House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) is set to unveil his caucus' new budget plan, and to help ensure it lands on fertile soil, the far-right Republican released a video trailer for his plan late last week.
For those who can't watch clips online, Ryan argues that the 2008 crash caught policymakers "by surprise," but he sees another one on the way.
"Let me ask you a question: what if your president, your senator and your congressman knew it was coming? What if they knew when it was going to happen, why it was going to happen, and more importantly, what if they knew what they needed to do to stop it from happening and they had the time to stop it? But they chose to do nothing about it, because it wasn't good politics?
"What would you think of that person? It would be immoral. This coming debt crisis is the most predictable crisis we've ever had in this country. And look what's happening. This is why we're acting. This is why we're leading. This is why we're proposing -- and passing out of the House -- a budget to fix this problem: so we can save our country for ourselves and our children's future."
The political motivations for all of this are pretty obvious: Ryan's plan is going to recommend brutal cuts to domestic programs, and he will do his best to say the slashes are necessary because of the "coming debt crisis." For the Ayn Rand acolyte, these aren't cuts he wants to make, but rather, they're cuts he thinks he has to make to prevent a debt-driven disaster.
Or so the argument goes.
There are a few angles to keep in mind as the debate begins again in earnest, and they share a theme: Ryan has absolutely zero credibility on these issues, and his fear-mongering is not to be taken seriously.
First, there is no debt crisis. The United States can easily borrow as much as it needs at low interest rates, suggesting there's nothing even close to a debt crisis. This is a fig leaf the right is using to rationalize draconian cut to domestic priorities, which they've long wanted to make anyway.
Second, if Paul Ryan and his allies were seriously panicked about reducing the deficit in a hurry to prevent a "crisis," they'd consider modest tax increases on the wealthy. Indeed, we know exactly what's driving the national debt, and much of it has to do with tax cuts the rich didn't need and the country couldn't afford. When Ryan acknowledges this, he'll start to have some credibility on the issue.
And third, for all of Ryan's alleged fear about the debt, his last budget plan ignored deficit reduction altogether, and instead prioritized more tax breaks for those at the very top.
Funny, these relevant details didn't seem to make the cut of Ryan's little video. What a shame.
Update: If Ryan's video looks familiar, there's a good reason for that.
Leave a Comment:
Oh, don't worry: Ryan will be fully conditioned for 2016.
Budgets say quite a lot about the values of the people who put them together. From the micro to the macro, what people choose to prioritize in their lives shows when the numbers come in and it becomes manifest where the money went, and how much was raised to support such spending.
The Ryan plan is Class Warfare plain and simple! -Kevo
You could almost wonder if Mr Ryan has ever heard of climate change.
Got much hypocrisy Mr Ryan?
MOST people knew there was a housing bubble. It was discussed pretty regularly at many dinner tables and board room tables. Just because the republican's (and really most politicians) kept denying it didn't mean everyone in the country bought it, it was simply a matter of time. No one was really shocked when it happened, it however was a shock to learn that the big banks had been even further in the hole with the credit-default swaps thing (which takes a seriously evil genius to come up with in the first place). So apparently Mr. Ryan was living under a rock through 2000-2008 and now believes he can get the masses to believe his sudden "insight"? You have got to be kidding me.
I was going to post more-or-less exactly the same thing. You beat me to it.
So I guess Barney Frank also knew, but was saying Fannie and Freddie were fine, and more mortgages should be given to people who couldn't pay
Tom
That is not even close as a comparable issue. Your attempt at equivalency is not even close to the realm useful comparison. In hindsight the housing bubble and Wall Street collapse appear so obvious that it is easy to blame anyone associated with it.
Sounds like Bush and his policies to me.
For the last freaking time people:
Barney Frank was not pro-private market sector loans to the poor. He was pro-public housing. All of the statements the right wing presents of him were him talking about why Fannie and Freddie needed to provide more public housing. They always stop just shy of him stating we need to provide public housing. He never advocated for the private loans. Those loans came about because of compassionate conservatism. The Republicans under Clinton and Bush created the problem. Seriously people we cannot fix our problems if we lack the maturity to have some accountability. I get that it's hard to admit that the Republican Party screwed up, but this is the only way for us to move forward.
