Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Life, the Universe and Everything
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Life, the Universe and Everything Post comments about everything else here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-20-2011, 03:08 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

From the NYT:

Quote:
WASHINGTON — Democrats and Republicans are joining to oppose one of the most important features of President Obama’s new deficit reduction plan, a powerful independent board that could make sweeping cuts in the growth of Medicare spending.

Mr. Obama wants to expand the power of the 15-member panel, which was created by the new health care law, to rein in Medicare costs.

But not only do Republicans and some Democrats oppose increasing the power of the board, they also want to eliminate it altogether. Opponents fear that the panel, known as the Independent Payment Advisory Board, would usurp Congressional spending power over one of the government’s most important and expensive social programs....

Lawmakers do not agree. Representative Paul D. Ryan, Republican of Wisconsin and chairman of the House Budget Committee, called it “a rationing board” and said Congress should not “delegate Medicare decision-making to 15 people appointed by the president.” He said Mr. Obama’s proposal would allow the board to “impose more price controls and more limitations on providers, which will end up cutting services to seniors.”

Senator John Cornyn, a Texas Republican who introduced a bill last month to repeal the Medicare board, said the president’s proposal “punts difficult decisions on health spending to an unelected, unaccountable board of bureaucrats.”
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-20-2011, 10:26 AM
chiwhisoxx chiwhisoxx is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,490
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/priorities
__________________
She said the theme of this party's the Industrial Age, and you came in dressed like a train wreck.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-20-2011, 11:30 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Ok, I suppose I may have been exaggerating somewhat. How about "Paul Ryan, Republicans don't support policies that accomplish their stated goal of deficit reduction, preferring hypothetical policies that won't be passed by Congress and wouldn't work if they were" or "Paul Ryan, Republicans prefer policies that make it harder to limit government spending on medical care for seniors, leading to higher deficits" or "Paul Ryan, Republicans consider low taxes for the wealthy and convincing their elderly electoral base that Obama will take away their Medicare much higher priorities than deficit reduction?" The way I see it, I'm just saying the same thing in a long-winded way.

And while I'm on the subject, I would like to note the contrast between Obama and Ryan's approach to reining in Medicare spending. This panel doesn't just enact its recommendations; it produces a set of recommendations that can be approved or not, but not amended, by Congress. In other words, it's a plan that understands Congress's dysfunction and the difficulty of passing spending cuts, and then changes the rules to make it easier to do so. The Ryan plan, on the other hand, creates a new class of insurance company middlemen who make money taking Medicare vouchers, and then promises to radically reduce the size of those vouchers. In other words, it promises to create a new AMT or Doc Fix: something that Congress bipartisanly refuses to follow through on every year. And then it goes a step farther and creates a powerful new interest group lobbying to make sure that congress never follows through on it. From the perspective of someone that doesn't care about the health care of seniors and wants to reduce the deficit, how is Ryan's plan the superior one?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-20-2011, 12:15 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Goodness, how surprising.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-20-2011, 01:10 PM
chiwhisoxx chiwhisoxx is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,490
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Ok, I suppose I may have been exaggerating somewhat. How about "Paul Ryan, Republicans don't support policies that accomplish their stated goal of deficit reduction, preferring hypothetical policies that won't be passed by Congress and wouldn't work if they were" or "Paul Ryan, Republicans prefer policies that make it harder to limit government spending on medical care for seniors, leading to higher deficits" or "Paul Ryan, Republicans consider low taxes for the wealthy and convincing their elderly electoral base that Obama will take away their Medicare much higher priorities than deficit reduction?" The way I see it, I'm just saying the same thing in a long-winded way.

And while I'm on the subject, I would like to note the contrast between Obama and Ryan's approach to reining in Medicare spending. This panel doesn't just enact its recommendations; it produces a set of recommendations that can be approved or not, but not amended, by Congress. In other words, it's a plan that understands Congress's dysfunction and the difficulty of passing spending cuts, and then changes the rules to make it easier to do so. The Ryan plan, on the other hand, creates a new class of insurance company middlemen who make money taking Medicare vouchers, and then promises to radically reduce the size of those vouchers. In other words, it promises to create a new AMT or Doc Fix: something that Congress bipartisanly refuses to follow through on every year. And then it goes a step farther and creates a powerful new interest group lobbying to make sure that congress never follows through on it. From the perspective of someone that doesn't care about the health care of seniors and wants to reduce the deficit, how is Ryan's plan the superior one?
Can we specifically address why these panels are a terrible idea? They may achieve *some* deficit reduction (I doubt it would be substantial, as cuts like this inevitably end up being politicized). But even if it achieves some deficit reduction, that doesn't necessarily compel a deficit hawk like Ryan to support it. No longer having a military would reduce the deficit; no one has to support that idea if they want deficit reduction.

