Paul Ryan: “In this war on poverty, poverty’s winning”

posted at 5:21 pm on October 24, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

This right here is one of the biggest reasons that Paul Ryan would make such a good vice president — his ability to succinctly and effectively communicate major truths about the universally-enriching mechanisms of free enterprise is a huge selling point with me. As much as I’m sure we all — ahem — enjoy the episodes frequently supplied by the current gentleman occupying that esteemed office, the vice presidency could use a new tone based a little less on outrageous outrage and a little more on economic reality.

At a campaign rally today in battleground-state Ohio, Ryan made a compelling case for freedom and prosperity as the antidotes to poverty in and of themselves, via The Hill:

“Upward mobility is the central promise of life in America. But right now, the engines of upward mobility are not running as they should,” the Wisconsin congressman said, speaking at Cleveland State University in Cleveland, Ohio. “In this war on poverty, poverty’s winning.” …

Ryan, in his speech, rejected the idea that Mitt Romney does not have a plan to save entitlement programs, specifically naming Medicare and food stamps. He also directly confronted Obama’s criticism that he and Romney care more about millionaires and billionaires than the middle class or poor people, calling it a “straw man” argument to say that their position is “every man should fend for themselves.”

“The truth is, Mitt Romney and I believe in upward mobility,” he said. “There has to be a balance, allowing government to act for the private good while leaving private groups free to do the work that only they can do. There’s a vast common ground between the government and the individual.”

But over the past five decades, government has spent more money on a “centralized, top-down approach” that by the 1970s created a “debilitating culture of dependency,” Ryan said.

That was… textbook. President Obama has often tried to commandeer the term “top-down” approach to suit his own populist, political agenda, but here, Paul Ryan ventures to use the intellectually-honest version of the term. Big-government (i.e., normally Democratic) principles too often come paired with unintended consequences that end up generating or worsening the very things they were [ostensibly] meant to avoid. Impose a hugely intrusive, regulatory crackdown aimed at the eeeevil financial sector? Ensure too-big-to-fail. Try to force your pet green-energy projects upon the masses and create green jobs? Divert valuable resources and destroy productive jobs. Orchestrate an overhaul of the health care industry? Make it more costly for everyone. You get the idea.

Few things have actually combated poverty so ineffectively as the principles enacted in the name of the “war on poverty.” Prosperity is the only large-scale, penetrating solution that addresses the root of the problem, and under President Obama, both the poverty rate and entitlement participation have swelled. More Democratic, centralized policies will not save us from this mess, nor help push people into the middle class. Paul Ryan just gets it — and it feels so good.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

canopfor on October 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM

More ridiculousness. Upward mobility is NOT the central promise of life in america.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Dante:

Ugh,the Promise of America,is Obama’s Grand Vision of RE-DISTRUBUTION,and taking all cash from the EXTREMELY FILTHY
DIRTY ROTTEN RICH,who make over $200,000.00,and RE_DISTRUBUTE,
to the SCUM OF THE EARTH,the POOR,and Hopey will SPRINKLE FAIRY
DUST,in a TRICKLE UP FASHION,that will turn AMERICA to a Fairer,
and more just Society,

where EVERYONE IS EQUAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

canopfor on October 24, 2012 at 6:47 PM

I think you’re being a little disingenuous. Romney has stated he favors voluntary options for those who are younger. I would like to see those options.

Personally, I’d like the option to opt out completely from Social Security and Medicare, and put those tax amounts directly into 401K and uncapped HSA accounts. At least then, I would be providing for my own future, and those amounts would remain mine, and gain interest over time.

What I can’t figure out is why liberals don’t even want me to have the option.

dominigan on October 24, 2012 at 6:35 PM

You cannot opt out, and you cannot have options if you leave in place the current system for those close to retirement. 45 years of age at the time of signing or something like that? The system already does not have enough money to pay for the deadbeat old people, so you cannot take part of your current burden and use it towards your own special program. It just cannot happen, there is no money. The best you could do is have the government chose to take more of your money through force and make you invest some part of it for your retirement. Changing medicare to a subsidized insurance program does not take away the voting for other people’s wealth problem, so the subsidies will just keep increasing just like the cost of medicare does now.

