Subscribe By Email

Worthy Causes


October 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31          

« The judgment and intolerance of the Religious Left | Main | By act or omission »

Wednesday, April 13, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


5 trillion divided by 10 years is 500 billion, not 50 billion. Sounds like Ryan's plan is about right.

Tom Flake


You are correct that $5 TT divided by 10 years is $500 BB. I respectfully disagree with the assessment that Ryan's plan is "about right". The calculations are complex, but there are several variables. Please take a look at when his budget gets to balance (2063). Then take a look at what the debt will be by that time ($28 TT). Then take a look at what percentage of the national budget interest payments will be. (About $1 TT per year). If you believe that paying $1 TT per year in interest to people who compete with us in various ways is a good thing and likely to make our grandkids more competitive than we are, then I simply don't agree.

I would take the argument a step further. As we shirk the tough decisions and put into office politicians who would steal our children's legacy and put them into paupers prison, we are complicit.

Do you remember Graham/Rudman/Hollings? That was our parents attempt to balance the budget, in fact, it simply put their debt onto us. I agree with those who are espousing a balanced budget, I disagree with Paul Ryan (and you) when you say that getting to a blanced budget can wait until 2063 when the debt is twice what it is today and interest payments are 2-3 times what they are today.


Honestly, I haven't read Ryan's plan. I was just taking your statement, "We need to cut $400 Billion this year..." and applying it to the $500 billion per year of the Ryan plan. That seemed about right.

I see you want to keep cutting and cutting, five years to cut $2 trillion from the federal budget expenditures until the budget spends only $1.7 trillion per year (after 2016, right?) That might be necessary. But I doubt that it is politically doable. It might not even be prudent... (not at this juncture!)

I know Dave Ramsey advocates rice and beans for people facing staggering debt. I suspect there would be rioting in the streets if Washington attempted to end the "bread and circus" so quickly. It took us quite a while to get in this mess. It will probably take us even longer to get out.

Tom Flake

Current receipts to the Treasury are roughly $2 TT per year. Current practice is to borrow another $1.5+ TT. Addmitedly the fifth year cut may not be necessary or it may not need to be a full $500 BB. By that time the debt will still be close to
$17 TT. (14.25 +1.25 + .75 + .25 = $$16.5 TT)
The Ryan plan doesn't get us to balance until the Federal debt reaches $28TT. I would simply advocvate preparing the country for the worst case scenario and then not have it come true rather than do what Ryan and Obama are doing (admitedly to different degrees) which is to keep the party going at the expense of our grandkids.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Tip Jar

Plainly Offsetting Costs

Search Brutally Honest

  • Google




Creative Commons License

Plainly Quotable