Paul Ryan's math doesn't add up

Tell me this, if trickle down economics works, why does corporate America have record profits, and trillions in cash tucked away, and employment is still lagging.  I'm an independent, and certainly see some merit in Paul Ryan at least having a plan.  However, small business owners are penalized or not supported as they should be.  Investment bankers and traders have very little to fear in the way of jail time, and day after day you hear of a new scam by one of them ripping off the avg joe who is supposed to invest in the stock market.  Corporate corruption would end if cameras from federal prisons were posted on Wall Street showing what would happen to white collar criminals that actually served real prison time being someones girlfriend!!  I've read 2.5 billion will be spent on the presidential election.  Ask yourself why, its a closed system with the rich making laws for the rich and protecting themselves.  By the way i'm a self-employed dairy farmer, not a fraud or put-on, i'm real in case you are wondering.

It's unpatriotic to hide and hoard your money in offshore tax havens.

I thought the wealthy were the job creators? Isn't that the reason many Republicans claim the wealthy needed more tax breaks???.... But that money over in Switzerland and the Caribbean isn't creating any US jobs.

Good article.  Ryan was asked recently in a tv interview when his plan would balance the budget--he had no answer at all because his plan will not balance the budget ever.  I am an economist and Paul Ryan is not, and his plan does not pass the BS test for economics.

 

The problem is that a federal budget plan is also an economic plan for the country and that cutting government expenditures reduces GDP and reduces tax revenue.  Any of the major business or university macroeconomic models indicate Ryan plan puts the U.S. into a recession and maybe a depression.  First the federal government needs to boost domestic spending, and then in 4-5 years taxes can be raised on everybody, but particularly the richest people who largely do not spend what they receive.

 

The reality is that the federal government spending partly offsets the downside of our current systems that puts trillions of dollars into only the pockets of a few people and large corporations who do not spend or invest those funds.

I expect a lot of thumbs down, since no one likes to hear really bad news.

 

Neither the cons nor the libs tells it straight.The 40 years after WWII saw the US become dominant since it was the only industrial power not reduced to cinders.

 

Then came the 1970s, and the only way to maintain standard of living was to nearly double the workforce by getting women to work. Europe and Japan were back in shape.

 

Enter the 1980s and Reagan brought prosperity in the form of borrowing from the future on a much larger scale. Then in the 1990s, we continued borrowing from the future, but added in globalism and outsourcing with China and India, which has helped accelerate the decline in the American middle class. Factor in the commercial credit and housing borrowing, and the fake "New Economy" which has proven to be a failure.

In the early 2000's, it became obvious to me that the US was circling the drain. Too easy to export an American job. The glib response of "just retrain for a new career" is ridiculous considering how expensive education is in the US. The Bush-era Republicans went on a Democrat-level spending spree. Now you got Obama trying to outdo Bush.

The tab will come due for the US, just like for Europe, and after that, Europe and North America will once again be the backwaters of the world, just like they were in ancient and medieval times, when China and India both ruled the roost.

 

It is sad to say, but our few generations of Post-WWII prosperity was an anomaly, and things are going back to the old "normal".

Livin in CR? How about livin in delusionland. LETS SEE ROMNEY'S TAX RETURNS. DON'T TRY TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT. PUT UP OR SHUT UP!

YOU LIE GREY!!!!!!!!!
Are you ever going to say anything rational? Sober up buddy.

Trickle down did not work in the past nor will it work in the future.  Ron Paul should be the Republican nominee and not Mitt.

very nice post.... 

you might want to check out the source ( center for budget and policy priorities )  of this article.

To mkmkmk, It seems that many rich people also pay low or no income tax.