Ryan’s instructions — without expressing any view about whether these paths were plausible.

There's nothing serious here.
Ryan gave insufficient information for a detailed and honest assessment of his proposals.
I don't want to hear about the "implications of revenue."
I know that if you cut taxes and spending, you get the an amplified version of the result you'd get if you just cut taxes--
1. reduced revenues,
2. higher deficits, and
3. more hardship for the majority who can least afford it.

The majority should rule in this country.
The comments Krugman is getting over there are challenging his ideas mightily.
I hope he responds.

[ewagner]

2. Cute....real cute Ryan...

The CBO didn't actually score it because he didn't provide enough detail...

funny thing: Rmoney's budget plan was deliberately written so it, too, could not be scored by CBO! What a coincidence!

[benld74]

3. The O-N-L-Y reason the GOP consider Ryan to be their Budget Policy wonk is

he put it into PRINT for all the world to see.

YET, like a GOP member he did not provide enough details for the CBO to score in the same manner it scores everything. Remember, GOP doesn't like the CBO, and have been trying to take its funding away.