Sunday, May 8, 2011

GOP is Winning the Budget Debate


Those poor Democrats are looking more and more like Wiley Coyote. They buy the Acme Socialist Propaganda kit guaranteed to defeat that GOP roadrunner, but they end up dropping an anvil on their own heads.







From a DNC fundraising letter, courtesy of Johah Goldberg at NRO…
“Under the Republican budget, if you’re a millionaire, you win the lottery. If you’re a senior, you lose your Medicare.” (Jonah Goldberg – NRO)
Great propaganda points perfectly tuned for the true believers, but blatant lies. Tax rates go down, but loopholes (overwhelmingly used by the rich) disappear. The tax proposal is revenue neutral, and it comes from Obama’s Debt Commission.

Democrat Mediscare Lies and Propaganda

USA Today calls it counterintuitive: Despite Democrat demagoguery, seniors back Ryan’s budget plan. So do those in their prime working and family-raising years. Only with the under 30 crowd does Obama’s sketchy plan outpoll Ryan’s. It’s simple really. Older people study the facts. Younger people tend not to, especially those in the thralls of political hero worship.

Responsible adults who have pulled their heads out of their MSNBC and studied the facts realize that Ryan’s plan changes nothing for those over 55. Obama’s plan is just a sketchy scheme with no hard details, full of gouge the rich and ration the care.

Republicans are winning the Budget Debate

Contrary to what the lying liars on the left are saying, USA Today/Gallup polling shows Americans are reluctantly coming to grips with the harsh realities of deficit reduction. Better yet, the GOP has not just touched the third rail; they’ve tapped into it to light their budgetary platform, and lived to fight on. I can’t believe it, but it looks like the GOP may actually be winning the debate.
“Republicans hold a 12-percentage-point edge over Democrats as the party better able to handle the budget, and a 5-point edge on the economy in general.” (USA Today)
Also encouraging…
“By more than 3-to-1, those surveyed say the deficit stems from too much spending, rather than too little tax revenue.” (USA Today)
Even more bad news for liberals: A growing cohort of Democrat congressmen and senators oppose raising the debt ceiling and voters overwhelmingly want spending cut, while only 11% dream the impossible dream of solving the debt with tax increases: 
“When it comes to solving the deficit problem, about half of Americans, 48%, want to do it entirely or mostly with spending cuts. Some 37% support an equal mix of spending cuts and tax increases; 11% prefer mostly tax hikes.” (USA Today)
Two Stubborn Facts:
+ Government Spending = 22% of GDP;
+ Taxation Stubbornly Sticks at 18% of GDP

Government spending is at around 22% of GDP and rising, which means government gets almost a quarter of every dollar the economy produces. Meanwhile, regardless of tax rates (Eisenhower = high; Reagan=low) the percentage of taxes collected as a percentage of GDP stubbornly sticks at around 18%.

The Solution
This leads to what I consider the smartest thinking on the issue: The federal government should base taxation, spending and budgeting upon these two facts. Size the budget to 18% of GDP and the problem is essentially solved.

18 comments:

Always On Watch said...

If the GOP can do the pr and get out in front of the-Republican-plan-will-hurt-senior-citizens meme. the Dems are done for in the budget debate.

As for the debt ceiling, I do expect some sort of compromise between the two parties. But any such compromise will not help IF budget cuts are not put into force. Would you loan more money to someone if that someone were living high on the hog and, at the same time, owing you previous monies? I've been in that position personally as the lender, and let me tell you, I cut off the beggar and called in the note I held.

LD Jackson said...

I hope the Republicans can continue winning the media battle. I have seen it time after time, where the Democrats falsely accuse the Republicans of something that simply isn't true. Case in point would be the way President Bush was castigated in the media for "cutting" the amount of money the federal government was putting into an insurance program for children. In reality, the money was still increasing, but not at the rate of the Democrats increase, so they portrayed it as a cut. It was a complete falsehood, but was accepted as truth by a lot of the country and President Bush suffered because of it.

Jack Camwell said...

According to the Gallup polling, over 70% of Americans think that the Medicare idea sucks.

The poll says, however, that 43% prefer the Republican budget overall compared to 44% who prefer Obama's.

Not the overwhelming response that Democrats were hoping, I think. The Republicans would do well to scrap Ryan's Medicare idea, I think.

Silverfiddle said...

I think Ryan's plan is far from perfect, but it's the only real plan out there by any politician.

Also, the medicare piece has suffered an incredible propaganda onslaught. I've seen other polling that showed something like half the people polled did not know that nothing changed for 55 and older. Is it the same 50%?

The Born Again American said...

Love your Roadrunner analogy...

WomanHonorThyself said...

facts are a stubborn thing arent they Silver! HAPPY MOTHERS DAY to your fam and yours~! :)

Christopher - Conservative Perspective said...

I totally agree on capping spending as it relates to the GDP.

This makes so much sense that it will never happen in D.C.

conservativesonfire said...

