Obama’s budget proposal shows mounting national debt and deficits. Paul Ryan unveiled the House budget proposal today, which shows a very different trajectory.
Via James Pethokoukis comes this chart demonstrating the difference:
After the Obama White House released its 2013 budget plan last month, U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner went to testify before the House Budget Committee. He told the committee’s chairman, Republican Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the following: “We’re not coming before you to say we have a definitive solution to that long-term [budget] problem. What we do know is we don’t like yours.”
Let me remind Team Obama of a favorite Geithner aphorism: “Plan beats no plan.”
Barack Obama doesn’t have a long-term, debt-reduction plan. Paul Ryan does. So under the Geithner formulation, Ryan wins by default.
But the latest version of Ryan’s Path to Prosperity, released today, does far more than defeat a rival who’s decided to forfeit the field. It presents a bold and sweeping solution to America’s twin problems: too much debt and too little economic growth.
Update: Matt Lewis, Paul Ryan’s new budget concedes Newt was right about ‘right wing social engineering’?
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
The choice…
Ryan’s Path to Prosperity or
Obama’s Highway To Hell
Excuse me, the above chart is Obama propaganda. There is not a chance in hell either scenario will be a linear progression. they will curve exponentially either way, as the federal government becomes more or less expensive as a part of the american economy it will produce a feedback loop much like compounding interest. So Obama’s Scenario is ridiculously over optimistic while the republican plan is wildly pessimistic.
Ryan Rocks. He’s talking live on CSPAN right now.
http://www.c-span.org/Events/Budget-Chairman-Releases-GOP-2013-Budget-Proposal/10737429163-1/
No worries, Mitt Romney is the guy with the experience to manage the decline.
After listening to Ryan talk for the past 15 minutes, I’ve changed my choice for President:
Paul Ryan 2012!
Man, that guy is amazing.
I agree, but he refused to run. Maybe he could be persuaded to be the VP.
Couple Ryan’s plan with Newt’s energy and reform plan and you have a winner.
NEWT RYAN 2012
RYAN altered his plan after Newt’s plan and thinking:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/does_ryan_now_agree_with_gingrich.html
Also: Two leading economists, Thomas Sowell and Art Laffer have endorsed Newt:
Thomas Sowell –
March 2 – http://www.limaohio.com/articles/obama-80228-western-candidates.html
December 20 – http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/286226/gingrich-s-past-our-future-thomas-sowell?pg=1
Art Laffer- http://www.cnbc.com/id/45815041/Arthur_Laffer_Endorses_Newt_Gingrich
I could go for that, Samuel.
I love Allen West, but after seeing Paul Ryan wipe the floor with the media, I have to change my mind for VP.
Newt/Ryan. I like the sound of that!
I say anyone/Ryan or anyone/Rubio.
Allen West would be best serving as head of Defense, not as VP.
Ryan/Hayes FTW! (seriously, anybody but Obama, and I don’t see Santorum or Mitt doing anything but continuing the debt spending)
“We have negotiated with terrorists,” an angry [Congressman] Doyle (D-PA) said, according to sources in the room. “This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.”
By the Democratic Caucus’ measure, Paul Ryan is beyond a terrorist.
So… That makes him a what…? Breitbart? Limbaugh?
When you abuse words like the Deeocrats do, you eventually run out of words…and credibility.
Let’s get real. Except for the Tea Party Republicans and Paul Ryan, nobody in the Congress thinks that a runaway debt bomb is really anything to worry about. The Panic of 2008 was just the first preliminary event.
What’s funny, Neo, is that EVERYBODY knows we are headed off a cliff. EVERYBODY. You can find Pelosi and Obama on record saying it, and LOTS of Collectivist pundits in more candid moments.
It isn’t the realization that is lacking…it is the political will and guts to address it.
No, not everybody. Really. I moved to San Diego a couple of years ago, and have watched the budget squalling with increasing bemusement.
The newspaper is now reporting on the annual budget ritual of sending pink slips to teachers. The whole thing is kabuki, and not a serious effort to deal with the state’s problems.
There are a few others. Jim DeMint comes to mind.
Y’all need to bounce back to reality… Newt is finished and Santorum continues to really go nowhere. Neither has executive experience and are DC insiders.
If we are to evict reign of the current Chicago mobsters we had better close ranks and get down to business.
It’s just that simple…
Wrong, we need to let the nomination process play out in an effort to garner public interest in republican proposals and dominate news cycles, until a time that a nominee is chosen we should resist infighting and doing the liberal media’s job for them.
Once a Republican nominee is chosen by letting the American peoples voices be heard at the primary polls, then coalescing behind a single candidate is essential as liberals unleash the most dirty and negative campaign in American history.
Furthermore, it is also then that grassroots coalitions be built to assure Repubican majorities in the house and senate.
The process is playing out and it’s clear where it’s headed. No one but Romney can have the nomination cinched before the convention and it’s looking increasingly likely that he will do so. He’s not my first choice, but having the right VP might help, especially in winning the election and, depending on how the President operates, maybe in governing as well. Bush relied heavily on Cheney and a smart President will pick a VP he can rely on just as heavily.
Relax, Bush picked Cheney one week before the Republican convention, that is where VP’s are given the nod.
Having a VP before the convention won’t help.
Romney would more likely open himself up to a barrage of liberal media bashing instead of garnering more support.
