Lots of interesting but boring-to-99%-of-the-population stuff about the deficit today. I don't want to recap everything...oh FINE I will.
Paul Ryan/Republican Plan: "cuts" $4.3 trillion in 10 years. scare quotes used bc a) his numbers don't add up b) no one can actually predict what our deficit will be in 10 years with any kind of certainty. that's like me asking you what your credit card debt will be in 10 years, so fundamentally this whole debate is about hypotheticals and the numbers are pretty screwy. Anyway - Ryan gets the cuts by turning Medicare into a block grant program (which means instead of covering your insurance when you're an oldtimer, you'll get a certain amount of money to buy your own insurance), raising the retirement age, cutting taxes on rich and raising them for the middle class/poor, fully repealing ObamaCare and Financial Reform Act. i think that's basically it.
Obama Plan: "cuts" $4 trillion in 12 years. Raise taxes on people making over $250,000, fully implement ObamaCare to cut health care costs, continue to invest in research & development, slash defense spending. This would be about $2-3 dollars in spending cut for every $1 dollar in new taxes. Oh and reform the tax code, which would save a lot of money.
Surprise! Republicans like Ryan's plan, Democrats like Obama's plan, and Moderates want to split the difference. You've got moderate folks like David Brooks and Max Shifrin endorsing what they call a hybrid approach comprising of the following:
- Aging populations, expensive new health care technologies and the extravagant political promises have made the current welfare state model unsustainable. Fundamental reform is necessary or the whole thing will collapse, here and in Europe.
- Seniors and the middle class cannot be excused from the benefit cuts that will have to be imposed to rebalance these systems.
- Health care costs will not be brought under control until consumers take responsibility for their decisions and providers have market-based incentives to reduce prices.
- Tax increases on the rich have to be part of a fiscal package.
- Government investments in research and infrastructure nurture broad-based prosperity.
That's the hybrid. There's kind of a big problem in that though, in the sense that it's...um...like...actually not a hybrid at all. Let's work in reverse order:
5. Obama's plan has investment in research/infrastructure, and (I think) Ryan's does not.
4. Obama calls for new taxes on the rich. Ryan has 100% said that is completely unacceptable.
3. This just isn't true. Medicare - government-run health care - does a better job of controlling costs than the private insurance market. Health care costs in countries with government-run health care see their health care costs increase at a slower rate than those with more private markets. Why? Because health care is different - unlike most things, where people make a rational, market-based choice, people rarely do that when their loved ones lives are at stake. The free market is not the best way to deal with health care costs.
2. None of Ryan's cuts come from people younger than 55 years old. Obama's cuts do.
1. Ryan's plan doesn't really have fundamental reform...it just shifts the rising cost of health care from the government to individuals. It repeals ObamaCare, which is actually forecasted to slow the rate of health care cost growth.
So long story short, the moderate, consensus view is basically Obama's plan. Oops.
