Why is Ryan so concerened how tax dollars are spent. He wasn't concerened when Bush was is Office. Obama did't create this nightmare he inherited it. And to think I voted for Bush I had my heads up my a__ __. Ryan is worried about his Job and all the free benifits he will get.

Maynard, I agree with on the 2% SS payroll holiday they did in the first "deal." Both sides are saying SS is going broke and here they short it. Obama's not innocent. I, like a lot of supporters of Medicare and Social Security are growing tired of Obama crying wolf about being held hostage only to eventually take part in the feast. He's got to return to the time when he connected with Americans, when he was against the dysfunction and not part of it. But Ryan and Republicans have played a major role by risking the entire country for the sole purpose of defeating Obama. Everything they do is qualified by how much damage they can do to him. I've never seen anything like it before. Even Bill Clinton had he easier when he was being impeached.

Mr Ryan would rather continue to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution.

youkillme: Thanks for your response. I am not trying to scare anyone. I believe that Social Security and Medicare programs need to be adjusted to the new reality of longer life spans. Happened before (I have to be age 66 for full retirement as I was born between 1950 and 1960) and needs to happen again to make programs solvent for future generations. Increase in full retirement wage and paying social security as well as medicare portion on all wages would help. That is why I can not understand why (other than political reasons) they did the 2% tax holiday on social security and why President Obama is so strong on extending it. It amazes me that they would short money going into a program that is not long term self sustaining at present and future levels of retirees. For someone making $10 per hour, that is an extra $8 per week. For someone making $20 per hour, it is an extra $16 per week (both based on 40 hour weeks). Do they really think that $8 or $16 a week is going to jumpstart the economy. Does not seem to have done much so far. This would be the first place I would reform Social Security -- eliminate this tax holiday that I feel was only put there as a feel good political move. IMHO

SarahB1, you're welcome. Remember to tip your waitress.

I've made a mistake, 2% of $1.2 trilion is $24 billion - not $240 billion. Concernedperson,it might end up translating to benefit cuts which might mean more out of pocket espenses for Medicare Advantage. There are so many variables involved and nobody has a crystal ball but they HAVE to start addressing industry health care costs no matter what happens with Medicare. Insurance costs alone are out of control.

grandys618..... All you have is cheesy arguments and no answers.
Your answers sound like processed junk, and not even done with kraft.
Maybe you need tobe a bit more selective in your taste, and not live on the scraps down the side of your couch.

Youkillme: Yes, cuts to the providers. But do you not think they will pass this cut onto the patients who are on medicare? Just asking. Many that I have talked with think that will happen, and therefore, the patients will suffer in the end.

If the automatic cuts kick in they are to be split 50/50 between defense and domestic discretionary spending. Social Security and Medicaid (2 of the big 3 entitlements) are exempted from the automatic cuts. Medicare could face a 2% cut, but the cuts would be directed at health care providers. There would be no cuts to benefits. Medicare facing a cut totaling 2% of the automatic $1.2 trillion ($240 billion over ten years) would hardly threaten the program. It does not end it, but Paul Ryan's proposal to privatize it - does. Of course then you used the false premise of sweeping "across the board" cuts to entitlements to scare people into thinking they would be weakened to a point that would make Ryan's privatization proposal seem more favorable.

These are several links to support my statement. Feel free to post links that show cuts to "entitlements" in the sweeping broad sense as you used it.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/43998490/Social_S...

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gr...

http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/197041/2...

http://strengthensocialsecurity.org/medi...

And the answers to your questions are NO and NO

youkillme: could you enlighten me to my lack of knowledge or lies? And as for a political purpose, I have no trust in either party. I get my information from the press === both conservative and liberal stations as well as on line. That information was that the super committee had to come up with 1.5 trillion in additional budget cuts by Thanksgiving. There would have to be a majority voting for it (at least 7 of the 12 members) to send it to the House and Senate for an up or down vote. If this fails to happen ... the bill provides for automatic program cuts to the tune of 1.2 trillion (not sure why they dropped 300 billion from the requirement). 50% from the defense budget (which makes up 20% of the total budget) and 50% from the remainder of the budget including entitlement programs. So please enlighten me with your facts.

Ryan is on his way out anyway come the next election. He's history.

Maynard, do you spew lies for a political purpose or is it that you really don't know what you are saying?

im waiting for the results of the Shafer Report to be acknowledged from nixons time

Step by step, Obamacare will cease to exist.

Defund it and decapitate it.

http://news.yahoo.com/appeals-court-rule...

