# Veep announcement \[Romney picks Paul Ryan\] **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 11, 2012, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157 "2012-08-11T03:40:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/361 "2012-08-13T16:18:50Z")
> [@babygoat666](#): > > You don’t think Santorum thinks he’s “next in line”? He may think so but he’s delusional. ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/362 "2012-08-13T16:19:41Z")
> [@Sam\_Lowry](#): > > So what do people think about Ryan [staying on the ballot for his House seat](http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/ryan-would-be-able-to-stay-on-ballot-for-reelection-d36f2o1-165826096.html)? Have previous presidential or vice-presidential nominees done this before? It does make me wonder about how confident he is in Romney winning and makes it seem more likely he accepted not in hopes of being the vice-president, but in hopes of raising his stature. It’s my understanding that that’s not up to Ryan now. It’s too late by Wisconsin law to withdraw his name from the ballot. It’s not like he’s going to be able to campaign for THAT seat in addition to the vice-presidency. And it has been done before, most recently by Joe Lieberman in 2000. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/363 "2012-08-13T16:20:03Z")
One thing that I think is being overlooked, is that Ryan is a leading member of Congress, which everyone [hates](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html) with a passion. I don’t think Ryan is a game changer one way or the other, I still think Romney gets his ass handed to him (the electoral road for Romney is very very hard). But I do think that for many Americans when they hear “Congressman Paul Ryan” they will immediately go into dislike mode. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/364 "2012-08-13T16:20:56Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Shayna, does the progressive movement want to empower “the people”, or “the person”? I think that’s why “the people” never buy what you’re selling. The community is everything, the individual relatively unimportant, unless that individual’s plight is a group problem representing a progressive concern, like discrimination. But if you’re in the wrong group, you’re just a whiner standing in the way of social justice. > > BTW, I wonder how the progressive movement would be served by the US defaulting on the debt? Where will your vaunted social programs be then? The Progressive movement empowers everyone; collectively _and_ individually. The Progressive movement is calling for thriving wages for work so individuals can once again build their _own_ nest eggs for retirement and their _own_ safety nets for emergencies. Radical right wing tax and pay policies have stolen rightful wages from workers since at least 1965-1970 when 1) wages stagnated and [workers are still working for what they did over 40 years ago](https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/winningwordsproject/pages/394/attachments/original/1343494789/average-hourly-earnings-1964-2008.png), and 2) when pay and productivity diverged from the parallel path they’d followed for decades, and productivity continued to rise while wages … wait for it … _stagnated_. Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would not only continue on this path to poverty for the majority of Americans, but they’d pass legislation that would make it _worse!_ > [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > Oh, come on now. Democrats/liberals/whatever have an odd view of “equal”, I’ll tell you that. [Have you even bothered to check how the Federal tax liabilities are distributed](http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?DocID=558&Topic2id=20&Topic3id=22)? Based on that information, could you tell me who’s getting a raw deal (note the changes from 1979 to present)? I have no idea how you came to the conclusion that Republicans/the rich don’t pay their fair share, but it’s absurd as it is wrong. As it stands [approximately half of American’s don’t even pay an income tax](http://blog.heritage.org/2012/02/19/chart-of-the-week-nearly-half-of-all-americans-dont-pay-income-taxes/), anyway, with the bottom two quartiles have a negative effective individual income rate (because it things like EITC). > > But you’re damn right. That’s not equal, though chances are you’re fine with that because “the rich can afford it” or something along those lines. The problem here is that Democrats don’t want to pay their fair share, or anything at all, of Federal income taxes, but then complain when the guy who is paying both his share and the Democrat’s share of taxes gets a break or complains about having to pay more while someone else pays little to nothing. You want to take money away from someone else while you, yourself, don’t want to give up any of your money to “solve the problem”. That’s wrong. > [@Omg\_a\_Black\_Conservative](#): > > This has nothing to do with what I typed out or what I responded to. So let me try this again by posing a simple question; how can you demand that someone should pay more in taxes (or even complain when the person paying the most gets a break) when you aren’t paying anything yourself? I’m quite curious. How, on Earth, can you legitimately argue that the “rich” don’t pay their fair share of taxes? > > (Yeah, I know. “But the rich can afford it!”