As per these panels specifically, they belie a misunderstanding of how medicine works. Obama gave an interview right as the healthcare debate was starting where he laid out the blue pill/red pill hypothetical: If a blue pill and the red pill both do the same thing, but the red pill costs twice as much, why does it exist? In a very abstract sense, this is perfectly logical. In the context of medicine, it isn't. People are idiosyncratic, and have unpredictable reactions to certain drugs. Some people, and it may be a small group of people, can't use the main drug for a given disease. I'm willing to be most of these people are willing to pay more for a drug if it lets them avoid the side effects they suffer from taking the primary drug, and these side effects can be quite serious. It's not only side effects, but also that some drugs that are quite similar work better or worse for some people. People are complicated, and respond in unpredictable ways to medicine. Cutting drugs that are too expensive is also horrible for R&D. A huge part of R&D is iterating on these drugs to create something that's either more effective or less expensive. Cutting the cord all together if something is potentially going to be too expensive kills this possibility.

The part about "unelected, unaccountable" officials controlling medicine is overblown, but it's not a claim totally without merit. Either way, it's not the main point, and I'm way more concerned with the effect it will have on innovation and access to medicine.
__________________
She said the theme of this party's the Industrial Age, and you came in dressed like a train wreck.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-20-2011, 02:29 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Can we specifically address why these panels are a terrible idea? They may achieve *some* deficit reduction (I doubt it would be substantial, as cuts like this inevitably end up being politicized). But even if it achieves some deficit reduction, that doesn't necessarily compel a deficit hawk like Ryan to support it. No longer having a military would reduce the deficit; no one has to support that idea if they want deficit reduction.
Good point. A wish to cut deficits doesn't automatically compel someone to support every last measure towards that end.

Still, Ryan is being stunningly dishonest with his transparently fake concern about Obama threatening to cut services, etc. After all, Ryan's plan is specifically designed to hold down growth in health care spending by denying treatment to scores of millions of elderly, disabled, and children, with the known result that vast numbers of people will die or suffer from untreated conditions. Within a few years of the enactment of Ryan's plan, the death toll will be in the millions, and the explosion in human suffering will affect tens of millions. That's the intent of the plan. That's the GOP vision for America's future. So, it takes amazing gall for Ryan to pretend to be concerned about "rationing."

Actually, it takes more than gall: It takes an ignorant population. The only way Ryan can open his mouth without being laughed off the stage is if the public is kept ignorant about what he is trying to do. The corporate media is doing everything it can to help sell his plan. On MSNBC during the morning and afternoon segments, for example, there has been constant bashing of Obama for the content of his speech at Georgetown, and constant praise for Ryan's "boldness" and "courage." I can only imagine what it must be like on Fox News and, worse, talk radio.

The kicker is why Ryan is trying to kill so many people. It's not so he can cut the deficit, but so he can pay for another massive tax cut for the only constituents he cares about -- and the only ones who won't be harmed by his plan -- the rich.

The moral depravity is absolutely bottomless.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
As per these panels specifically, they belie a misunderstanding of how medicine works. Obama gave an interview right as the healthcare debate was starting where he laid out the blue pill/red pill hypothetical: If a blue pill and the red pill both do the same thing, but the red pill costs twice as much, why does it exist? In a very abstract sense, this is perfectly logical. In the context of medicine, it isn't. People are idiosyncratic, and have unpredictable reactions to certain drugs. Some people, and it may be a small group of people, can't use the main drug for a given disease.
The fiscally prudent thing to do is to give the less expensive pill to the larger group of people for whom it it suitable, and give the less expensive pill to the smaller number who require it. Obama's hypothetical had nothing to do with the scenario you describe above; it was about making prudent, fiscally-responsible decisions about how to spend health care dollars so they go further and provide more services to more people -- a goal abhorrent to libertarian values, I know. I read Atlas Shrugged, too.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
I'm willing to be most of these people are willing to pay more for a drug if it lets them avoid the side effects they suffer from taking the primary drug, and these side effects can be quite serious.
And they're a lot more likely to get the drugs they need under a Democratic plan than under the dystopian libertarian plan.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
It's not only side effects, but also that some drugs that are quite similar work better or worse for some people. People are complicated, and respond in unpredictable ways to medicine. Cutting drugs that are too expensive is also horrible for R&D.
Wow. You're really stretching here.

