The unrealistic assumptions behind Paul Ryan’s budget numbers

Dec 2010
36,825
28,616
Virginia
#1
The unrealistic assumptions behind Paul Ryan’s budget numbers
By Ezra Klein




There’s an important disclaimer in the very first paragraph of the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of Paul Ryan’s budget plan.


The calculations presented here represent CBO’s assessment of how the specified paths would alter the trajectories of federal debt, revenues, spending, and economic output relative to the trajectories under two scenarios that CBO has analyzed previously. Those calculations do not represent a cost estimate for legislation or an analysis of the effects of any given policies. In particular, CBO has not considered whether the specified paths are consistent with the policy proposals or budget figures released today by Chairman Ryan as part of his proposed budget resolution.

Translated out of CBO-ese, what that means is that CBO hasn’t looked at whether Ryan’s budget will achieve the results Ryan says it will. Rather, it looked at what will happen assuming Ryan’s budget achieves the results that Ryan says it will.

The unrealistic assumptions behind Paul Ryan’s budget numbers - The Washington Post

Now here's the part that gets interesting folks...so stick with me.
"He tells them to assume that all federal spending aside from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will fall from 12.5 percent of GDP in 2011 to 3.75 percent of GDP in 2050.

It’s that last assumption, perhaps, that shows most clearly how unlikely Ryan’s specified budget path is. He’s saying that in 2050, spending on defense, on food stamps, on infrastructure, on education, on research and development, on the federal workforce, and everything other non-entitlement program combined will be less than four percentage points of GDP.

Consider that defense spending has never fallen below three percentage points of GDP, and Mitt Romney has promised to keep it above four percentage points of GDP. Ryan has not outlined a realistic goal."


[video=youtube;fcPCoVC75MA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcPCoVC75MA[/video]

And there it is folks...the TRUTH comes out and KOs the Romney-Ryan Plan.
 
Apr 2012
14,903
2,675
The New America
#7
The unrealistic assumptions behind Paul Ryan’s budget numbers
By Ezra Klein




There’s an important disclaimer in the very first paragraph of the Congressional Budget Office’s analysis of Paul Ryan’s budget plan.


The calculations presented here represent CBO’s assessment of how the specified paths would alter the trajectories of federal debt, revenues, spending, and economic output relative to the trajectories under two scenarios that CBO has analyzed previously. Those calculations do not represent a cost estimate for legislation or an analysis of the effects of any given policies. In particular, CBO has not considered whether the specified paths are consistent with the policy proposals or budget figures released today by Chairman Ryan as part of his proposed budget resolution.

Translated out of CBO-ese, what that means is that CBO hasn’t looked at whether Ryan’s budget will achieve the results Ryan says it will. Rather, it looked at what will happen assuming Ryan’s budget achieves the results that Ryan says it will.

The unrealistic assumptions behind Paul Ryan’s budget numbers - The Washington Post

Now here's the part that gets interesting folks...so stick with me.
"He tells them to assume that all federal spending aside from Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security will fall from 12.5 percent of GDP in 2011 to 3.75 percent of GDP in 2050.

It’s that last assumption, perhaps, that shows most clearly how unlikely Ryan’s specified budget path is. He’s saying that in 2050, spending on defense, on food stamps, on infrastructure, on education, on research and development, on the federal workforce, and everything other non-entitlement program combined will be less than four percentage points of GDP.

Consider that defense spending has never fallen below three percentage points of GDP, and Mitt Romney has promised to keep it above four percentage points of GDP. Ryan has not outlined a realistic goal."


[video=youtube;fcPCoVC75MA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcPCoVC75MA[/video]

And there it is folks...the TRUTH comes out and KOs the Romney-Ryan Plan.
Uhhhhh...Ryan's budget is not now nor will it ever be the law of the land. Romneys budget is not Ryan's budget...it's Romneys. If you prefer to discuss a plan hat will never be policy have at it but your wasting precious bandwidth.
 
Oct 2007
2,136
682
Utah
#9
Democrat Erskine Bowles painted a different picture than Ezra Klien about Paul Ryan’s proposed budget plan, and actually criticized Obama’s budget plan. Bowles is the co-chair of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, a commission created by Obama. Here’s what he said: Erskine Bowles Praised Paul Ryan, Criticized Obama At 2011 Event

“I always thought that I was okay with arithmetic. [Paul] can run circles around me, and he is honest, he is straightforward, he is sincere. And the budget that he came forward with is just like Paul Ryan. It is a sensible, straightforward, honest, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit just like we did, by $4 trillion... The President came out with his own plan and the President, as you remember, came out with a budget, and I don’t think anybody took that budget very seriously. The Senate voted against it 97 to nothing. He, therefore, after a lot of pressure from folks like me, he came out with a new budget framework, and in that new budget framework, he cut the budget deficit by $4 trillion over 12 years. And, to be candid, this $4 trillion cut was very heavily back-end loaded. So, if you looked at it on a 10-year basis and compared apples-to-apples, it really was about a two and a half trillion dollar cut.”
 

Rasselas

Former Staff
Feb 2010
71,080
47,969
USA
#10
Democrat Erskine Bowles painted a different picture than Ezra Klien about Paul Ryan’s proposed budget plan, and actually criticized Obama’s budget plan. Bowles is the co-chair of the National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, a commission created by Obama. Here’s what he said: Erskine Bowles Praised Paul Ryan, Criticized Obama At 2011 Event
I don't know why cutting benefits for the poor and middle class makes sense at the same time Ryan wants to increase the defense budget and cut capital gains and inheritance taxes to nothing. If he thinks we've got a problem why should only the poor and middle class (and people now approaching retirement age) be required to sacrifice to solve it?