You are right, we cannot just convince people to give up the entitlements overnight, but we sure as hell should not be telling them that those benefits will be there 30 40 and 50 years into the future. We should be telling them the truth about how it harms the nation and it is time to start unwinding them. Turn them into totally means tested now, stop allowing people to retire at a time certain with benefits no matter how poor they are unless they are crippled, and cut the cost of the programs by at least 50% over the next 8 years at a minimum cut. Yeah, people are going to have to go back to work, they made bad voting choices in the past on average and I have little sympathy for them. My daughter sure as hell should not be expected to pay for their vacations and medical care.

astonerii on October 24, 2012 at 6:49 PM

The larger the government, the less free the people.

The more government controls, the less well it operates.

This is the era of disintermediation, removing the middleman, increasing the competition… every time government expands what it attempts to do, the less well it operates as a whole, the higher the overhead and, in the end, the fewer choices you have and the higher the cost of those choices until you are a beggar to a tyrant. And when you push more and more to government you push more to a single point of failure which makes for a less robust, less responsive system.

All these lovely ‘good ideas’ cost too much, treat our children as ATMs, lowers our productivity and competitiveness and gets you worse results, not better for EVERYONE. The ‘war on poverty’ is unwinnable as poverty will always be with us, there will always be a bottom 10% because that is a percentage of the population that makes less than the rest… it will ALWAYS be there and the attempts to get rid of it means not that the poor are enriched but the rich are made poor as THAT is the only way to get rid of that 10%: draw everyone into it. And then find you have a new lowest 10%.

Is it good that Paul Ryan points out that this is a failure? Yes.

It is a shame that it is just one part of the more general rule of what happens when you overburden government with things it wasn’t made and actually cannot do well. It is a single data point and it is NOT alone but surrounded by other failures. Yes it is a point of difference I have with the ticket, and the ‘entitlements’ are STILL the problem and can’t be made to be there for generations to come… demographics drives the math and the math does not work when these things are given to government to do.

ajacksonian on October 24, 2012 at 6:52 PM

If that does not happen, then I will work to my fullest to primary every Republican official that stood in the way and if necessary support a third party in 2016.

dominigan on October 24, 2012 at 6:39 PM

I think the time for the Republicans to make a serious change is past. They have been given many chances and have never failed to fail. Romney is as close politically to Obama as was available in this cycle with the possible exception of Huntsman. That’s who they chose to go with. I see no reason in pretending that they will suddenly become men they are not, nor do I see any reason in believing the GOP will suddenly start being conservative…which they have shown no inclination in the past of doing.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 6:53 PM

Obamacare MUST be overturned.

dominigan on October 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM

Depends on the outcome of this election. Only if we win the Senate with a majority of at least 2+ Senators can we kill it. If we can accomplish that, then we can send a cancel bill to President Romney that he will have no choice but to sign, having pledged to do so.

If Republicans or the president insist on a replacement bill before we kill Obamacare, all is lost. That’s a rathole that we will never get out of.

We can’t kill Obamacare until we say it loud and clear, -we were better off before Obamacare, all things considered. That means that killing it first should be a priority.

slickwillie2001 on October 24, 2012 at 6:56 PM

BIDEN FORGETS WHICH STATE HE’S IN (AGAIN) –

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/biden-forgets-which-state-hes-in-again/

Pork-Chop on October 24, 2012 at 7:01 PM

astonerii on October 24, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I agree with most of that.

That said, as with anything and anyone, past is not prologue, and the future is fluid and not yet written.

Statements are subject to interpretation and bias.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:12 PM

He’s voting for Romney but he’s going to b!tch about it the whole time.

thebrokenrattle on October 24, 2012 at 6:46 PM

I see.

ptcamn on October 24, 2012 at 7:19 PM

In other words, they talk about it, but they don’t do it, and a simple look at their votes show it.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 6:41 PM

They don’t do it??
First, they are not in positions of that kind of power. It seems you would like a dictator.
Secondly, Obama has set some very interesting precedents on how bypass a lot of obstacles and this can come back to bite them in the azz while R&R nudge the ship back on course.

That said..you didn’t answer my question to you concerning your preferred choice to be President and Vice President. It’s easy to say..”Not THEM…and not THEM either” But who do you think is so very different a politician that would achieve what you think is the solution to our problems? (again..majical people with dictatorial power not included)

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:23 PM

“debilitating culture of dependency,” Ryan said.