Barney Frank was not pro-private market sector loans to the poor. He was pro-public housing. All of the statements the right wing presents of him were him talking about why Fannie and Freddie needed to provide more public housing.
Thank you Mouzer for making sure this gets out and repeated.
keep on telling THE TRUTH ABOUT THESE LIARS, Benen.
Oh, no it looks like The Grim Reeper is back. He has just pulled himself out of the dark abyss. Maybe he is planning to write another school paper this time it is on "How to look as if you're working when you're actually not." or "The great mystery behind getting paid for doing absolutely nothing" or "The new Gentlemans' GOP club, No Women allowed"
The Grim Reaper indeed. I still say, those big blue eyes and those ears... Hmm, maybe Rick Santorum is right, I've been watching too much porn!!
Eeeeeeekkk!
So is he admitting that the Bush administration knew the economic crisis was coming and did nothing? Because, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe he was President in 2008.
Ssssssh, you are disrupting the GOP faux reality. Bush knew nothing about pending terrorist attacks, he knew nothing about the pending economic crash, and he certainly could do nothing about his term's high gas prices. What he could do of course was let his rich buddies run amok while keeping the eyes of the nation toward his needless war in Iraq. He could dispense shut-up money to the nation in the form of "tax refunds" while letting Cheney run cloven-hoofed over energy reform.
We aren't allowed to talk about Bush ever. It's too glaring a comparison between the economic good years of Clinton and the economic recovery under Obama, that Democrats govern for the benefit of the nation while Republicans govern for the benefit of themselves. And all it seems to take to get voters to keep them in office is a fresh set of lies and displaced blame.
Bush, what bush I didn't see no bush.
Paul Ryan, like his cohorts in the Republican Party, know only one mantra: Help the rich, hurt the poor.
After his last budget "plan" was revealed to be an embarassing fiasco where it was shown Rep. Ryan could not even do simple addition and subtraction, it is remarkable that he was even allowed to prepare a second budget. Clearly, Republicans have no shame.
I'd be willing to bet good money that a raft of pundits will pronounce this to be yet another serious attempt at budget compromise. Hopefully, we won't be exposed to a second round of Ryan workout tapes at the same time.
There is nothing preventing Ryan from creating another budget proposal and getting the House to vote on it, preferably before the elections. No doubt Republicans will be just as happy to vote for it as they were on Ryan's previous proposed budget because that went over real well with the voters.
Wiki sez: Ryan got a BA in econ & PolySci from Miami of Ohio. When not attending class he drove the Oscar Meyer Wienermobile .
He also worked as an intern, opening mail, for Wisconsin Senator Kasten, and moonlighted as waiter and a fitness trainer.
He was a speechwriter for Jack Kemp, and legislative director for Senator Brownback, before running for congress.
All excellent training to become an expert on economics.
-Speaking of which, Paul Krugman has a Nobel Prize in economics. . .
'what if your president, your senator and your congressman knew it was coming?' 'It would be immoral'. Asked and answered Congressman Ryan. You KNEW, you SAW it and you didn't nothing except doubled down. The meltdown started in 2007. Bloggers that you denigrate SAW it coming, talked about and discussed it but the GOP decided to ignore it because you had buddies you could call in to hide the banking scandal, buddies to manipulate the price of gas and buddies to lie about Social Security and Medicare. And this was in 2007-2008. You're right Ryan. It was immoral.
Rachel, you're preaching to the choir and not addressing the Republicans' primary contentions: that tax increases drain money from the economy, lessening economic activity and thereby reducing revenues; and its flip side, that tax reductions increase economic activity, thereby increasing tax revenues. It's the misapplied Laffer Curve/supply-side dream of these benighted conservatives. Every liberal and progressive agrees with the three flaws you find in Ryan's thinking, and every conservative still believes in the fiscal religion (aka Reaganomics) of Saint Reagan. Anytime a liberal or progressive proclaims the flaws of conservative fiscal doctrine, the proclamation should include at least a refutation of the conservative doctrine. Perhaps you could link to this brief but excellent summary: http://www.economicsforaroundearth.com/supply-side-economics-and-the-laffer-curve/.
