He and Palin have both been very specific about taxing and spending, printing press inflation, and redistributive economics.
No,..they haven't.
Exactly how much will be cut, exactly from where, and exactly when.
That's how you speak in specifics.
Yes, they have.
Exactly how much will be cut�is not the way it works.
You have to develop a plan what will work no matter what the dollars are.
No one could name the exact amount before a bill has worked its way though all the committees in both houses and has been signed into law.
The better way and the way it worked in �94 is a plan that will solve the problem no matter what the specifics are.
A law requiring a balanced budget would work no matter what the amounts.
Pay as you go no matter what.
Uncle Newt�s balanced budget came in three years before they had any hope of it doing so. Clinton couldn�t wait to sign that bill and take credit for it.
Prespecified amounts and timetables would not have worked as well.
Prespecified where and when must have some flexibility and be defined in fairly broad terms because no one knows for sure what future conditions and requirements will be.
You are exactly right that the big three federal budget busters are Defense, Social Security, and Medicare/Medicaid.
Work out the goals first and require by law that the specifics follow.
Uncle Newt proved it can be done.
I posted Palin�s specifics back on page six of this thread.
She is supporting the best plan out there at this time and leaving room for improvement�for flexibility.
Your crack: �She just says she'll do whatever Paul Ryan says to do.� was a cheap shot.
And Paul Ryan and all those who voted the same way were doing what seemed the best at that time. They may have been wrong, but they were not trying to steal but to stop a disaster�a worldwide depression. Another cheap shot.
Here is that post again.
The numbers are there.
It would be impossible in the real world to be any more specific then this:
I�m still agreeing with what Sarah said in her Op-Ed at the Wall Street Journal:
��In my view, a better plan is the Roadmap for America�s Future produced by Rep. Paul Ryan (R., Wisc.). The Roadmap offers a reliable path to long-term solvency for our entitlement programs, and it does so by encouraging personal responsibility and independence.
On health care, it would replace ObamaCare with a new system in which people are given greater control over their own health-care spending. It achieves this partly through creating medical savings accounts and a new health-care tax credit�the only tax credit that would be left in a radically simplified new income tax system that people can opt into if they wish.
The Roadmap would also replace our high and anticompetitive corporate income tax with a business consumption tax of just 8.5%. The overall tax burden would be limited to 19% of GDP (compared to 21% under the deficit commission�s proposals). Beyond that, Rep. Ryan proposes fundamental reform of Medicare for those under 55 by turning the current benefit into a voucher with which people can purchase their own care.
On Social Security, as with Medicare, the Roadmap honors our commitments to those who are already receiving benefits by guaranteeing all existing rights to people over the age of 55. Those below that age are offered a choice: They can remain in the traditional government-run system or direct a portion of their payroll taxes to personal accounts, owned by them, managed by the Social Security Administration and guaranteed by the federal government. Under the Roadmap�s proposals, they can pass these savings onto their heirs. The current Medicaid system, the majority of which is paid for by the federal government but administered by the states, would be replaced by a block-grant system that would reward economizing states.
Together these reforms help to secure our entitlement programs for the 21st century. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the Roadmap would lead to lower deficits and a much lower federal debt. The CBO estimates that under current spending plans, our federal debt would rise to 87% of GDP by 2020, to 223% by 2040, and to 433% by 2060. Under Rep. Ryan�s Roadmap, the CBO estimates that debt would rise much more slowly, peaking at 99% in 2040 and then dropping back to 77% by 2060.
Put simply: Our country is on the path toward bankruptcy. We must turn around before it�s too late, and the Roadmap offers a clear plan for doing so. But it does more than just fend off disaster. CBO calculations show that the Roadmap would also help create a �much more favorable macroeconomic outlook� for the next half-century. The CBO estimates that under the Roadmap, by 2058 per-person GDP would be around 70% higher than the current trend.
Is Rep. Ryan�s Roadmap perfect? Of course not�no government plan ever is. But it�s the best plan on the table at a time when doing nothing is no longer an option.
Let�s not settle for the big-government status quo, which is what the president�s commission offers. We owe it to our children and grandchildren to make these tough decisions so that they might inherit a prosperous and strong America like the one we were given.� Governor Sarah Palin
