A rational defense of Ryan's budget and Medicare plans

[Zimar]

Originally Posted by jt800

Maybe YOU Liberals should learn to NOT lie and say Paul Ryan made a claim about 2.8 % unemployment and then not be able to back it up with a quote at all???

I still can't figure out why it's SO DIFFICULT for you Liberals to show someone a simple quote when you claim someone's said something??

Instead all you give me is links to well-know partisan hacks who's articles only discuss the Heritage Foundation's report.

So why don't you just refute these actual claims instead of attacking the source? Proving them wrong would be the best way to shoot them down, right?

Oh, that's right, you can't.

[jt800]

Originally Posted by Zimar

So why don't you just refute these actual claims instead of attacking the source? Proving them wrong would be the best way to shoot them down, right?

Oh, that's right, you can't.

I didn't MAKE THE CLAIM!!!!!!

The burden of proof isn't on me.

You can't prove a negative you dolt.

When I make a claim, it's always up to me to prove it as it should be. If Ryan never said that, then how am I supposed to prove he didn't say it? It's simply NOT THERE!!!

[Zimar]

Originally Posted by jt800

I didn't MAKE THE CLAIM!!!!!!

The burden of proof isn't on me.

You can't prove a negative you dolt.

When I make a claim, it's always up to me to prove it as it should be. If Ryan never said that, then how am I supposed to prove he didn't say it? It's simply NOT THERE!!!

A regular person can prove a statement is incorrect. You could show us something that says that these projections that so many sources have noted, are just incorrect. You could tell us the actual, correct economic projections for the Ryan plan.

But I don't think you've actually read the Ryan plan, have you?

[MTAtech]

Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok

And you completely ignore that tax rates would be cut for quite a lot of the middle class and that Ryan has stated that deductions and expenditures which would be eliminated as a part of the plan would be those primarily for the wealthy.

Paul Krugman should always be blindly trusted and followed. It's not like he has an agenda.

I did not ignore that. Paul Krugman does have an agenda but his economics is almost always right. It's not enough to say, 'oh, PK has an agenda so we can't take his work seriously.' If one can find flaws, do show us where his conclusion is wrong. Read: What's In The Ryan Plan? - NYTimes.com

While there may be tax-rate cuts, the elimination of deductions far out weigh those cuts and on the very wealthy, their tax-rate cuts far outweigh their deduction cuts. That was a finding of the analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.