More blather about how people want to be on government assistance. Idiot.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Man, Ryan is in town tonight, traffic sucks!!!

Bmore on October 24, 2012 at 7:25 PM

More blather about how people want to be on government assistance. Idiot.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:25 PM

There she is, just as sweet as ever!

Bmore on October 24, 2012 at 7:29 PM

First, they are not in positions of that kind of power.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:23 PM

What did they do with the power they did have?

Ryan voted for No Child Left Behind, Medicare Part D, TARP, the auto bailout, Davis-Bacon wage controls, the increased debt ceiling and more.

Romney…the Assault Weapons Ban, Romneycare, free cars for welfare bums, gay marriage, liberal judges, shutting down coal plants, tried for a Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, etc.

Obama is obvious.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:29 PM

There she is, just as sweet as ever!

Bmore on October 24, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I think Connie is a welfare-Cadillac owner. Probably deals in food stamps.

slickwillie2001 on October 24, 2012 at 7:31 PM

Bmore, you are in ATL area? So am I.

Brat on October 24, 2012 at 7:32 PM

More blather about how people want to be on government assistance. Idiot.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:25 PM

What “blather” is this?

You may be skipping a step.
People who are presently not receiving government assistance, generally don’t want it.

People who are accustomed to getting assistance and have that factored into their budget, most certainly do want to keep the checks rolling in. This is just basic human nature imo.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:36 PM

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Thats really just a non sequitur.
One can only vote on what is presented to them, and in a lot of situations the way the game is played out is to include some krap in bills that need to be passed.

To my recollection, Ryan wanted a modified version of TARP and also the auto bailout….different time…different set of circumstances..different level of necessity.

You is your pick for “Savior of All Things Political”?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:42 PM

You is your pick for “Savior of All Things Political”?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:42 PM

There isn’t one, and we aren’t going to be saved.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:44 PM

People who are accustomed to getting assistance and have that factored into their budget, most certainly do want to keep the checks rolling in. This is just basic human nature imo.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:36 PM

It’s much worse than that. We have several million second and third-generation welfare recipients. Those are people that were brought up in households (loosely defined) where since before they were born, NO ONE ever worked. How do you convince someone like that to get a job? How are they ever to understand what a job even is? How do you convince them that going to school is worthwhile?

slickwillie2001 on October 24, 2012 at 7:45 PM

How do you convince someone like that to get a job? How are they ever to understand what a job even is? How do you convince them that going to school is worthwhile?

slickwillie2001 on October 24, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Cut welfare. Hunger has an amazing ability to bring the important issues to the forefront. A job and paycheck may then seem very important, and a better job via schooling would also seem like a good deal.

Failure is a vital part of learning and there has to be consequences to idiotic behavior. Writing a check to promote foolishness isn’t something anyone should support.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:49 PM

People who are accustomed to getting assistance and have that factored into their budget, most certainly do want to keep the checks rolling in. This is just basic human nature imo.
Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:36 PM

The conservative argument is always that these people prefer to receive assistance than get a job which would make it unnecessary, which is total rubbish. Just more poor reasoning for reducing entitlements.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:51 PM

They don’t do it??
First, they are not in positions of that kind of power. It seems you would like a dictator.
Secondly, Obama has set some very interesting precedents on how bypass a lot of obstacles and this can come back to bite them in the azz while R&R nudge the ship back on course.

That said..you didn’t answer my question to you concerning your preferred choice to be President and Vice President. It’s easy to say..”Not THEM…and not THEM either” But who do you think is so very different a politician that would achieve what you think is the solution to our problems? (again..majical people with dictatorial power not included)

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:23 PM

No, they don’t do it. And drop the silly logical fallacies. One was a governor and one votes on legislation that winds up on the president’s desk. To answer your question, my preference is Ron Paul.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 7:55 PM

The conservative argument is always that these people prefer to receive assistance than get a job which would make it unnecessary, which is total rubbish.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:51 PM

So there’s no such thing as a welfare bum or a lazy individual?

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Thats really just a non sequitur.
One can only vote on what is presented to them, and in a lot of situations the way the game is played out is to include some krap in bills that need to be passed.

To my recollection, Ryan wanted a modified version of TARP and also the auto bailout….different time…different set of circumstances..different level of necessity.

