Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Tue Oct 2, 2012, 08:31 AM Oct 2012

WaPo Editorial: Paul Ryan’s budget flimflam

By Editorial Board, Published: October 1

PAUL RYAN wants to tell you about the wonders of the 20 percent cut in tax rates that he and running mate Mitt Romney propose. He doesn’t want to tell you how much it will cost. On Sunday, Fox News’s Chris Wallace asked the Republican vice presidential nominee this basic question four times, citing projections of a 10-year cost of $5 trillion. Four times, Mr. Ryan dodged, hiding behind a flimsy scaffolding of pseudo-wonkiness. “Look, I won’t give you a baseline with these because that’s what a lot of this is about,” he said.

The $5 trillion figure derives from an estimate by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that the Romney tax cuts — without base-broadening offsets — would reduce revenue by $456 billion in 2015. Multiply by 10, and account for costs rising each year, and the $5 trillion estimate is probably low.


If Mr. Ryan wants to hide behind jargon, here’s a relevant point. “Baseline” refers to the assumptions made about the budget if the Romney-Ryan tax cut isn’t enacted. The Tax Policy Center’s baseline is favorable to the Republican plan because it assumes the extension of all Bush tax cuts. A more realistic, or at least equally plausible, set of assumptions would add another $1 trillion to its cost. Mr. Ryan flings about terms such as “baseline” to obscure that painful fact.

The Republican ticket says it could pay for its tax cut by eliminating loopholes. But the biggest loopholes are popular: the exclusion from taxation of employer-sponsored health insurance and the deductions for mortgage interest, charitable contributions and state and local taxes. Pressed by the assiduous Mr. Wallace about which of these Mr. Ryan would limit, the nominee pleaded a lack of time. “It would take me too long to go through all of that,” he said.

read more:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/paul-ryans-budget-flim-flam/2012/10/01/b6625396-0be5-11e2-bb5e-492c0d30bff6_story.html?tid=pm_opinions_pop

6 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
WaPo Editorial: Paul Ryan’s budget flimflam (Original Post) DonViejo Oct 2012 OP
ryan is such an ass. iemitsu Oct 2012 #1
Ryan reminds me of that pig in "Animal Farm" who was the propagandist. AZCat Oct 2012 #2
Taxes don't do what most people think Lefty Thinker Oct 2012 #3
Ryan's political philosophy: "Give 'em that old flim flam flummox..." alcibiades_mystery Oct 2012 #4
About darn time Cosmocat Oct 2012 #5
So what happened to his puffed out chest... mojo2012 Oct 2012 #6

iemitsu

(3,888 posts)
1. ryan is such an ass.
Tue Oct 2, 2012, 09:04 AM
Oct 2012

he dodges questions about paying for his plan because no one in this country thinks the rich should get more breaks at the expense of the working and the poor.
americans need to be reminded that working americans have not seen any real wage increases since 1968. that the only way any of us has kept up with the cost of living is to add a full time worker to each household.
and this spoiled young man thinks we are freeloaders. that we should pay more so the obscenely rich can pay less.
they already owe us for the social security money they took with the tax breaks they have seen over the last few decades. they owe us that plus interest.

Lefty Thinker

(96 posts)
3. Taxes don't do what most people think
Tue Oct 2, 2012, 09:23 AM
Oct 2012

Taxes do not "fund" our government; our government can create money at will (Article II, Section 8 of the Constitution). But if the government only created money, no one would have any intrusive need for dollars. Taxes create that intrinsic need. They also reduce inflationary pressures. Put this up against what Romney/Ryan are suggesting and the picture you get is far bleaker than most economists have offered: more difficulty getting out of debt, stagnant home values, and a stagnant or shrinking economy.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
4. Ryan's political philosophy: "Give 'em that old flim flam flummox..."
Tue Oct 2, 2012, 09:35 AM
Oct 2012
How can they hear the truth above the roar?



Dude's a fuckin' sophist, no mistake.

Cosmocat

(14,565 posts)
5. About darn time
Tue Oct 2, 2012, 09:37 AM
Oct 2012

this should be the response from the media at large.

These two clowns are running around selling:

20% lower effective rate
tax cuts for all
revenue neutral

These three things simply do not add up.

SO, they dash in:

Closing unspecified loop holes:

You close loop holes to make it revenue neutral, there are not tax cuts, and by extension the pixie dust of tax cuts to spur the economy is gone.

Literally smoke and mirrors.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»WaPo Editorial: Paul Rya...