Friday, December 08, 2017

Paul Ryan Aims for Medicare, Social Security Cuts

There has been one inescapable question surrounding the newly passed GOP tax plan: Who will pay for it? The answer is actually not complicated, because top Republicans have already told everyone. House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., who has long dedicated his career to drawing ire over the ever-rising national debt and deficit, has made lobbying for cuts a big part of his legislative agenda. Days before the House version of the tax plan under President Donald Trump's administration passed, Ryan was well aware of the hit the deficit would take as a result. In fact, he already had a plan in place to help fix the problem his party deliberately intended to create: spending cuts and welfare reform. "You cannot get the national debt under control, you cannot get that deficit under control, if you don't do both -- grow the economy, cut spending," Ryan argued during a town hall event in Virginia for Fox News.

More

It became quite obvious that social safety net programs had been put in the crosshairs, and on Wednesday, only days after the Senate tax plan passed, Ryan confirmed as much.

"We're going to have to get back next year at entitlement reform, which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit," Ryan said during an interview on Ross Kaminsky's radio show, The Washington Post reported. "Frankly, it's the health care entitlements that are the big drivers of our debt, so we spend more time on the health care entitlements -- because that's really where the problem lies, fiscally speaking."

Comments

More from the article:

Following private conversations between the two, Ryan said he also feels confident that the president will support his efforts to scale back Medicare, which Trump promised he wouldn't do on the campaign, along with Medicaid and Social Security.

"I think the president is understanding that choice and competition works everywhere in health care, especially in Medicare," Ryan explained. "This has been my big thing for many, many years. I think it's the biggest entitlement we've got to reform."

#1 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-12-07 02:20 PM

Reform will mean draconian cuts. Who do you think you're crappin, Ryan?

#2 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2017-12-07 02:29 PM

Trump promised not to touch Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. He also promised to provide Americans with better, more affordable health insurance. Now we see what the GOP is really going to do: cut back on all 3 programs and move to privatize Medicare. At least that's how I'm reading: "I think the president is understanding that choice and competition works everywhere in health care, especially in Medicare."

#3 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2017-12-07 02:31 PM

"I think the president is understanding that choice and competition works everywhere in health care, especially in Medicare."

Anyone who believes health care operates like a regular business is an idiot.

#4 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-07 02:34 PM

This is still part and parcel of the old Reagan Era Starve the Beast strategery.

Cut taxes (add war costs when convenient to re-election) then when there is no Magic Growth and no Tinkle Down, cry, "But... but... The Deficit!" and then start cutting programs for seniors, children, the sick, and the poor.

It is True Republican Family Values in a scam nutshell.

It' just too ---- bad that so many poor dumb rwingers are fooled by it every time.

#5 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-07 02:44 PM

which is how you tackle the debt and the deficit

The utter unwavering hypocrisy of voting to add $1,400,000,000,000 to the debt and then cry that the debt is too high is a hallmark of the GOP.

Standard GOP playbook...voting to give tax cuts to billionaires, drive up the debt, then cry about the debt and screw the poor and middle class to fix the very problem they created.

They are scum.

#6 | Posted by 726 at 2017-12-07 03:29 PM

Wasn't this a thread a few days ago?

#7 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2017-12-07 07:40 PM

yup and the scum bag Repubs are planing to cut billions from Supplemental Security Income and turn it into a block grants.
which of course will destroy SSI

But no one gives 1 flying Fork about that because its for the poor of the poor and not even the Dems could give damn about them, which is why you never will read about SSI being destroyed by the repubs

#8 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2017-12-08 03:37 AM

poor of the poor = poorest of the poor

#9 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2017-12-08 03:47 AM

"They are scum."

Couldn't add another flag but I wanted to make sure that I am on record agreeing with your comment.

"Wasn't this a thread a few days ago?"

Probably and you will see many more as Ryan and the REpublicans attempt to destroy New Deal programs, they deserve every ounce of fury we can offer.

#10 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 08:02 AM

There's a reason that Ryan is known as the Zombie Eyed Granny Starver.

#11 | Posted by Reagan58 at 2017-12-08 08:32 AM

Social Security has over its 81-year history contributed exactly nothing to the federal deficit. The deficit is the result primarily of the nation's massive military budget and endless series of wars and cold wars since the end of World War II, as well as to a gutless Congress that continually adds to the red ink by refusing to fund government programs they created, such as Republican Bush's prescription program.

Medicare and Social Security have always been self funded and the use of the word "entitlement" is deliberately misleading. The Republicans latest Tax Bill is a shining example of real entitlements, intended solely for the already rich.

Social security has been running a surplus since 1986 and House Reps like Ryan have been taking that money to fund their unnecessary wars and pet projects. Meanwhile, an Equifax hack has released 143 million names and numbers into the criminal underworld. Equifax is supposed to freeze your account on request, but they won't do it for fear of loss of business.