Two points.

(1) If you really think the purpose of Medicare or the public health system is to provide federal subsidy to high tech research & development, you should be favoring the Democratic plans over the draconian Ryan plan, which slashes spending, and by extension, profits that pharmaceutical companies can fold back into R&D.

(2) If you want Big Government to subsidize private R&D, you can just do it with more efficient direct subsidy. You don't need to use the health care system as a sloppy, inefficient proxy to haphazardly attempt to achieve the same end.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Cutting the cord all together if something is potentially going to be too expensive kills this possibility.
If you discover than anyone is proposing "cutting the cord altogether," let us know.


Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
The part about "unelected, unaccountable" officials controlling medicine is overblown, but it's not a claim totally without merit. Either way, it's not the main point, and I'm way more concerned with the effect it will have on innovation and access to medicine.
Oh, you're concerned about access to medicine? Then you must be against the Ryan plan.
__________________
"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." -- Adam Smith

Last edited by TwinSwords; 04-20-2011 at 02:54 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-20-2011, 02:29 PM
stephanie stephanie is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,921
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Can we specifically address why these panels are a terrible idea?
I'd prefer that we seriously address the problem, namely that we have skyrocketing medical costs.

I think it's a fair criticism of the culture and politics of the US to say that any efforts to reduce costs are going to be tough because -- even though there are issues that a lot of people will agree on, like huge amounts are being spent for mostly unnecessary tests and on end-of-life care for those without hope of recovery -- when it comes to any specific situation people will feel like they (or their family member) should be covered. We see this all the time with outrage over something an insurance company won't cover, including experimental treatment, etc., and it's only likely to be worse with Medicare (as we've already seen).

So what can we do?

Well, the non-serious Ryan approach is to use this as an excuse to privatize everything (basically, get rid of Medicare). This, however, is not an acceptable answer, as it means the popular purpose of Medicare (old people need health care coverage) won't be met. Moreover, it's dishonest, as Ryan et al. are mostly not being upfront about the fact that their cost savings is because people won't have access to the kinds of care that they flip out if we suggest Medicare just stop covering.

In turn, we have the Dem plan, something like the panels, which is also mostly non-serious, not because it's so awful that something like Obama's pill example might be the approach, but because it's inconceivable that in the US a political arm would make hard calls without more unanimity that we have to do this than as been shown. However, what seems to be incredibly dishonest is the shreiking by Ryan and the like that seems to echo the Palin notion that Medicare not covering stuff is akin to rationing and being deprived of health care. As with the Ryan plan, no one is stopping anyone for buying additional coverage that would cover this stuff. Granted, few people could afford it and insurance companies may or may not decide to sell coverage (you can still pay out of pocket to the doctor, etc.), but that's all part of the supposedly-oh-so-wonderful privatization concept too.

To seriously address the costs, we have to make real decisions about what Medicare would cover, what we can't continue to cover, and also how to push back against rising medical costs (i.e., reimbursals and such, having more services provided by nurse practioners and clinics, negotiating drug prices harder and allowing importations, etc., and, sure, tort reform can be part of this, or at least the discussion in a serious way).

But the reason we can't have this discussion in any serious way and the reason any half-hearted panel that gets set up won't do much to hold down costs is that the right is doing whatever possible to present any such effort as contrary to our rights, fascism, Trig-Palin-killing, etc., and will politicize any reduction on what Medicare pays for, unless, of course, we just ditch Medicare. That's why Ryan et al. are particularly worthy of contempt here.

(For the record, I admit many Dems are as likely to politicize these types of decisions and make real limits impossible, but I don't think they are so much the same ones behind the push to do this. They are more the Mickey Kaus (or Pinkerton) "why shouldn't we spend money in this way" types. Plus, it's not as inconsistent with their stated goals, in that they aren't also claiming Medicare needs to be privatized. So rather than thinking they are entitled to the same contempt, I'd simply say they are making an error in judgment or have different priorities than I currently do.)
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-20-2011, 03:36 PM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Can we specifically address why these panels are a terrible idea? They may achieve *some* deficit reduction (I doubt it would be substantial, as cuts like this inevitably end up being politicized). But even if it achieves some deficit reduction, that doesn't necessarily compel a deficit hawk like Ryan to support it. No longer having a military would reduce the deficit; no one has to support that idea if they want deficit reduction.
Sure, but Paul "Privatize Medicare and then index it to inflation" Ryan opposes Medicare cuts would be like Dennis "Department of Peace" Kucinich fighting to keep building F-22's by fearmongering about Chinese stealth planes blowing up our carriers or something. This is further evidence that Republicans have gone all in on their Medicare flip-flop. They are simultaneously arguing against any cuts to benefits of current seniors with bullshit about death panels and rationing while voting to gut the program for future beneficiaries in order to fund tax cuts for the rich.

