Tag: We are spending too much stupid.

OK, that was actually a good move

Everyone here knows that I have very little love for Ryan these dahys, but when he does something right, I will give him his props. From the article:

Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) on Wednesday persuaded Republicans to postpone votes on bringing back legislative earmarks until 2017 after reminding members of President-elect Donald Trump’s promise to “drain the swamp” of Washington.

House Republicans were set to hold a secret ballot on changes to their internal conference rules that would have allowed lawmakers to direct spending to projects in their districts under certain circumstances.

Based on what lawmakers were saying in the meeting, “it was likely that an earmark amendment would have passed,” according to a source in the room.
“Ultimately, the Speaker stepped in and urged that we not make this decision today,” the source said.

Behind former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Republicans banned earmarks after winning the House in 2010 and have stuck by that policy despite grumbling from both sides of the aisle.

I am glad Ryan put an end to this terrible, terrible idea, and very impressed he did it for the right reason. I am really, really angry that the republican establishment douche-bags thinks it is time to bring back pork barrel spending now that they are in the majority. WTF, have you not glommed that the fact so many people voted for Trump was precisely this sort of statist waste, you fucking idiots?

With the GOP now set to control both Congress and the White House next year, some Republicans are agitating for change.

Reps. John Culberson of Texas, Mike Rogers of Alabama and Tom Rooney of Florida filed an amendment to GOP rules that would ease the earmark ban by creating a new process for targeted spending.

A separate proposal by Rooney that focused more narrowly on Army Corps of Engineers projects appeared to have the votes to pass on Wednesday, several lawmakers said.

Not only no, but hell no. As was pointed out before: no matter how good the original intention of the idea – and I am not saying these people have good intentions at all, and suspect they are teeing this up this way precisely because they can get the votes from others that actually in this one case see this as a good move – it will end up abused.

Short cuts even for what some might believe to be good things, just leaves the door open for others that later come along, to do bad things, as a lot of liberals, driven psychotic because Trump inherited the government machine they just spent the last 8 years weaponizing to force thing their way, are now realizing.

Mo earmarking. Despite all the arguments that it is needed to make some thing move faster, this idiotic practice is all but guaranteed to devolve back into what it was: a machine to allow those that use that practice to collect campaign money by pushing for pork barrel spending at the tax payers expense.

Here is some advice Mr. Ryan: never let this shit come back under the “Drain the swamp” administration. if you do, I am going to assume you did that because you wanted to sabotage this move to defang the establishment.

Cuts? We don’t need no stinking cuts!

The shell game has begun. So is the damned narrative. If you get your news from the usual LSM outlets, you are probably thinking that the problem is all the evil republicans who want to protect their rich buddies from paying their “fair share”, whatever the fuck that bullshit arbitrary marxist lingo – and have no doubt that it is arbitrary on purpose, so they can redefine it in their favor whenever they feel they need to steal more money – is supposed to mean. The narrative is that the democrats are standing fast but working hard to get a compromise, and Politico is doing its best to carry the narrative. What’s the first issue? Them dumb republicans will have to cave to the donkeys and give us tax hikes.

Listen to top Democrats and Republicans talk on camera, and it sounds like they could not be further apart on a year-end tax-and-spending deal — a down payment on a $4 trillion grand bargain.

But behind the scenes, top officials who have been involved in the talks for many months say the contours of a deal — including the size of tax hikes and spending cuts it will most likely contain — are starting to take shape.

Cut through the fog, and here’s what to expect: Taxes will go up just shy of $1.2 trillion — the middle ground of what President Barack Obama wants and what Republicans say they could stomach.

That $ 1.2 trillion over a long period, maybe a decade or two, because there is no way they hike taxes on just the rich to get that much in a year. It’s thus going to be fucking peanuts in the grand scheme of things, because they are spending roughly the same amount every year over and above what they collect. If we say that the $ 1.2 trillion is over a decade, then doing the math, we are looking at about $12 trillion of money we don’t have over a decade, means we end up with $10.8 trillion in new debt after this new tax offsets the spending. We are fucked because these new taxes do nothing of any real consequence.