You is your pick for “Savior of All Things Political”?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:42 PM

That wasn’t a non sequitur. I don’t know what you consider yourself because I don’t see you having any principles whatsoever.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

There isn’t one, and we aren’t going to be saved.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:44 PM

So your solution is what?..curl up in a fetal ball and wait for the end?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

slickwillie2001 on October 24, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I agree.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:58 PM

The conservative argument is always that these people prefer to receive assistance than get a job which would make it unnecessary, which is total rubbish. Just more poor reasoning for reducing entitlements.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:51 PM

They do..and by they I mean the ones who don’t like to be bother by a schedule and responsibilities. If you don’t believe this you may live in a bubble.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

So there’s no such thing as a welfare bum or a lazy individual?
sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 7:56 PM

Of course they exist. This is no justification for punishing the vast majority of recipients who are just struggling to survive.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

So your solution is what?..curl up in a fetal ball and wait for the end?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

I don’t know. That doesn’t magically mean that Romney and Ryan become great conservatives because I would like to have a better course of action available. They aren’t going to do anything to cut government any more than Obama will. Sometimes there aren’t any choices particularily when you only get to choose from two groups (GOP/DNC) who are the problem.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 8:04 PM

That wasn’t a non sequitur. I don’t know what you consider yourself because I don’t see you having any principles whatsoever.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

I disagree..it seemed a non sequitur ro me.

What are you basing your claim about me on exactly?? I have no principles whatsoever?…really?..do tell, I’m all “ears”.
Attacking me is not a argument for your position.

I consider myself a thinking human being.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Of course they exist. This is no justification for punishing the vast majority of recipients who are just struggling to survive.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Are they the 400 pound folks I see waiting in line at McDonald’s? I keep seeing stories of those poor poverty stricken folks with big screen TVs and have something of a struggle summoning up any compassion.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 8:07 PM

That doesn’t magically mean that Romney and Ryan become great conservatives because I would like to have a better course of action available. They aren’t going to do anything to cut government any more than Obama will. Sometimes there aren’t any choices particularily when you only get to choose from two groups (GOP/DNC) who are the problem.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 8:04 PM

No one claimed that they were “great conservatives”..thats beside the point. I would like a better course of action available also..but there is not one.

To claim that they “aren’t going to do anything to cut government anymore than Obama will do” is just negativity based on suspicion. It also seems ridiculous imo.

Just curious…who are you voting for?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

More angry at Hot Air than Ryan and Romney really. This used to be a MOVEMENT CONSERVATIVE site, now is nothing more than another Republican power hungry feed the government more power so long as Republicans are in charge rag.

astonerii on October 24, 2012 at 5:54 PM

So, you’re saying that you’ll be moving along to find a site more suited to your political philosophy? Well, best of luck in your search. Hope you find what you’re looking for.
Write if you find work…

Solaratov on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Of course they exist. This is no justification for punishing the vast majority of recipients who are just struggling to survive.

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Means testing for the top and the bottom may help. Let the squeal.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:18 PM

To claim that they “aren’t going to do anything to cut government anymore than Obama will do” is just negativity based on suspicion.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

I really do not understand how you see their past behavior as just a ‘suspicion’?

Why aren’t you voting for Obama? Does his past behavior and actions make you think poorly of him? Isn’t that just “negativity based on suspicion“? You can’t be certain that the past is prologue to the future, and the future is after all, fluid and not yet written.

Why not Obama? Why not Romney or Ryan?
They have a history by which to judge them and that is fact, not suspicion.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 8:19 PM

The conservative argument is always that these people prefer to receive assistance…

Constantine on October 24, 2012 at 7:51 PM

Conservatives came up with “Julia”?

rogerb on October 24, 2012 at 8:29 PM

I disagree..it seemed a non sequitur ro me.

What are you basing your claim about me on exactly?? I have no principles whatsoever?…really?..do tell, I’m all “ears”.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Then you should look up what a non sequitur is and what it isn’t.

My observation is based upon your lack of demonstrating any principles in your arguments and positions. Plus, you mocked and scoffed at those you labeled “purists”.

To claim that they “aren’t going to do anything to cut government anymore than Obama will do” is just negativity based on suspicion.

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 8:13 PM

It’s called analyzing data and reaching a conclusion. Just because you don’t have that ability doesn’t mean everyone else lacks that ability.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM

It’s not complicated, but you have to have principles first.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 6:47 PM

An ‘anarchist’ with principles. Interesting concept.