Oh, and the whole point of this panel is to make Medicare's coverage decisions less political. Bear in mind that the creation of the panel doesn't actually cut anything; it changes the way in which these decisions are made, since Congress has demonstrated that it is unable to say no to the combination of Seniors, drug companies, device manufacturers and providers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
As per these panels specifically, they belie a misunderstanding of how medicine works. Obama gave an interview right as the healthcare debate was starting where he laid out the blue pill/red pill hypothetical: If a blue pill and the red pill both do the same thing, but the red pill costs twice as much, why does it exist? In a very abstract sense, this is perfectly logical. In the context of medicine, it isn't. People are idiosyncratic, and have unpredictable reactions to certain drugs. Some people, and it may be a small group of people, can't use the main drug for a given disease. I'm willing to be most of these people are willing to pay more for a drug if it lets them avoid the side effects they suffer from taking the primary drug, and these side effects can be quite serious. It's not only side effects, but also that some drugs that are quite similar work better or worse for some people. People are complicated, and respond in unpredictable ways to medicine. Cutting drugs that are too expensive is also horrible for R&D. A huge part of R&D is iterating on these drugs to create something that's either more effective or less expensive. Cutting the cord all together if something is potentially going to be too expensive kills this possibility.
For one, we're talking about what Medicare does and does not cover, not rationing. That's a huge distinction that conservatives elide constantly. For two, you're making an argument in favor of unlimited Medicare expenditures. If health care costs weren't on track to bankrupt the country, I'd be all for having medicare cover lots of almost-identical drugs. But when this program is the chief driver of the long-term deficit, we need to find ways to make it more efficient in order to keep it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
The part about "unelected, unaccountable" officials controlling medicine is overblown, but it's not a claim totally without merit. Either way, it's not the main point, and I'm way more concerned with the effect it will have on innovation and access to medicine.
Oh come on now, it isn't just overblown. It's breathtakingly dishonest. First of all, the alternative is to have Medicare's coverage decisions made by congressmen that are responding to industry lobbyists and the AARP as they are now, or to have such decisions made by unelected, unaccountable beauracrats at the private insurance companies that make money by denying care, as Ryan is proposing. And of course Ryan's entire public persona is built around hysteria about the debt and the size of government.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-20-2011, 06:55 PM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
As per these panels specifically, they belie a misunderstanding of how medicine works. Obama gave an interview right as the healthcare debate was starting where he laid out the blue pill/red pill hypothetical: If a blue pill and the red pill both do the same thing, but the red pill costs twice as much, why does it exist? In a very abstract sense, this is perfectly logical. In the context of medicine, it isn't. People are idiosyncratic, and have unpredictable reactions to certain drugs. Some people, and it may be a small group of people, can't use the main drug for a given disease. I'm willing to be most of these people are willing to pay more for a drug if it lets them avoid the side effects they suffer from taking the primary drug, and these side effects can be quite serious. It's not only side effects, but also that some drugs that are quite similar work better or worse for some people. People are complicated, and respond in unpredictable ways to medicine. Cutting drugs that are too expensive is also horrible for R&D. A huge part of R&D is iterating on these drugs to create something that's either more effective or less expensive. Cutting the cord all together if something is potentially going to be too expensive kills this possibility.
You mention all good medical reasons why medications are not interchangeable. There are a lot of people who will do just fine with the less expensive drugs, while a small minority may need something more specialized. So the rule can still apply with some exceptions.