Despite demographic changes in the economy Social Security will remain solvent until 2034. Just raising the cap on income subject to the FICA tax (currently capped at the first $127,000 of earnings) will fix that problem. But Congress has refused to deal with such a fix, and longer allegedly people's deliberative body waits, the more dramatic and costly that fix will have to be.

Ryan is talking out of both ends at once. To promote his dreadful tax plan he claims it will produce economic growth and more jobs. But to kill Social Security he simultaneously claims that slower growth and reduced tax revenue in the future, so cuts are necessary.

RYAN IS A TYPICAL REPUBLICAN LIAR. Do not believe anything they say. Stand up, call Congress, fight this nonsense.

#12 | Posted by bayviking at 2017-12-08 09:13 AM

The Social Security administration presently holds 3 trillion dollars worth of U.S. Treasury Bills which Republicans think they can pretend don't exist or are worthless IOUs. Then, if they are, the so are all the rest of the Treasury bills held by millions of Americans, other nations and including China. Tell the Chinese their T-bills are empty IOUs. SS is not bankrupt, SS could be perfectly sovent for infinity if we just eliminate the cap on earnings subject to SS taxes.

#13 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 09:32 AM

"Despite demographic changes in the economy Social Security will remain solvent until 2034. Just raising the cap on income subject to the FICA tax (currently capped at the first $127,000 of earnings) will fix that problem. But Congress has refused to deal with such a fix,"

Because it's a politically risky thing to do.

For either party.

#14 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-08 09:38 AM

"Because it's a politically risky thing to do.
For either party."

FDR would laugh at you for saying that. The Democrats would remain in power forever if they ever got the guts to do what is necessary, cowards won't ever be a strong party.

#15 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 09:40 AM

I'm not very good at this figuring-out-what-politicians-are-up-to business. But, my guess is that Ryan is simply overreaching by threatening SS/Medicare cuts on purpose. So that he can bargain with the Democrats for the lesser legislation of turning all that sweet money over to his operatives on Wall Street. Imagine the private profit that could be made. Instead of the interest on our contributions going back into the SS/Medicare fund, they'd go into the pockets of stock traders and holders.

#16 | Posted by madscientist at 2017-12-08 10:27 AM

"So that he can bargain with the Democrats for the lesser legislation of turning all that sweet money over to his operatives on Wall Street"

I don't doubt that is his purpose but one really does need to ask themselves, what kind of an evil bastard would knowingly screw over every American worker? Ryan truly is a soulless person with no empathy for anyone except himself yet people still vote for this zombie? His constituents must be the most clueless idiots on the planet.

#17 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 10:37 AM

Paul Ryan would prostitute his own mother to give the proceeds to billionaires.

#18 | Posted by Sully at 2017-12-08 10:44 AM

"choice and competition works everywhere in health care, especially in Medicare."

I'll believe that the next time I see a menu of prices posted at the doctor's office.

#19 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-08 10:45 AM

It REALLY Pisses me off when they call Social Security an "Entitlement". Speaking bluntly if both my employer and I are literally paying for it my entire working life it is EARNED. If I had the money I have pumped int SS over the years I COULD retire and right about now. How about they not give out huge tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations and instead actually close some loopholes that let them get away with paying a lower tax rate than I do as a average person?

#20 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2017-12-08 10:46 AM

Its funny because Medicare is the most efficient insurance or insurance type program in the United States.

#21 | Posted by Sycophant at 2017-12-08 11:00 AM

"instead actually close some loopholes"

Paul Ryan should be asked if GRATS are still allowed in the new tax bill. I'm sure they are.

#22 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-08 11:03 AM

You non-millionaire Trumptards and Rethuglicans still believe
in Trickle Down Economics? @Idiots, @completemorons, #40yrsaFOOL!

p.s. Merry WAR ON CHRISTMAS! :D

FoolTools!

#23 | Posted by earthmuse at 2017-12-08 11:16 AM

Wasn't this a thread a few days ago?

#7 | Posted by Rightocenter

No you're simply losing track of all the ways republicans are trying to kill the poor.

#24 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-08 11:17 AM

Paul Ryan would prostitute his own mother to give the proceeds to billionaires.

#18 | Posted by Sully

And the dems would do the exact same thing right? Try and rip up medicaire and SS? At least that's what my daily KGB propaganda stories tell me.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-08 11:19 AM

"Its funny because Medicare is the most efficient insurance or insurance type program in the United States."

And, though they may pay less for some services to doctors, most doctors like the program because they don't need a room full of people trying to collect from insurance companies who play all sorts of games to avoid paying.

#26 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 11:27 AM

Paul Ryan: Gosh, we need to save money. Golly, we need to show some discipline and stop living beyond our means. Gee whiz, these entitlement programs are costing America too much. Dang it, cutting taxes on rich people will reduce our revenue. Darn, we sure as heckfire have to recapture that money somewhere. So doggone it, we are just going to have to bite the bullet and cut these costly programs, which I'm sure the old and poor people will understand, because they are used to sacrifice.

