|
06-30-2012, 09:12 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna
Do I believe Mitt Romney's business experience would serve him well were he elected POTUS? Yes, he knows how to read an income statement and a balance sheet. And the financial statements of the country show a near bankrupt business model headed towards total insolvency. Maybe more important, both the Congress and increasingly the country, because of either their lack of knowledge, political morality or narrow ideology keep driving the country even further towards the financial cliff. All in their personal short-term interests or support of an incomplete ideology. They...we...are morally bankrupt. And Mitt Romney spends almost all his time telling the voters what Obama has done wrong, but almost no time on his plans for what will have to change--explaining and convincing us of the need for such changes.
I'm disappointed in Romney's unwillingness to campaign on what he knows is needed if this country is ever to achieve true fiscal reform. He knows how to do the arithmetic! He knows that fiscal responsibility can't be achieved with just tax decreases. He knows that some hurtful cuts to government spending, defense spending, entitlement benefits, and yes increased tax revenues will be needed. He only campaigns on half--or even a third--of what he knows is necessary. He campaigns on the ideas that attract the most voters, but doesn't tell the whole story on what really must be done. Like I said, he knows what steps the arithmetic of our government's taxing, spending and borrowing tells him is necessary. But he panders for votes with only part of the story. He and his handlers believe the people are too dumb to understand. I maintain we aren't, that the correct course of action can be explained, understood and embraced by the country. Romney needs to lead the country into a "twelve step program" leading to complete fiscal reform.
I don't expect any different from President Obama. But he's given no indication in four years that he knows or is willing to support the needed changes. And he's shown no capacity to lead the Congress or the country towards the needed changes. But Mitt Romney? I know that he knows better, and I'm disappointed at his reluctance to speak out. If he really is the leader I think he might be, he knows what he will have to say, explain and lead the country towards sometime. He knows better!
|
This is not meant to be an endorsing speech for Romney, but have any of you folks even read his plans on his website ?
Not endorsing but just a flavor...
Just curious...just an excerpt...
"Any turnaround must begin with clear and realistic goals. Optimistic projections cannot wish a problem away, they can only make it worse. As president, Mitt’s goal will be to bring federal spending below 20 percent of GDP by the end of his first term:
Reduced from 24.3 percent last year; in line with the historical trend between 18 and 20 percent
Close to the tax revenue generated by the economy when healthy
Requires spending cuts of approximately $500 billion per year in 2016 assuming robust economic recovery with 4% annual growth, and reversal of irresponsible Obama-era defense cuts
Take Immediate Action: Return Non-Security Discretionary Spending To Below 2008 Levels
Any turnaround must also stop the bleeding and reverse the most recent and dramatic damage:
Send Congress a bill on Day One that cuts non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent across the board
Pass the House Republican Budget proposal, rolling back President Obama’s government expansion by capping non-security discretionary spending below 2008 levels
Follow A Clear Roadmap: Build A Simpler, Smaller, Smarter Government
Most importantly, any turnaround must have a thoughtful, structured approach to achieving its goals. Mitt will attack the bloated budget from three angles:
The Federal Government Should Stop Doing Things The American People Can’t Afford, For Instance:
Repeal Obamacare — Savings: $95 Billion. President Obama’s costly takeover of the health care system imposes an enormous and unaffordable obligation on the federal government while intervening in a matter that should be left to the states. Mitt will begin his efforts to repeal this legislation on Day One.
Privatize Amtrak — Savings: $1.6 Billion. Despite requirement that Amtrak operate on a for-profit basis, it continues to receive about $1.6 billion in taxpayer funds each year. Forty-one of Amtrak’s 44 routes lost money in 2008 with losses ranging from $5 to $462 per passenger.
Reduce Subsidies For The National Endowments For The Arts And Humanities, The Corporation For Public Broadcasting, And The Legal Services Corporation — Savings: $600 Million. NEA, NEH, and CPB provide grants to supplement other sources of funding. LSC funds services mostly duplicative of those already offered by states, localities, bar associations and private organizations.
Eliminate Title X Family Planning Funding — Savings: $300 Million. Title X subsidizes family planning programs that benefit abortion groups like Planned Parenthood.
Reduce Foreign Aid — Savings: $100 Million. Stop borrowing money from countries that oppose America’s interests in order to give it back to them in the form of foreign aid.
If pursued with focus and discipline, Mitt’s approach provides a roadmap to rescue the federal government from its present precipice. But that respite will be short-lived without a plan for the looming long-term threat posed by the unsustainable nature of existing entitlement obligations. Learn more about Mitt’s proposals for entitlement reform: [links to Medicare and Social Security]
Empower States To Innovate — Savings: >$100 billion
Block grants have huge potential to generate both superior results and cost savings by establishing local control and promoting innovation in areas such as Medicaid and Worker Retraining. Medicaid spending should be capped and increased each year by CPI + 1%. Department of Labor retraining spending should be capped and will increase in future years. These funds should then be given to the states to spend on their own residents. States will be free from Washington micromanagement, allowing them to develop innovative approaches that improve quality and reduce cost.
Improve Efficiency And Effectiveness. Where the federal government should act, it must do a better job. For instance:
Reduce Waste And Fraud — Savings: $60 Billion. The federal government made $125 billion in improper payments last year. Cutting that amount in half through stricter enforcement and harsher penalties yields returns many times over on the investment.
Align Federal Employee Compensation With The Private Sector — Savings: $47 Billion. Federal compensation exceeds private sector levels by as much as 30 to 40 percent when benefits are taken into account. This must be corrected.
Repeal The Davis-Bacon Act — Savings: $11 Billion. Davis-Bacon forces the government to pay above-market wages, insulating labor unions from competition and driving up project costs by approximately 10 percent.
Reduce The Federal Workforce By 10 Percent Via Attrition — Savings: $4 Billion. Despite widespread layoffs in the private sector, President Obama has continued to grow the federal payrolls. The federal workforce can be reduced by 10 percent through a “1-for-2” system of attrition, thereby reducing the number of federal employees while allowing the introduction of new talent into the federal service.
Consolidate agencies and streamline processes to cut costs and improve results in everything from energy permitting to worker retraining to trade negotiation."
Point is, we have not even gotten to the conventions yet....why do you consider the lack of specifics at this time in a race to be unusual !
|