What I see happening here is someone is watching and monitoring the news and then reporting it to the Gop. They then try to turn the situation around in their favor, by lying as if they said something that the Democrats or the President just stated. I can't explain this fully but, it seems to be happening a lot lately. It seems to be a ploy that they are using. Ryans' speech is a perfect example of this. I guess they assume that the majority of Americans aren't too bright. They can't get support by being honest so they have to try and trick the Americans' into thinking they actually care about them. They also need to stop speaking for all All Americans they should be honest and direct their speeches to All rich and greedy Americans.
I think you explained it just fine.
Thought I'd share my impressions of meeting Ryan in person. In various settings I've met him 8 times. He is a really creepy guy in person, very much a used car salesman. Not a used car salesman at a big dealer, no a guy at a fly by night rip off lot. Ryan will tell you anything he thinks you want to hear if he thinks you'll give him money. I mean will say ANYTHING. For example if you complain that the FDA is slow and that you think they need more money to hire more people he is all for it, but if you complain about oversight from the FDA he says slash the budget to zero. All within the same meeting. Just a huge liar. Total fake with zero values other than money for him. If he was not in the House he'd be a grifter. Just sad that this jackass sits in Les Aspen's old seat. By the way he is not Eddie Munster, Paul Ryan is Eddie Haskel 'That's a lovely dress you have on today Mrs. Cleaver'.
The economy collapsed in 2007 with real estate abandonment because immigrants began fleeing the country after foreign news services began running stories about how the War on Drugs made the US into the crime capitol of the world.
Republicans want to stop immigration and throw more people in prison, which are the things that collapsed the economy in the first place. Romney said so when he stated "we need to let Detroit go bankrupt".
Immigrants need to keep coming to the US and prison populations need to be reduced in order for the economy to grow. Only Democrats want the things that cause the economy to grow.
Do the math.
Ryan isn't making a mistake with these statements. He "believes" what he is saying, which is why people need to abandon the GOP until they reform.
Congressman Paul Ryan is in his seventh term in the House of Representatives; that puts him in year thirteen of that office (with years prior involvement in politics on other levels).
He asks us about people that saw something coming and did nothing about it?
Well, on one of his insistent mantras he speaks of the insufficiency of the Medicare program going forward (we won't debate his egregious "solutions" here).
Well, I am guessing if Congressman Ryan had a calculator, or heck an abacus or maybe a piece of paper and a basic knowledge of math -- he would have known the year[s] when the Baby Boomer generation would be hitting retirement age with the attendant expense long ago. 1946-1954 = their retirement begins in 2011 (using 65 years of age as benchmark... though it is now 62-66, 65 is good basic averaging).
So, if he was in Congress for 6 terms before this event, why did he wait until last year and then again now to propose a "fix".... didn't he see it coming? Or is this just another fear tactic in the term of a Democrat POTUS, for the express purpose of scaring people into voting Republican? Bet on the fear factor.
Since I can do math and even though I am just a citizen -- who is supposed to BE represented by all those elected (D) or (R) -- I am obviously better informed than Congressman Ryan and frankly, I will not only refuse the fear mongering of Mr. Ryan and his cohorts (in all levels of government, including in the states and localities), I will fight it -- with FACT.
Oh yeah, do the Republicans know who owns most of the US debt? It isn't China...
Signed, better Informed than Republicans-if-you-take-Paul Ryan-as-a-Spokesperson!
I meant to include Social Security (62-66) with Medicare (65) ... missed the "edit" time.
But I hope the reader gets my point -- the "fixes" proposed now -- but not for those collecting now (= baby boomers/big voting bloc) -- should have been proposed years ago if the ones suggesting them are to be found credible today!
He's not a Real American, where's his Flag Lapel Pin!!!
When Bush proposed those tax cuts, wars and increased spending, Ryan, like most of the Republicans, had no problem voting for those items. This was in spite of the fact that those items increased the debt which Bush hid in his budgets. Bush inherited suprluses from Clinton. Does Ryan think people cannot connect the dots between what Bush did and the debt? I hope he runs for president in 2016 and Hillary Clinton is his opponent. The debates would be the perfect confrontation for Dems.