. That’s not any kind of response, but I’ll bet I’ll get it again.) > > ETA: I once posted a chart showing that lower income brackets, obviously, benefit more from tax increases, as they receive more in government benefits than they pay out while the rich pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits. That’s kind of a “well, duh” thing, but it’s worth pointing out. Well, you’re entirely wrong. 1. The rich in this country are highly subsidized with government handouts; even deeply conservative Senator Tom Coburn acknowledges as much. > [@](#): > > [Subsidies of the Rich & Famous](http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?a=Files.Serve&File_id=bb1c90bc-660c-477e-91e6-91c970fbee1f), by Tom A. Coburn, M.D., U.S. Senator (R-OK) > > The government safety net has been cast far and wide, with almost half of all American households now receiving some form of government assistance.\*\* But most taxpayers will be asking why when they learn who is receiving what.\*\* > > From tax write-offs for gambling losses, vacation homes, and luxury yachts to subsidies for their ranches and estates, the government is subsidizing the lifestyles of the rich and famous. **Multimillionaires are even receiving government checks for not working. This welfare for the well-off – costing billions of dollars a year – is being paid for with the taxes of the less fortunate, many who are working two jobs just to make ends meet, and IOUs to be paid off by future generations.** > > This is not an accidental loophole in the law. To the contrary, this reverse Robin Hood style of wealth redistribution is an **intentional effort to get all Americans bought into a system where everyone appears to benefit.** … > > We should never demonize those who are successful. [aside: that is not what Progressives or Democrats are doing. G-d love the rich; more power to 'em. But …] Nor should we pamper them with unnecessary welfare to create an appearance everyone is benefiting from federal programs. … > > The government’s social safety net, which has long existed to catch those who are down and help them get back up, **is now being used as a hammock by some millionaires, some who are paying less taxes than average middle class families.** Comprehensive information on the full range of government benefits enjoyed by millionaires has never been collected previously. This report provides the first such compilation. What it reveals is **sheer Washington stupidity with government policies pampering the wealthy costing taxpayers billions of dollars every year.** 1. A large number of super wealthy individuals _also_ [pay ZERO federal income taxes](http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/12insprbulhignincome.pdf) because of _their_ tax breaks, subsidies and write-offs … except they don’t _need_ those tax breaks in order to keep enough of their paltry income to, you know, _survive_. > [@](#): > > For 2009, of the 3,975,288 tax returns with expanded income of $200,000 or more, 35,061 (0.882 percent) **had no U.S. income tax liability** ; and 19,551 (0.492 percent) had no worldwide income tax liability. 1. We aren’t calling for the wealthy to pay a fair share because “they can afford it”; we’re calling for them to pay their fair share because _they aren’t_ doing so at the moment. We contend, as did Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln, that labor is the superior of capital and should be treated with _more_ respect in the tax code, not less, which is the scheme the right wing have set up for themselves. There’s no excuse whatsoever for capital gains to be treated “special” somehow and taxed at half the rate as income from labor is taxed. You guys can _sell_ it as an incentive to invest in the lie of creating more jobs, but the reality is that it’s nothing more than rewarding people for **not working** , which I thought you guys supposedly hated the idea of. :dubious: We also contend that when [the super rich stopped paying workers their share of corporate profits](https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/winningwordsproject/pages/394/attachments/original/1343574760/Worker_CEO_Pay_Comparison.png), stealing it for themselves and [hoarding it in banks and offshore accounts so they could avoid paying their fair share of taxes on it](http://www.thetelegram.com/Opinion/Columns/2012-07-28/article-3040447/Cash-hoarding-and-the-world-economy/1), they weakened the tax base and shorted the U.S. Treasury billions of dollars that would have been collected had that money gone into workers’ pockets where it was earned, and not into vehicles that prevented it from being taxed. > [@](#): > > Last week, The Guardian reported that the world’s super-rich have taken advantage of lax tax rules, stashing away at least $21 trillion, possibly as much as $32 trillion, from their home countries and hiding it away in various tax havens. The research was carried out for the Tax Justice Network by economist James Henry. > > The result of the stashed, tax-haven cash is a staggering loss of about $280 billion in income tax revenues. > > According to The Guardian, John Christensen of the Tax Justice Network noted that inequality is much, much worse than official statistics show, but politicians still rely on trickle-down economics to transfer wealth to poorer people. > > “This new data shows the exact opposite has happened: for three decades extraordinary wealth has been cascading into offshore accounts of a tiny number of super-rich.” > > In other words, all this hidden wealth means we have underestimated the depth of inequality. > > **And yet this cash hoarding is allowed to happen while the world’s economies struggle, citizens are forced to work longer, or are thrown out of work, or forced to take wage cuts, give up their pensions or suffer in abject poverty.