(Excuse me. Anarcho/capitalist) (lol)

Solaratov on October 24, 2012 at 8:30 PM

To answer your question, my preference is Ron Paul.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 7:55 PM

Of course.

You’re an idiot.

Solaratov on October 24, 2012 at 8:36 PM

So your solution is what?..curl up in a fetal ball and wait for the end?

Mimzey on October 24, 2012 at 7:57 PM

Nah. Those guys are going to wait for the revOlution…and then take the country back to its roots. (After they win, of course.)

Solaratov on October 24, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Nah. Those guys are going to wait for the revOlution…and then take the country back to its roots. (After they win, of course.)

Solaratov on October 24, 2012 at 8:40 PM

Sorry, not a Ron Paul fan either. He is better than Obama or Romney though.

I just don’t see voting for Romney as substantially different than voting for Obama. They are both going in the same direction and with the same goals. One of them thinks it should be done swiftly and one thinks it should be done at a more even pace.

They are both representative of the groups that created the situation we are in and I don’t see any sea-change in the way the Republicans or Democrats behave that would lead me to imagine they will act any differently than they have been for the past couple of decades.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Paul Ryan just gets it — and it feels so good.

A breath of fresh air.

disa on October 24, 2012 at 9:12 PM

The system already does not have enough money to pay for the deadbeat old people, so you cannot take part of your current burden and use it towards your own special program.

— astonerii

As one of the `deadbeat old people` (62) I take offense and demand a retraction. I have been working for 50 years nonstop and still am. I have never filed for unemployment, never been on welfare and for all intents and purposes never taken a dime from the government. I worked my way through college, twice. I sometimes worked 2 and 3 jobs to make ends meet.

Its not the DOP that have left the system in the shambles that it is. That is the politicians fault. And remember it was OUR money before the government took it.

Bottom line — stuff it.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Its not the DOP that have left the system in the shambles that it is. That is the politicians fault. And remember it was OUR money before the government took it.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Somebody voted for those politicians and the promises they used to pander for support. Promises that were a fantasy from the start and for which the money has now run dry.

Good, bad…doesn’t matter, the money’s not there.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 9:42 PM

Good, bad…doesn’t matter, the money’s not there.

sharrukin

That’s very well be the case. However I resent the implication that the sole reason the system as it is is because of DOP’s. The SS/Medicare ponzi scheme was only sustainable if you had a growing pop base and a growing economy. DOP’s did not write that code, FDR and the Dims did. Go put the blame where it belongs.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM

The best you could do is have the government chose to take more of your money through force and make you invest some part of it for your retirement.

astonerii on October 24, 2012 at 6:49 PM

Looks like you may be finally getting it.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 9:53 PM

The SS/Medicare ponzi scheme was only sustainable if you had a growing pop base and a growing economy.

They stopped having kids which meant the taxpayer base no longer existed for the entitlements they voted for. The few taxpayers who are left no longer want to make good on false promises made to their fathers based on conditions that no longer exist.

DOP’s did not write that code, FDR and the Dims did. Go put the blame where it belongs.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 9:51 PM

It was the Republicans who also backed a great deal of that nonsense including Ryan and Romney who both increased entitlements with their votes. Medicare Part D was a Republican plan, not Democratic. Romneycare was Republican. No Child Left Behind was Republican.

The Democrats were the worst offenders in this, but they were hardly the only ones at the trough.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 10:01 PM

The Democrats were the worst offenders in this, but they were hardly the only ones at the trough.

sharrukin

Case you haven’t noticed I don’t really care which party did what. They are all thieves. Give back the money I paid in plus money market interest and I will gladly not be in the system.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM

They are all thieves. Give back the money I paid in plus money market interest and I will gladly not be in the system.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM

There is no money.

Washington has been living on borrowed cash for decades.

sharrukin on October 24, 2012 at 10:09 PM

Case you haven’t noticed I don’t really care which party did what. They are all thieves. Give back the money I paid in plus money market interest and I will gladly not be in the system.

Dr. Dog on October 24, 2012 at 10:05 PM

There is no money. It would require theft of another person’s property to pay you back, and you have no rightful claim to anyone else’s property. One immoral action doesn’t necessitate another immoral action.

Dante on October 24, 2012 at 10:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 2