"First, there is no debt crisis. The United States can easily borrow as much as it needs at low interest rates, suggesting there's nothign even close to a debt crisis."
Wow!!! That statement betrays nearly incomprehensible levels of either ignornace, delusion, disembly, or insanity; picking one or mixing & matching is moot.
Printing money is ALWAYS accomplished at "low interest rates"!!! By that standard of illogic, why do we need any tax collection mechanisms at all...Hey, we can just "borrow" whatever we feel like spending with NO consequences at all.
Check out the economic histories of The Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe. They too sufferd the delusional insanity that they could just print money; having their cake and eating it too until the house of cards collapsed.
You obviously have no idea what the above statement means.
It has nothing to do with "printing money", it does relate to issuing US Treasury Bonds which are currently offered at a very low rate of interest ...meaning INTEREST PAID TO THE BUYER! The buyer is essentially loaning money to the US Treasury at a very low cost to the US. These bonds are among the most stable and valuable of all financial instruments offered in the world market.
PS: The country that holds the MOST US debt is ... The USA!
Check out some facts instead of the ideological rantings you seem to feed on to form [erroneous] opinion.
Actually, the debt does matter. The interest we pay on the debt sure could have been used for other purposes. For example, last year we paid about $277 Billion interest on our debt. Social Security, which costs us about $730 Billion a year, had only a $49 Billion deficit. That interest money could have been better used there or maybe for a better stimulus package.
Now, that being said, there are times when any country will need to run in debt, i.e., for wars or for national emergencies. I think our economy's crash would qualify as one of those emergencies!! The problem is that the debt we are saddled with WASN'T created because of those reasons, but because Reagan wanted both a large military and low taxes and we just have never recovered from that. Obama and the Congress, faced with TWO continuing wars and an economic emergency, really had no choice but to increase the debt.
Good ole Paul Ryan, in his economic/fiscal innocence, thinks NOW is the time to balance the budget!
I read "A Roadmap for America's Future, version 2.0" (now he's coming out in versions) and what a document. After you pull out the propaganda, there really isn't much to read actually, but he really NEEDS to get his facts straight - the numbers I could verify were pretty much wrong (unless, of course, you believe that the standard deduction on Form 1041 for a single person is really $12,000).
Secondly, he can't calculate. Look at his numbers for replacing Social Security - instead of each of us paying 4.2% of our salary towards social security, he wants us to pay 5.1% and get back less (do the calcs, you will see what I mean - all you need is a savings calculator, an annuities calculator and his plan). He also thinks we and our employers pay 12.4% of our salaries towards Social Security (huh? 4.2 + 6.2 = 10.4, NOT 12.4 - maybe he was adding something else in, but I can't figure out what it is.). If this plan does get in, I sure wouldn't want to be in that 45-55 age bracket - those people are going to get SCREWED!!!
We WILL need to tackle the debt sooner or later, because we just can't keep borrowing our way out of trouble. You know a rainy day will come when we really do need to borrow big again and we will need to be fiscally sound enough to do that, but COME ON, how about a rational plan that doesn't destroy the country for the sake of a tax break for the corporations and the rich????
Debt crises (as a statement) = government cannot borrow money
Government borrowing money =/= government printing more money
Try to keep up, yes?
W/ that said oncea is correct. People keep forgetting that we're involved in multiple wars overseas, that we're in a recession, that wages are stagnate, and that taxes are too low. If you want to address what has caused our current deficit and what has caused our debt these issues are your primary problem. Republicans keep forgetting that historically we never went to war w/o raising taxes. They keep forgetting that we're in a recession (when discussing the debt, anyway), and they keep forgetting that the buying power as a percentage of income that the average American family has, has gone down. This dramatically impacts consumerism which dramatically impacts GDP growth.
I live in Ryan's congressional district. When auto jobs were leaving Kenosha and Janesville (his hometown) he was a no-show. Now he's gonna fix a mammoth problem like our debt? Yeah, sure.
He is thinking to himself "Yeah, but I look good"
What if your President, Senators and Representatives knew it was coming and did nothing about it. That would be immoral for sure. If they didn't see it coming, like 9/11, so they say, then they weren't doing their job. So either way, the Bush administration dropped the ball here too.