** Here’s a simple example of how stealing workers’ wages steals funding from the Social Security pool, for instance: Company A has 1 CEO, 50 senior executives and 1,500 worker bees with a payroll expense of $99,000,000. Under right wing schemes the distribution looks like this: Average worker pay is $41,673.83. Execs make 20x that @ $833,476.60 CEO makes 325 that @ $13,543,994.75 Because of the cap on taxable Social Security income, the Social Security pool only gets $6,101,335.87 Now let’s use the same $99,000,000 payroll, but give workers their fair share that represents a reasonable increase in wages based on [their increased productivity over the decades](http://www.winningwordsproject.com/reframing_the_40_year_long_stagnant_worker_compensation_problem_in_america), and pay them, say, $76,263.11, which is just under 2x as much as current and would restore them to a wage that more closely represents their decades of increased productivity. Let’s let the executives still reap in big bucks at $305,052.44, and let’s make the poor, put-upon CEO try to survive on a measly $3,813,155.45, which is still _fifty times_ the average workers’ wage. NOW the Social Security fund takes in $10,604,859.98; a difference of ($4,503,524.11). Extrapolate that out over 40+ years and over tens of thousands of corporations and it’s easy to see on just this _one_ aspect of the right wings’ policies, how the wealthy have prevented us from keeping just that _one_ program solvent to the tune of billions of dollars. And that’s to say nothing of the lost tax revenue workers would have paid at their higher tax rate than the rich pay at their special super low tax rate, not to mention how many fewer individuals would have been forced onto taxpayer subsidized programs which could have redirected our higher tax revenues to rebuilding our infrastructure and paying down our debt because working families would no longer need it to put food on their tables and roofs over their heads. It’s a matter of simple mathematics. The wealthy are cheating us with their tax avoidance schemes and their decades-long fight to hold wages (especially the minimum wage) down to 1965 levels. We want our money back from them. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/365 "2012-08-13T16:21:15Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > He may think so but he’s delusional. That he is, but he may be right about this. The GOP has a penchant for nominating the person who finished 2nd in the primaries last time. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/366 "2012-08-13T16:22:25Z")
> [@babygoat666](#): > > You don’t think Santorum thinks he’s “next in line”? “next in line” is an amorphous concept, but generally we know it when we see it. Santorum, unlike say, George Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, is just not electable. Republicans as a rule don’t elect people that are likely to get blown out, at least not since Goldwater. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/367 "2012-08-13T16:22:46Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > That’s a copout. Spending is on an unsustainable course. Treasured Democratic priorities will have to be cut. Otherwise you’ll end up with nothing in the end, just like the Greeks. Don’t you remember how two and three years ago we heard all these cries of doom from your side, how the evil deficit was going to destroy the credit-worthiness of the country and we’d have rampant inflation? Gee, our rampant inflation today is almost unnoticeable, and government bonds have historically low interest rates, showing that the markets disagree with you. On the other hand the austerity program in Spain has led to massive unemployment and very high interest rates on government debt. How many times does reality have to slap you in the face for you to get the message? The way to cut the deficit is through taxes on unproductive income and by investing that money in programs to improve infrastructure, educate our kids, and stimulate the economy while doing so. It is a great opportunity, especially since we can finance this with very cheap money. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/368 "2012-08-13T16:23:28Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Are you unaware that Republicans in the House are trying to back out of the deal which cut spending on both military and civilian programs after the cliff? You may think this, but your friends don’t. I’m aware of it. I’m also aware that Democrats went over the caps. And the final compromise made just last week kept spending slightly over the caps. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/369 "2012-08-13T16:25:43Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > The way to cut the deficit is through taxes on unproductive income and by investing that money in programs to improve infrastructure, educate our kids, and stimulate the economy while doing so. It is a great opportunity, especially since we can finance this with very cheap money. If the government borrowed long term, that would be true. The government doesn’t do that though. It borrows short term like every other government does, which makes it very vulnerable to interest rate changes. As we’re seeing in Europe, where some countries have to roll over a ton of debt at interest rates they can’t afford. ---