Maybe you should read up on the history of political campaign strategy, familiarize yourself with the rules.
http://www.gop.com/images/legal/2008_RULES_Adopted.pdf
But IMO it sounds like you’re unsure of the capabilities of your candidate of choice.
But wait! Where’s Harry Reid’s plan? Poor thing, as recent press interviews have demonstrated, his mind isn’t what it once was and he falls into fits of dementia from time to time. He lacks the mental faculties to do something as complex as sign off on a budget. As they say here in the South – bless his heart.
I don’t think the changes in Ryan’s budget support Newt’s Right wing social engineering dig as much as it is a concession to the fact that the Dems have leveraged the Mediscare tactic so well we need an out.
Sadly I fear that unless we change Medicare substantially people will stick with it, if only because it’s effectively riskless for them from a mere money perspective. That’s a result of some bread and Circuses work that needs to be undone. The same thing that represents the problem is what will keep people on it (the unfunded and ever expansive part.)
Having said that, perhaps if enough people jump ship, Doctors will cease taking Medicare simply due to it’s low reimburssment, which would kill it over the longer term.
Doctors are already turning Medicare patients away. My own doctor has a big sign at the front desk: We do NOT accept Medicare.
In the end, there will be no place for seniors to go for medical help.
This administration wants old people to die.
It’s as simple as that.
My old doc is another goat-head like myself.
He’s already out in the open about defying ObamaCare.
Me, too. Remember how Prohibition was killed. Just say, “HELL no”…!!!
With any luck at all, the Supremes will invalidate Obamacare completely. Let’s pray that happens and revolt (politically) if it doesn’t.
Really, sudden shifts and coercion are a bad thing. I agree with Newt. Repubs need to have some respect for the affected voters.
I love Paul Ryan and wished he would have felt differently about running for President.
Otherwise, I’m glad to see that he took Newt’s ideas to heart.
Democrats point to the WW2 part of that chart, and claim that is the path out of our great depression/recession.
But they forget that after WW2:
A. there was pent up demand from many nations that were destroyed
B. those nations had their own manufacturing base destroyed, so they all bought American
C. there was pent up domestic demand since we’d been producing for the war effort
D. Americans had a strong work ethic, and fundamental values (as opposed to welfare state, buy my birth control mentality)
Today we have an over supply of housing, and “stimulus” has already funded cars and appliances and weather stripping. But consumers are in debt, instead of ready to cash in savings bonds.
Our trade balance is hugely negative. There is massive foreign competition, and a tidal wave of unfunded state obligations, on top of the federal debt. And local/state/federal taxes only go up.
The “greatest generation” came out of the war ready to work. But Obama has a Che t-shirt under his suit. He wants revolution … has no clue on budgeting. He would “redistribute” all (ill-gotten) wealth to HIS people. Capitalism is a foreign concept to him. The collective must be served.
Ryan’s declining to run in 2012 seems to have been based primarily on concerns for his still young children, a decision that enhances the man in my eyes even more. He’s only 42 years old and is desperately needed right where he is, on the House Budget Committee. Time enough for a near future Ryan presidency.
Since it’ll be Obama 52%, Romney 48% (bank on it) in 2012, my dream ticket for 2016 is Ryan & Rubio, with Allen West at Defense and Sarah Palin at Energy – with the expressed mission to close the agency within 4 years.
I think your projections are about right–The One 52, Romney 48. I think the GOP narrowly holds the House and fails to gain control of the Senate.
I love your 2016 slate–especially Palin at Energy to close it down.
Problem is–making it to 2016. I know drunks have to hit absolute bottom, but I am not sure the analogy holds. I doubt the US can recover from an out and out collapse. Not in the form we know it.
The problem is personal, seated in the empty chests of our current and historical political leadership. They are all – both sides of the aisle – making millions for themselves – literally – by basically maintaining the status quo of the last few hundred years: selling their influence as elected and appointed officials. It is those of us whose money is being used that pay the price, get angry, stamp our feet.
While many a politician has trod the populist road and claimed our anger and genuine victimhood as his or her own, very, very few of them did so sincerely, and fewer still managed to do a damn thing about it. 97% are crooks. 2.999% pay lip service. The remainder are good people, however ineffectual.
[…] And A Nobel Winner Would Never Lie, Right? Posted on March 20, 2012 1:30 pm by Bill Quick » Debt Bomb Chart of the Day – Le·gal In·sur·rec·tion […]
“Plan beats no plan”?
Actually when it came to Bush’s attempt to privatise Social Security in 2005, “no plan beat plan”
Ryan’s budget should just be called “Let’s screw old people really, really hard, and take their money and give it to the wealthy. Because that’s the kind of people we are.”
Maybe you’d care to enlighten us on just how this budget takes Social Security checks and signs them over to the evil rich? Don’t just use dog-eared Dem talking points without backing up what you say. I mean, really..if conservatives plan on starving grandma, I want to know the plan.
You wouldn’t want anyone to think you were a troll, would you?
[…] CHART: Obama vs. Paul Ryan From Professor William Jacobson… Obama’s budget proposal shows mounting national debt and deficits. Paul Ryan unveiled the House […]
[…] courtesy Legal Insurrection. It won’t be necessary to read the paragraph with this; just looking at the chart for 10 […]