So what’s left? Well the vaunted cuts. The problem is that the donkeys, now that they have gotten their taxes, do not really want the cuts. Oh, don’t get me wrong, the LSM is going out of its way to pretend they do. Check this nonsense out:

A top Democratic official said talks have stalled on this question since Obama and congressional leaders had their friendly-looking post-election session at the White House. “Republicans want the president to own the whole offer upfront, on both the entitlement and the revenue side, and that’s not going to happen because the president is not going to negotiate with himself,” the official said. “There’s a standoff, and the staff hasn’t gotten anywhere. Rob Nabors [the White House negotiator], has been saying: ‘This is what we want on revenues on the down payment. What’s you guys’ ask on the entitlement side?’ And they keep looking back at us and saying: ‘We want you to come up with that and pitch us.’ That’s not going to happen.”

We want to cut entitlements. But by how much? Lets look at the Politico article for some perspective:

Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) told “Morning Joe” on Tuesday that he could see $400 billion in entitlement cuts. That’s the floor, according to Democratic aides, and it could go higher in the final give and take. The vast majority of the savings, and perhaps all of it, will come from Medicare, through a combination of means-testing, raising the retirement age and other “efficiencies” to be named later. It is possible Social Security gets tossed into the mix, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) plans to fight that, if he has to yield on other spending fronts.

Hmm. $400 billion cut? Is that in annual spending, or is that $400 billion over a decade? Because if it is $400 billion over a decade, it is chump change. And while it will not bridge the annual gap – that $1.2 trillion of money we don’t have being spent each year – $400 billion is a lot. That’s $4 billion over a decade. The problem is that even when combined with the $1.2 trillion hike, we are looking at a total of $5.2 trillion over the decade. But then that still falls horribly short. At our current spending rate, we will have $12 trillion of added debt. While $5.2 trillion is no chump change, we still would be left with $6.8 trillion in new debt. And that’s assuming that the $400 billion number is annual, which I doubt is the case.

The problem isn’t that a total $400 billion cut is insignificant, or that even if it really is a $4 trillion cut over the decade that it isn’t enough, it is that this cut thing is a total shell game. Dig down through this puff piece and eventually you find this:

Democrats want most Medicare and other entitlement savings to kick in between 10 and 20 years from now, which will make some Republicans choke. Democrats will point to the precedent set by House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) of pushing most mandatory savings off until a decade from now.

We have to wait 10 to 20 years for the cuts? Seriously? Can we just say they want NO CUTS, because if the cuts happen 10 years out, as I already showed, we will be another $10 trillion in debt (assuming the tax increases happen). And if they come 20 years later that debt figure doubles. The cuts happening so far out that we can just accept it as fiat that they would never happen, is not acceptable. It’s not even an accounting gimmick. It is a bald faced bullshit lie. And even if off topic, I want to point out that I do not recall the Ryan plan pushing the cuts out like Politico claims, but I could be wrong. Yeah CM, that your token distraction item. You can focus on this tid-bit and ignore the rest of this story.

It sure is a given that these spending cuts, if they ever happens, still fall far short of what we need. And this assumes that these marxists don’t get to do what they really want – the reason they are doing the whole Kabuki dance about taxing the rich more for – which is to use the tax hike as an excuse to increase the entitlement spending they rely on to buy votes. More debt. We have also not even factored in debt increases due to Obamacare’s costs. The taxes & penalties that this behemoth levies are significant and economy crushing, but they will never cover the cost. Anyone telling you otherwise is a god damned liar. Even more debt. So we are still looking at an enormous jump in debt over the next decade if these crooks get their way. Huge jump. At least $10 trillion, in the best case scenario. Probably more.

Look, let’s not kid ourselves. If the cuts are not immediate and significant, they are never going to happen. This plan, if it doesn’t implement immediate cuts, is a sham. The American people are being had. Well, at least those of us that are productive tax payers doing the right thing are being bent over and had. The free loaders are gonna keep their gravy train and vote accordingly. At least until the gravy train derails. We are doomed. Nobody wants to deal with reality. We have to cut back spending or we are going to end up with an economic implosion that will wipe out practically all prosperity, growth, and advancement of the last century. Shame on the crooks willfully doing this to us. We are already over the fiscal cliff, and not bright enough to admit it.