The more they tax the more they spend. Government spending just becomes a bigger part of the GDP. Not good.

Most Rev. Gregori said...

As long as we continue to allow the government to reach into our pockets, wallets, purses and banking accounts, they will continue to spend and spend. Even if they discontinue or shut down a government program, they raise the spending somewhere else. To be completely honest, it is both parties that do this, the only difference is the Democrats are more aggressive.

In the end, the government will continue to shoot themselves in the foot until all that is left is a bloody stump and they will then fall on their collective butts dragging the rest of us with them.

And for those looking for a Savior in the GOP or the Democratic party, forget about it because as long as the big banks, Rockefeller's, Sachs, Rothchild's and Soros are allowed to have the lion's share of the say in government affairs, no one will ever change a thing because they are either bought or threatened.

Andrew33 said...

The information age has opened a pandoras box for liberals and the media. With all the problems facing the country, now, people are paying attention more. Now that they are paying attention more, they are seeing through all the hocus pocus and smoke and mirrors our government and media are trying to sell us.
I just did a post on my blog which you commented on where I pointed out that even among BHO's core supporters (Youth, Black, Hispanic), there is a clear erosion of support. They are being hit hardest by the liberal policies and now they are waking up as well.
The important thing now is to continue the attack and turn this momentum shift into tangible victories, especially in the primaries. We need to get rid of the RINOs and limousine republicans as much as BHO and the dems.
To be honest, I'd rather have huge gains in the house and senate (*note this would be conditional on gaining a supermajority in the senate) than the Presidency.

Country Thinker said...

Three things, Western, and I'm quite an armchair budget geek.

Not sure where you came up with government spending at 22% of GDP. It's mkore than that, especially with mid-year appropriations taken into account. that's the neat trick - the Feds (both parties) presume there will be no "emergencies" to pay for mid-year, so the real deficit is alwyas higher than advertised.

Not sure where you came up with revenues at 18% of GDP. I agree there's a market limit to revenues (Hauser's Law), but I don't think we'll get near 18% of GDP this year, not when we've been under 15%.

@Jack: Scrap the Medicare idea before it's even been drafted? Wow, that's giving up quickly. The GOP needs to make the unbsustainability case to make headway, though. Both parties have done it, so it shouldn't be hard. The GOP can argue "let's try this, or just accept random denials of service." That's actually a clear description of the landscape.

Silverfiddle said...

Country: I have no doubt they are playing tricks under the table. I'm using published government data taken from here

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/

You bring up why it is so hard to discuss this stuff. There is so much trickery and fog, and I think they do it on purpose.

The tax/GDP is easy to understand. Tax too high and the rich just go hide it somewhere

Jersey McJones said...

The GOP is LOSING the budget debate.

They can win complaining about teachers, complaining about organized state and local unions, complaining about healthcare spending, but they can't win by actually doing anything about it.

Of course seniors are fine with these sleazy budget moves - they're not effected. GOPers remind them over and over again they are not going to lose their entitlement benefits. Seniors, these days, are worried about their entitlements, and it seems they are willing to tax their great-grandchildren for surety.

Good for them. Personally, I couldn't sleep at night if I thought like that.

JMJ

Finntann said...

Seems like a lot is being done about it.

The lefts only answer is spend, spend, spend.

Doesn't work in real life...

...won't work in politics for very much longer.

The people see your programs for what they are... vote buying.

The end is nigh!

Always On Watch said...

Medicare is not exactly an entitlement program, particularly as compared to SSI, SSDI, Medicaid, and TANF.

Always On Watch said...

Another thought....If we cut off Social Security and Medicare, will offspring of the elderly (or the disabled) be legally forced to support their parents?

It seems to me that my father had to support both his parents as they didn't qualify for Social Security or Medicare. My grandfather, a pastor and a blacksmith who didn't pay into Social Security (I don't recall why) died in 1941 and my grandmother (who never worked outside the home) in 1958. I clearly recall that when my grandmother, tormented by senile dementia, went to a nursing home in 1954, her children (my father and my uncle had to foot the bill).

If offspring had to support and care for their "illderly" parents, the financial hit on those children would be intense.

I've thought a lot about these issues, particularly after my husband had a stroke in 2009 at the age of 59. The bill for some three months was approximately $170,000! As my husband didn't qualify for Medicare, he still had a private health-insurance policy. Thank God!

BTW, there is no sheltering a well spouse's assets from medical bankruptcy. So, when a serious illness or a long-term illness strikes, the well spouse can well be out on the street -- with Medicaid picking up the tab for the "illderly" spouse.

Silverfiddle said...

Jersey: Keep shouting loud enough and that will make it true, right?

AOW: Excellent points all. Ryan isn't talking about ending everything, but trying to do it smarter.

Lisa said...

The pint Ryan and the GOP are trying to make is if we contiune the same path we are now there won't be anything at all.
But according to the left the rich have endless money trees growing on their front lawns.