These are some key facts from the plan. The above article has a download of the entire thing in it if you want to read it.
Cuts $6.2 trillion in government spending over the next decade compared to the President’s budget, and
$5.8 trillion relative to the current-policy baseline.
Eliminates hundreds of duplicative programs, reflects the ban on earmarks, and curbs corporate welfare
bringing non-security discretionary spending to below 2008 levels.
Brings government spending to below 20 percent of the economy, a sharp contrast to the President’s
budget, in which spending never falls below 23 percent of GDP over the next decade.
DEBT AND DEFICITS
Reduces deficits by $4.4 trillion compared to the President’s budget over the next decade.
Surpasses the President’s low benchmark of sustainability – which his own budget fails to meet –
by reaching primary balance in 2015.
Puts the budget on the path to balance and pays off the debt.
Keeps taxes low so the economy can grow. Eliminates roughly $800 billion in tax increases imposed by
the President’s health care law. Prevents the $1.5 trillion tax increase called for in the President’s budget.
Calls for a simpler, less burdensome tax code for households and small businesses. Lowers tax rates for
individuals, businesses and families. Sets top rates for individuals and businesses at 25 percent. Improves
incentives for growth, savings, and investment.
GROWTH AND JOBS
Creates nearly 1 million new private-sector jobs next year, brings the unemployment rate down to 4
percent by 2015, and results in 2.5 million additional private-sector jobs in the last year of the decade.
Spurs economic growth, increasing real GDP by $1.5 trillion over the decade.
Unleashes prosperity and economic security, yielding $1.1 trillion in higher wages and an average $1,000
per year in higher income for each family.
Am reading it now...
Answer by grlygrlz2 at 12:56 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Answer by adnilm at 1:06 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Medicaid would be utterly dismantled by turning the entitlement into a system of state block-grants, essentially allowing states to spend the money on whatever healthcare priorities they want – which sounds fine at first blush, but would more than likely mean they’d forego spending on a lot of the neediest citizens out there, from the poor and elderly to the disabled. The fact is, states already have a lot of autonomy in crafting their version of the Medicaid entitlement. This would simply allow states to opt-out of paying for those who need it the most
giving seniors a voucher that they can use to purchase insurance on the private, ahem, ‘market’
It also said these numbers are if health care is repealed, which we all know isn't going to happen, so you can't rely on these numbers.
Answer by mommom2000 at 1:14 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Answer by adnilm at 1:34 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Answer by myame at 1:36 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Answer by adnilm at 1:37 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
, and reduce their income taxes to zero. Taxes on incomes between $50,000 and $90,000 should be cut to 10 percent; between $90,000 and $150,000 to 20 percent; between $150,000 and $250,000 to 30 percent. And exempt the first $20,000 of income from payroll taxes. Make up the revenues by increasing taxes on incomes between $250,000 to $500,000 to 40 percent; between $500,000 and $5 million, to 50 percent; between $5 million and $15 million, to 60 percent; and anything over $15 million, to 70 percent. And raise the ceiling on the portion of income subject to payroll taxes to $500,000. It's called progressive taxation.
Politically speaking Ryan's plan is extreme. Financially it is the right thing to do to control Federal government over reaching and over spending. I apologize for my spelling and sentence structure. Typing with one hand while holding a sick sleeping 2 year old.
Answer by myame at 1:40 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Answer by myame at 1:45 PM on Apr. 5, 2011
Check out some of the top posts today in Groups: