Does anyone have a plan that isn’t a joke?

Sadie sent me a link to a post about the various budget plans, all of which turn out to be hogwash.  The link is below, but it’s really an excuse for me to ask a question I wanted to ask anyway.  Is anyone in Washington pushing a realistic plan?  Is there, for example, a “Tea Party” plan that actually addresses the deficit/debt issue?  Do any of the Republican presidential candidates have a plan?  We’ve talked here about what we’d like to see, personally, but I’m asking here about plans by people in the public eye, actually being considered by lawmakers and potential lawmakers.

 

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/07/rating-obama-reid-and-boehner-deficit.html

With that backdrop, it’s time to rate the Obama, Reid, and Boehner Deficit reduction plans on a credibility scale.

10-Point
Credibility Scale

  1. Golden
  2. Rock Solid
  3. Fudge
  4. Jello
  5. Marshmallow
  6. Cream Puff
  7. Nauseous
  8. Gaseous
  9. Imaginary
  10. Delusional

Scoring the Proposals

  • Given a $1.4 trillion deficit, the latest plan from Boehner to cut a minuscule $85 billion a year (and back-loaded at that) is somewhere between nauseous and gaseous. It’s no wonder that various Tea-Party members will not vote for it.
  • Obama’s plan is imaginary or delusional depending on whether or not the President actually believes he has a plan, when he doesn’t.
  • Parts of Senator Reid’s plan are gaseous and the rest is clearly imaginary.
  • In contrast, the gang-of-six $4 trillion deficit cutting plan has something of the consistency of Jello, fudge, or marshmallow depending on details that were never disclosed.

$4 trillion sounds like a lot but it is only $400 billion a year, while the deficit is $1.4 trillion. Thus it’s tough to give that plan a rating higher than Jello, and impossible to give it a rating higher than fudge.

At this late juncture, the best one can reasonably hope for is a nauseous resolution. Unfortunately, the odds now favor something between gaseous and imaginary with delusional a distinct possibility.

The higher the score, the lower the credibility, and the better for gold.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. bizcor says

    Paul Ryan has a plan. It was passed by the House several months ago. The Senate tabled it. Cut Cap and Balance was a plan. The house passed it and the Senate tabled it. My opinion is the Republicans should stand pat. They have passed two budget proposals in 6 months. The Democrats passed zero in two years. Which by the way is illegal and there should be some people in jail as a result.

  2. says

    Btw, in case people forgot, 93% of DC residents voted for…. you guessed it, Obama. They’re not going to rock the boat. They know which side of the bread the butter is on.

     See, this is what happens when you let a traitorous political party, or so they claim, take power and aggregate it in one place.

    It gets kind of hard to kick em out after they’ve spent a century or two fortifying themselves in. 

  3. says

    Blacks keep talking about “the system is fixed” and how the “Man up Top” keeps “them”, as in the blackies, down.

    They don’t know a damn thing about that. The “system” that is fixed is the black system which is a subsidiary of the White Master Race system which is a subsidiary of Socialism. 

  4. says

    Don Quixote: $4 trillion sounds like a lot but it is only $400 billion a year, while the deficit is $1.4 trillion. 

    These are the problems facing the United States: 

    Very short term: Inability to resolve debt ceiling crisis.
    Short term: Continued jobs recession has negative impact on revenues. 
    Medium term: Structural deficits of about $600 billion per year. 
    Long term: Growth in the cost of medical and elder care. 

    Resolving the debt ceiling crisis should have been perfunctory, but the U.S. has spooked the markets, so they are now expecting it to be coupled with some sort to of deficit reduction package. Linking the two was a serious mistake that has weakened the U.S. credit reputation. 

    Structural deficits can be addressed with margin cuts in entitlements and the military and modest tax cuts. The U.S. should probably forego the Bush tax cuts entirely, but only once the U.S. is out of the jobs recession. 
    Long term, the U.S. population will have to grapple with the problems of aging and the increasing costs of medical care. This is true whether or not health care is government or private pay. Structural changes will be required, but the current system is simply unsustainable. Other developed countries have much stronger systems with universal coverage, so the U.S. can probably learn from the experience of others. 

  5. says

    Okay, let’s reframe the question slightly.  Is anyone pushing a plan that would actually address the problem that stands a snowball’s chance in hell of getting approved?  Or is the matter simply hopeless with the current crew in Washington?

  6. says

    Don Quixote: Is anyone pushing a plan that would actually address the problem that stands a snowball’s chance in hell of getting approved?  Or is the matter simply hopeless with the current crew in Washington?

    The debt ceiling is normally a perfunctory action that, though distasteful, is done by the majority in the House.
    The problem is that the majority in the House depends on a coalition with the Tea Party, and they refuse to go along. As everything in the House depends on the majority party to make the gears move, and the majority party is bound up in knots, nothing is getting done.

    An immediate bipartisan plan is quite possible, on the order of about $4 trillion (on the order of 3-1 on cuts-to-revenues), but the political theater has to reach a conclusion first. It will be messy, but it’s doable, once they decide they are willing to compromise. This won’t resolve the entire deficit problem, of course, but there is no reason why mature, responsible adults can’t have further discussions on the matter.

  7. says

    Geez, Zach, I was afraid you were going to say that.  Mature, responsible adults?  In Congress??  You mean like people who actually are looking out for future generations?  If we had that, we wouldn’t be in this mess to begin with.

  8. SADIE says

    They’ll eventually pass something that doesn’t hurt either party too much in 2012. Isn’t this the very reason they’ve all been in a huddle. If it was the economy that was eating away at their guts and not their re-election campaigns would we be having this discussion at all.
     
    There will not be a $4 trillion cut. It will a fraction of that figure. Why, you ask? -because they do most things fractionally and rarely wholly. I am in favor of a Constitutional Amendment that limits spending tied to the GDP. The GDP has been revised (isn’t it always) to a whooping 1.3% through June.  A change to the Constitution takes years. Warren Buffet suggested 3%. It could 4 or 5%, it just can’t be an open checkbook. Until there are actually laws forbidding spending beyond a certain figure – what’s to stop them. The Democrats have illegally not put forth a budget in more than two years and the only thing that has countered that, is the opposition.
     
    Lastly, Obamacare (please save us SCOTUS) will create the ultimate exploding economic bubble. It won’t go off all at once, it’ll look like the burbling of a drowning man in films. Some will notice the bubbles, some won’t. Drowning is inevitable either way. The CBO can only score what is given to them. Does anyone know what papers they pushed in front of the accountants.  We all know there’s lots of shady businesses that keep two books. How many books are there is DC? If the GDP is revised after 3 months and again after six – what say you about the ‘scoring’ national health care.
     
     
     

  9. BrianE says

    So, we pass the Reid plan, raise the debt ceiling $2.7 trillion, which provides the ability to borrow money until 2013.
     
     
    And we cut $1 trillion in imaginary spending– spending that hasn’t even been requested at this point, but OK, we aren’t going to spend money that Congress hasn’t asked to spend, and in the alternate universe of Washington, that represents a cut.
     
    Reid’s bill deems a budget passed for the next two years, based on funding levels established by the CBO. So for 4 years the Senate will not have passed a budget.
     
    So then what? When will Congress need to raise the debt ceiling again?
     

  10. says

    Zachriel: This won’t resolve the entire deficit problem, of course, but there is no reason why mature, responsible adults can’t have further discussions on the matter.

    Don Quixote: Geez, Zach, I was afraid you were going to say that.  

    Hmm. There may be a slight problem with the plan.
     

Leave a Reply