"The powerful, new joint Senate-House committee".
I'm still waiting for the Grace Commision recommendations to kick in from 1984.

So we now have a "super committee" composed of 6 from each party. In all likelihood, they will not reach agreement so there will be nothing to vote on. Automatic cuts will be made across the board in both defense and entitlement programs like social security and medicare to the tune of 1.2 trillion. And both parties will blame the other party for not agreeing to their plan. Once again there will be no responsibility for our political elitists. And people over 65 WILL be adversly affected by the automatic cuts. The section of the Ryan plan that made no changes to seniors and going-to-be seniors age 55 and older is beginning to look better and better. At least it gave people some time to plan. Guess those over 65 better plan in a hurry because come the end of 2011, they are likely to take a beating. IMHO

freedomfighter, you do realize there was a debt deal struck between dems and repugs. If Congress does not approve of this committee's recommendations detailing cuts of around $1.5 trillion, automatic cuts will commence in 2013, split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending (exempting funded programs like Social Security and Medicare). As much as I think the creation of this committee is totally wrong, it's good Ryan won't be on it since he is arguably the most partisan, ideological and toxic personality in Congress.

Does anyone realize that this committee has report their ideas just before Thanksgiving and the busy Christmas shopping season? It is another step to the destruction of the economy and small businesses. Also, this panel will have no teeth in the matter, is the decison of congress and the president.

Nice to see the comments have fallen back on the normal old standby's.

Yeah, every time I'm passed over for a promotion or raise, I usually didn't want it anyway.

I didn't want to win the lottery, either, so it worked out great for both of us.

grandys618...... glad I found you. Regarding the WEAC insurance that you profess to Know so much about. CUNA ARTICLE....... Janesville School district has been self funded for around 30 years.
Maybe you should stay out of Janesville politics, The fact that you don't reside hereif and can't tell the truth.

unclesmoothie...... Do you drink something without knowing it's content?
Maybe you should read first, swallow second.

Really mouse? Really? "Mind your own business"? You have considerable nerve to make that statement seeing you how sit on this site and mind everybody else's business and tell them how they should live. What a freakin hypocrite!

Troyjanss, that's the problem for Ryan. As Chair of the budget committee, if he sits on the "super committee" then the committee DOES have a voice and he would pretty much have to accept its recommendations and try to put them into practice. Those recommendations would be unpopular enough that they could hurt his reelection chances, a risk he isn't willing to take.

My question is why would anyone want to be on a "powerful" super committee that don't have the power to do anything other than spout their mouths.

"It turns out Rep. Ryan voted to increase the debt ceiling and Rep. Tammy Baldin voted against it. D.C. really is an alternate universe."
.
Reminded me a lot of the NAFTA vote a long time ago. The extremes of both the right and left strongly opposed NAFTA, and voted against it. It passed because the moderates on both sides voted in favor of it. Same thing here..How often do Tammy Baldwin and Michelle Bachman vote the same way?

Wise choice. I'd get out of that profession has to be annoying.

This was probably a politically astute thing to do on his part. Why frustrate yourself while serving on a committee in deadlock? He needs to put distance between himself and his past record in order to save himself in the next election. It is wise to keep a low profile while in the company of other snakes in the grass.

Ryan...... you should be on Saturday night live. Take your wig off, because i have a feeling your really Palin.

vatoloco..... don't worry about what teachers do with personal income.
I don't think you have that right..... so get over it and mind your own business.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0K_LZDXp...

For some reason, this came to mind when I read this article.

You know, right before Bin Laden was killed, I asked the President not to consider me for the mission.

after his medicare proposals I can't believe they didn't want him. Better luck next time pauly

I suspect is was more like the Republic party didn't want to associate with him on the committee.

During his twelve years in Congress, the empty suited Ryan voted "yes" on bills that added $6 trillion to the nation's deficits. It is also more than a little ironic that Ryan ten years ago called the tax cuts "too small" because he believed the estimated surplus Bush eviscerated would be even larger. He has no business being on any committee dealing with the debt or budgets, let being the chair of the budget committee. It's too difficult to fathom the damage he has done to our country.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/8...

It turns out Rep. Ryan voted to increase the debt ceiling and Rep. Tammy Baldin voted against it. D.C. really is an alternate universe.

Why don't you ask the WEAC to give you some money they used to lobby for more greed?

They are not too poor to give to politicians.

Ryan best be spending his time for re election. He has done enough damage already to us common folk.