However, what you don't seem to be aware of or at least include in your reasoning, is that insurance companies, Medicare D, and other prescription medication plans are already rationing medications. They are limiting their formulary, they require a much larger copay for medications that are brand name or for those which are most expensive. They have also come up with a tier system with different copays for each group. All that is already happening. At best it can be made more rational, more uniform and standardize procedures to facilitate those exceptions that are based on medical necessity.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-20-2011, 07:06 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
The kicker is why Ryan is trying to kill so many people. It's not so he can cut the deficit, but so he can pay for another massive tax cut for the only constituents he cares about -- and the only ones who won't be harmed by his plan -- the rich.
Perhaps you simply misconstrued Ryan's premise?
He is incorrigible:
Spinning is fundamental.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-20-2011, 07:18 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by graz View Post
Perhaps you simply misconstrued Ryan's premise?
He is incorrigible:
Spinning is fundamental.
Yes, and honk if you love Ayn Rand, and Jesus, because you just may be a danger yourself and others.
__________________
"God is a metaphor for that which trancends all levels of intellectual thought. It's as simple as that." J. Campbell
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-20-2011, 09:12 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean View Post
However, what you don't seem to be aware of or at least include in your reasoning, is that insurance companies, Medicare D, and other prescription medication plans are already rationing medications.
For movement or base conservatives and the GOP establishment (as opposed to the rank and file), these things only matter in a very narrow spectrum of cases. Theirs is certainly nothing like a broad, general interest in the welfare of the population. Their interest in rationing doesn't extend an inch beyond its usefulness as a political cudgel to use against Democrats.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ocean View Post
They are limiting their formulary, they require a much larger copay for medications that are brand name or for those which are most expensive. They have also come up with a tier system with different copays for each group. All that is already happening.
And if this system turns out to result in many scores of millions who cannot afford adequate care, or *any* care, even if it means they will die, or their conditions will worsen, causing suffering and shorter lives -- they don't care. As long as it's the invisible hand of the free market strangling people to death, the GOP feels its hands are clean.
__________________
"All for ourselves, and nothing for other people, seems, in every age of the world, to have been the vile maxim of the masters of mankind." -- Adam Smith

Last edited by TwinSwords; 04-20-2011 at 09:30 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-25-2011, 09:49 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiwhisoxx View Post
Cutting drugs that are too expensive is also horrible for R&D. ... I'm way more concerned with the effect it will have on innovation and access to medicine.


(Source)
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-26-2011, 09:17 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Quote:
Originally Posted by TwinSwords View Post
Well! That looks like a great way to ensure American exceptionalism!
__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 05-07-2011, 02:28 AM
Don Zeko Don Zeko is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Exiled to South Jersey
Posts: 2,436
Default Paul Ryan single-handedly eliminates the individual mandate

Er, one of them, at least. And not from the law that's on the books, but from his own plans for Medicare:

Quote:
In a post yesterday, I summarized and expanded on Simon Lazarus’s argument that Paul Ryan’s budget has not one, but two, individual mandates. That post was wrong.

Lazarus’s article mentioned that the Ryan budget replaced the tax break that employers get for health-care insurance with a refundable tax credit that was “little noticed by pundits or politicians.” This was in Ryan’s Roadmap, and so I figured it got snuck into the final legislative language and Lazarus had simply been eagle-eyed enough to noticed it. But that policy isn’t in the budget. Lazarus was assuming that the budget’s vague portion on tax reform had something like the specific tax policies from the Roadmap in mind. I don’t think that’s a reasonable assumption to make, and given that I hadn’t noticed the health-care tax credit in the budget before, I should’ve checked it out for myself. That leaves Ryan’s budget with one individual mandate-like policy, not two. Mea culpa.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 05-07-2011, 08:47 AM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Shocking News: Paul Ryan, Republicans don't care about the deficit

Shocked. Shocked, I tell you.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 05-07-2011, 11:27 AM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Sa®ah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Paul Ryan single-handedly eliminates the individual mandate

Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Zeko View Post
Er, one of them, at least. And not from the law that's on the books, but from his own plans for Medicare:
Good catch.

However, it looks like the Republicans have abandoned his plan to destroy Medicare, at least for the time being.

__________________
Brendan
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 05-07-2011, 01:25 PM
miceelf miceelf is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,569
Default Re: Paul Ryan single-handedly eliminates the individual mandate

I really don't get why people were talking about how courageous or new his ideas where.

he was trying to do to medicare what Bush tried to do with social security.
he was trying to reduce the already historically low top bracket tax rates, as Bush repeatedly did.
his plan was, under incredibly generous assumptions that bear no relationship to reality, deficit neutral, and with any reasonable set of assumptions, would further explode the deficit. (again, like Bush)

I just don't see how this is anything other than Bush.2.

I hope that Ryan goes down in history as the Catfood Kid.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.