[lbo-talk] what'd they cut in that $38B?

Jordan Hayes jmhayes at j-o-r-d-a-n.com
Sat Apr 9 09:21:21 PDT 2011


Doug writes:


> Bet the Dems conceded more than the Reps ...

It seems like that would have to be the case; there wasn't really anything to lose for the Republicans to shut the government down, even if they started it back up on Monday or Tuesday: see what these un-serious Democrats made us do?

Speaking of Serious (good links in the original):

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/09/serious/

"Serious" April 9, 2011, 6:09 am

I'm in an airport lounge, for my sins, and there's no avoiding the TV running CNN. And there's David Gergen, telling me that the Ryan plan, whatever its flaws, is "serious". So I guess that's the Very Serious People line.

James Fallows has a very good take[*] on this; my version would be this: I don't think a budget plan is "serious" unless it has numbers that remotely add up, says something specific about how it will cut spending and/or raise revenue, and puts forward proposals that have at least some chance of actually going into effect.

So, we have a plan that proposes to cut spending to Calving Coolidge levels, without explaining how it will do that; that includes $2.9 trillion in tax cuts, but asserts that it will make that up by broadening the base - yet says literally nothing about what that means; and has as its centerpiece a Medicare plan that will collapse as soon as seniors start getting their grossly inadequate vouchers.

Oh, and it directs us to a totally ludicrous Heritage Foundation analysis for support.

There's nothing serious about this plan. And the way our pundit class swooned over this fantasy document suggests that all those people lecturing the American people about our unwillingness to face up to reality and make hard choices should spend some time looking in the mirror.

---

[*] http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/the-brave-and-serious-mr-ryan/237008/



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list