David Stockman was the Paul Ryan of the Reagan era AND NOW EXCORIATED PAUL RYAN's BUDGET BS.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Aug 20, 2012 4:10 AM GMT

    David Paul. ON Huffington Post

    Ryan's Rise Shows How Far the GOP Has Fallen

    Posted: 08/19/2012 9:35 am

    REAGAN's Director, Office of Management and Budget was David Stockman,

    Why does Ryan's plan preserve Medicare untouched for those 55 years and older? The answer is not because they paid for it and therefore are entitled to it -- because they didn't pay for it. Medicare is in large measure paid for by general tax revenues just like everything else. It is simply because they vote, and they vote with a greater sense of determination and focus than those who are 35 years old and younger.

    Imagine what a roadmap might look like if those aged 18 to 35 had the political clout that their numbers might demand? One could imagine that Pell Grants would be the third rail of politics. Military action as a tool of foreign policy might be viewed with greater skepticism if political power hinged on the votes of those whose lives were to be put in harms way. And Social Security and Medicare would more likely be means tested and subject to spending limits. Perhaps if the young electorate whose wallets were to be raided to pay for it all down the road voted their self-interest with the same ferocity of older voters, we might have less willingness to borrow today to pay for a broad-based welfare state for the elderly. It is all about who shows up on election day.

    While conservatives heap adulation upon Ryan as a thinker, David Stockman is not fooled. He understands that Ryan's document demonstrates neither budgetary insight nor political courage. Writing on the op-ed page of the New York Times last week, Stockman assaulted Ryan's plan:

    "Thirty years of Republican apostasy -- a once grand party's embrace of the welfare state, the warfare state and the Wall Street-coddling bailout state -- have crippled the engines of capitalism and buried us in debt. Mr. Ryan's sonorous campaign rhetoric about shrinking Big Government and giving tax cuts to 'job creators' (read: the top 2 percent) will do nothing to reverse the nation's economic decline and arrest its fiscal collapse...
    But the greater hypocrisy is his phony "plan" to solve the entitlements mess by deferring changes to social insurance by at least a decade.

    A true agenda to reform the welfare state would require a sweeping, income-based eligibility test, which would reduce or eliminate social insurance benefits for millions of affluent retirees. Without it, there is no math that can avoid giant tax increases or vast new borrowing. Yet the supposedly courageous Ryan plan would not cut one dime over the next decade from the $1.3 trillion-per-year cost of Social Security and Medicare."


    What Stockman and Peterson understand is that for all of the hubris of conservatives in Congress, they are no different than their political brethren across the political spectrum. In fact, they have proved to be worse. They hold forth on the immorality of deficits and the path to ruin that lies ahead, but it is all just words -- words that mask a deep hypocrisy and cynicism. And when David Stockman looks at the Ryan plan, and the fawning support of the conservative establishment in Washington, he cannot conceal his contempt.


    "It's rank demagoguery. We should call it for what it is. If these people were all put into a room on penalty of death to come up with how much they could cut, they couldn't come up with $50 billion, when the problem is $1.3 trillion. So, to stand before the public and rub raw this anti-tax sentiment, the Republican Party, as much as it pains me to say this, should be ashamed of themselves."
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9528

    Aug 20, 2012 4:04 PM GMT
    It's interesting to note that in defending his plan, Ryan accurately states that his plan won't effect seniors and those near retirement (that means if Romney/Ryan get elected and pass this plan next year, this won't affect anyone 45 and older by next year - I read his plan; it's on page 97). But then he shifts the focus of his plan to those younger than 45 and say that it's all about choice options....My only question is, if Medicare is SOOOO popular, which it is, then why would anyone want to opt to a plan that isn't known for its popularity???

    But what he doesn't tell you is that those under 45 will have to pay about $6000 more per year for their Medicare.

    And that is the Paul Ryan scheme.