Romney’s 20%
Tuesday, October 23, 2012 at 5:00AM 
Romney has promised that if elected he will reduce federal spending from 25% GDP (Gross Domestic Product) to 20% by 2016. This would be enough for me to hold my nose and vote for him, if I believed him, but this is not consistent with his other promises.
Romney has promised no cuts in Social Security or Medicare to anyone over 55.. My joke has been that since I am 58 I support this. He has also pledged to not cut defense. About 20% of the budget goes for defense (probably an underestimate as there are parts of defense hidden in the Energy Department); about 20% of the budget is Social Security; about 15% of the budget is Medicare. So 55% of the budget is untouchable. That would thus require a cut in all other government programs by over 50%—color me skeptical. This also ignores the increase in medical costs every year.
How then does Romney say this with a straight face? As in the case with politicians of all persuasions it is a combination of cunning lies and personal delusion. Apparently Romney expects that if he is elected the oceans will cease to rise, oh wait, that is someone else.
In particular the Romney/Ryan delusion is economic growth. Here is the Anerican Thinker explanation:
One way it is possible to get near 20% of GDP for government spending by 2016 is to factor in economic growth. Unadjusted for inflation, economic growth averaged around 4% in 2010 and 2011 (factoring in inflation, the growth is much lower). Let’s say that Romney’s economic policies are effective and that growth starts to take off. Rather than 4% unadjusted growth a year, let’s estimate 6% growth. Six percent annual GDP growth is a very attainable number. The second term of the Clinton administration matched that number, and the first term also came close. Reagan’s presidency also saw about a 6% annual GDP growth per year.
The American Thinker is assuming 6% growth over the next 4 years. They are delusional as well. The title to their magazine is a misnomer.
In the last election I held my nose and voted for McCain as I lived in a swing state. McCain won Missouri by 7000 votes, one of them was mine. I am not sure how I would vote if I lived in Colorado, Iowa, Florida, or Ohio, especially Ohio. Since I live in California—the bluest of blue states—my vote is worthless.
As you may have figured out by now, I have a well-developed sense of the absurd.
Roseanne Barr for President! She wants to bring back the guillotine.
Politics 
Reader Comments (3)
The Defense budget of the US is grossly beyond its needs. That is the one place I could see either Obama or Romney making cuts that would be sustainable. Much of the rest of the federal budget seems fairly essential.
But if the Republicans or Democrats would REALLY take the American health care system by the horns and implement a socialized financing system for it, they could truly save their nation from financial catastrophe. They could save 40% easily, just like Canada and countless other free countries have. But don't hold your breath. The average American is too much of a simpleton and too easily led by the nose through insurance industry and Republican lies to ever figure that out ... short of economic collapse ... :(
I truly grieve for the US and what its political system is going to do to its neediest, all for the love of unjust corporate profits and political bribes.
Since your vote is worthless in California, then write in Virgil Goode of the Constitution Party. He is a certified write in
candidate in California and your vote will be counted.
Obamacare would give us more health care, and will cost more.
Socialism (Canada) would give us less and cost us less. (Sorry Todd.) But if you want basic health care without frills, obviously this is the cheap way.
Generally, the free market, if unchained and properly regulated to punish fraud, will give people more for less. This is Romney's argument, but he really isn't going to give us free market health care.
I choose the free market. Unfortunately, that option will never be on the table. So, we're doomed. I hope Romney kicks the can just a bit farther down the road than Obama has. That's the best we can hope for at this point.
This was a question not asked in the debates: Assume that, due to circumstances beyond your control, the economy does not recover, but continues at 1% growth or less. THEN what will you do??? Haha. Crazy to even think this question would be asked.