**Author:** ![Shayna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shayna/32/17976_2.png) [@Shayna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shayna)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/370 "2012-08-13T16:33:45Z")
> [@Shayna](#): > > Company A has 1 CEO, 50 senior executives and 1,500 worker bees with a payroll expense of $99,000,000. That should be 1,050 worker bees, should anyone try to check my math. Didn’t notice the typo to fix it before the 5 minute edit window had expired. ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/371 "2012-08-13T16:34:55Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > “next in line” is an amorphous concept, but generally we know it when we see it. Santorum, unlike say, George Bush, John McCain, Mitt Romney, or Mike Huckabee, is just not electable. Republicans as a rule don’t elect people that are likely to get blown out, at least not since Goldwater. Evidently George Bush was the only electable one in that list. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/372 "2012-08-13T16:36:55Z")
In almost any other year, John mcCain would have won easily. Put him up against John Kerry or Al Gore, it’s a GOP landslide. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/373 "2012-08-13T16:37:25Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > I’m aware of it. I’m also aware that Democrats went over the caps. And the final compromise made just last week kept spending slightly over the caps. You also realize that playing politics with the caps in the first place was a bullshit move? Wait, you probably don’t, nevermind. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/374 "2012-08-13T16:41:59Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > In almost any other year, John mcCain would have won easily. Put him up against John Kerry or Al Gore, it’s a GOP landslide. Yeah, it’s a damn shame that Karl Rove happened to him in 2000. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/375 "2012-08-13T16:59:27Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > In almost any other year, John mcCain would have won easily. Put him up against John Kerry or Al Gore, it’s a GOP landslide. I’m not so sure. He was a pitiful candidate. I think Gore would have cleaned his clock. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/376 "2012-08-13T17:05:17Z")
> [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > One thing that I think is being overlooked, is that Ryan is a leading member of Congress, which everyone [hates](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/congressional_job_approval-903.html) with a passion. I don’t think Ryan is a game changer one way or the other, I still think Romney gets his ass handed to him (the electoral road for Romney is very very hard). But I do think that for many Americans when they hear “Congressman Paul Ryan” they will immediately go into dislike mode. He could always lie and say that he’s not an incumbent. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/377 "2012-08-13T17:24:32Z")
[Romney would have made it unconstitutional for Ryan to be president](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/13/mitt-romneys-constitutional-amendment-would-bar-paul-ryan-from-the-presidency/) ---
**Author:** ![babygoat666](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/2acd7d/32.png) [@babygoat666](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/babygoat666)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 5:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/378 "2012-08-13T17:43:27Z")
> [@DigitalC](#): > > [Romney would have made it unconstitutional for Ryan to be president](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/13/mitt-romneys-constitutional-amendment-would-bar-paul-ryan-from-the-presidency/) What an asinine amendment. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/379 "2012-08-13T17:45:46Z")
> [@babygoat666](#): > > What an asinine amendment. Well said. Amendments are about the most serious thing you can propose, and it sure looks like Romney was all too casual about proposing an amendment. One wonders if Saint Ronald Of Reagan would have qualified. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2012, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157/380 "2012-08-13T17:50:50Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > I’m not so sure. He was a pitiful candidate. I think Gore would have cleaned his clock. Not if Gore couldn’t beat Bush. Er, by more than he did. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/veep-announcement-romney-picks-paul-ryan/631157.md?page=20)