#27 | Posted by cbob at 2017-12-08 11:45 AM

Ryan read "Atlas Shrugged" and didn't realize it is fiction. He thinks he is John Galt.

#28 | Posted by TenMile at 2017-12-08 12:11 PM

Ryan read "Atlas Shrugged" and didn't realize it is fiction.

#28 | POSTED BY TENMILE

Sounds like every "free market republican". Why do you think they ended up in conservative politics and not, say, economics?

#29 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2017-12-08 12:33 PM

When Reps pass their tax legislation, Dems say it's the worst thing ever.

When Dems pass their tax legislation, Reps say it's the worst thing ever.

When Dems or Reps pass their tax legislation, Internet commenters continue saying the exact same thing the other side said when it was their turn.

Nothing ever changes...

#30 | Posted by humtake at 2017-12-08 12:35 PM

"When Dems or Reps pass their tax legislation, Internet commenters continue saying the exact same thing the other side said when it was their turn.
Nothing ever changes..."

Except Democrats raise taxes and try to approach balancing the budget; Republicans cut taxes on the wealthy and totally ignore CBO telling them it will raise the debt 1.5 trillion dollars. Then they say we need to cut Medicare and SS to pay for their tax cuts. It is just a flat out lie to say both sides are the same.

#31 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-08 12:42 PM

"When Reps pass their tax legislation, Dems say it's the worst thing ever."

In this case, it is.

"When Dems pass their tax legislation, Reps say it's the worst thing ever."

And yet the economy does better under Ds than it does under Rs. And the R labs (aka states) which have done this have experienced disastrous results.

"When Dems or Reps pass their tax legislation, Internet commenters continue saying the exact same thing the other side said when it was their turn."

Republican Math.

#32 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-08 12:45 PM

"FDR would laugh at you for saying that."

If it was that easy, they would have done it years ago.

It's obviously more politically riskier than you understand.

#33 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-08 12:49 PM

"It's obviously more politically riskier than you understand."

Do you believe a $2 Trillion tax cut makes it riskier, or less risky?

#34 | Posted by Danforth at 2017-12-08 12:53 PM

34

for Ryan's political career? Less risky.

#35 | Posted by eberly at 2017-12-08 03:14 PM

for Ryan's political career? Less risky.

#35 | Posted by eberly

For sure.

Must be nice to have your district so gerrymandered that you can openly say "We have to cut taxes for the rich or they'll stop giving us bribe money" and still get re-elected.

#36 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-08 04:00 PM

Slowly raise the age of eligibility by two or three years and, as Danforth has suggested, add a point to each side of the FICA tax. I would be interested to see how the trajectory of SS + Medicare changes with those 2 implemented. It would be a nice compromise too. Republicans get their spending reduction and Demcorats get their tax increase. Win/win IMO. If that doesn't do the trick, perhaps add another year and a nominal increase in the FICA cap.

#37 | Posted by JeffJ at 2017-12-08 05:54 PM

Why should we raise the age of eligibility when Rump's tax cut for the rich is what's further imperiling the program?

What's more important? Keeping a promise to average people who paid into the system for 4 decades, or cutting taxes for billionaires?

#38 | Posted by JOE at 2017-12-08 06:36 PM

Slowly raise the age of eligibility by two or three years and, Win/win IMO.
#37 | Posted by JeffJ

Except for the old man whose aching body now has to work 2 or 3 years longer.

All the benefits of our economy over the past decades have gone to the rich. They get richer by sending jobs overseas, replacing food products with chemical experiments, overcharging us for health care, co-opting our government, getting bailouts after the crash the economy, cramming us into smaller airline seats, polluting the planet, and countless other ways.

They make our whole lives as miserable as they possibly can to squeeze every dollar they can out of us.

If SS is underfunded, howbout the people who profit from our misery fund it? We work for their benefit our whole lives. Can they at least repay the favor at the end?

#39 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-08 06:58 PM

Hey, doesn't Ryan practice running marathons, not just needlessly purging the majority from health care? I'll bet he's quite fast..

#22 - GRATS, GRITS and whatnots they will always attempt to insert ways to preserve their highly concentrated wealth distribution. If only the estate were an entity that had to decide on preserving itself.. I could argue a better "distribution" would be to move the estate offshore as well.

#40 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2017-12-09 12:42 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

White House Budget Director: Shutdown 'Kind of Cool' (66 comments)

Steele: 'This Shutdown Rests at the Feet of the GOP' (46 comments)

Oxfam: World's Richest 1% Hoard 82% of the Wealth (29 comments)

When Trump's Foreign Policy Luck Runs Out (19 comments)

Opinion: Fix NFL PR Nightmare? Put a Woman in Charge (18 comments)

Patriots vs. Eagles (15 comments)

White House Answering Machine Message Lays Blame (15 comments)

Voters Disapprove of Trump, Doubt His Mental Stability (14 comments)