posted September 18, 2012 05:40 PM            

The Right Is Wrong to Pin Obama’s Edge on Welfare State

By Ramesh Ponnuru Sep 17, 2012 3:30 PM PT

A lot of conservatives are puzzled that polls show the presidential election is even close, let alone that most show Barack Obama ahead. So convinced are they that Obama has failed that they think he ought to be out of the running.

This mystery is leading an increasing number of conservatives to adopt a depressing theory about the future of our country -- a theory that is fortunately false.

John Hinderaker, who writes for the conservative blog Power Line, expressed it in a recent post: “On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed.”

He continued: “With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs -- not to mention enormous numbers of public employees -- we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy.”

‘Tipping Point’

This explanation fits into a long tradition of conservative skepticism about democracy. The underlying idea is that the more people rely on the federal government, the more they will support government activism and the party that favors it. Whatever one thinks of that activism, it’s a plausible idea -- just as it’s plausible, though Republicans never say it, that defense spending might promote an unhealthy interest in the defense budget among the Americans who benefit directly from it.

More recently, many conservatives have expressed worry that the growth in the percentage of Americans who pay no federal income tax will make the electorate more supportive of big government. Paul Ryan said as much after a speech at the Heritage Foundation last year: “We’re coming close to a tipping point in America where we might have a net majority of takers versus makers in society and that could become very dangerous if it sets in as a permanent condition.”

Mitt Romney echoed the sentiment in a video secretly recorded at a fundraiser and released Sept. 17, in which he argued that the 47 percent of Americans who don’t pay federal income taxes would vote for Obama “no matter what.”

As an explanation for electoral trends, though, this theory doesn’t hold up.

One major reason for the growth of the federal government in recent years has been that entitlement spending per beneficiary has increased, and so has the number of beneficiaries as people have retired. Yet senior citizens -- who benefit from federal programs, on average, far more than younger people -- have become more Republican over that same period. They actually voted for John McCain over Obama in 2008 by a slightly higher margin than they did for George W. Bush over John Kerry in 2004.

In 2010, their Republican margin increased even more, to a whopping 21 points. Pollster Scott Rasmussen told me that in his latest poll, Romney still leads among seniors by 19 points.

It’s true that Americans with low incomes -- more and more of whom now receive food stamps and federally subsidized health insurance -- have generally voted for Democrats over Republicans. But in 2010, these voters shifted toward Republicans even as food stamps, unemployment benefits and the like continued to increase.

Conservatives have even less reason for worrying about people who don’t pay federal income taxes. A major reason that the number of those people has grown is that a Republican-controlled Congress created, and the Bush administration expanded, a tax credit for parents. If there is any evidence that in recent years middle-class parents have become more Democratic, relative to the general electorate, I haven’t seen it.

A Handicap

So why is Obama doing so well in the polls, if increased public dependency on government isn’t the answer?

For starters, the public at large isn’t as convinced as conservatives that he has been a dismal failure. Most people cut him some slack because of the economic crisis that began under a Republican president and kept unfolding as Obama took office. They know that the economy has changed direction. Some people think the economy has done about as well as it could have under the circumstances.

Another reason Obama is doing well might have to do with the weakness of the Republican economic message. Republicans dwell on the heroic entrepreneur held back by taxes and regulation, which must be part of the story that a free-market party tells. But most people don’t see themselves in that storyline, any more than they see themselves as dependents of the federal government. They don’t see Americans as divided between makers and takers.

To the extent Republicans do, they’re handicapping themselves.

posted September 18, 2012 08:27 PM            

Ooops, No

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted September 18, 2012 09:46 PM            

and quite a few people earning a million or more per year are AMONG that 47%

the truth is apparently VERY malleable when romney claims to be speaking it.

but to insult half the country? not exactly indicative of presidential material. as obama said, all of those folks are americans too.

and many are seniors, students, the working poor, in fact the "lazy" bit applies better to those collecting dividends in their sleep than to many of that number. let's not forget veterans ...

and many are temporarily out on their arses getting ready to stand on their own feet again. perhaps you should try starting over with nothing and no rich friends or credit because of the shite that they've been through.

posted September 19, 2012 05:38 AM            

A true Statesman would have pondered how he would bring this 47% to his party, how he would convince them that he has policies to make them rise high enough to become tax payers.

I think those of the 47% who do not vote will be all geared up now to cast their vote.

posted September 19, 2012 08:42 AM            

I like Dick Morris for the same reason. They are a breath of fresh air. Ron Paul is the same way, too. I don't agree with many of his policies, but he is an authentic person.

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted September 19, 2012 10:00 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by YoursTrulyAlways:
The trouble is that the public doesn't want to hear anybody say anything unpopular, regardless if its the truth, especially when the words come from a billionaire (but I don't think Romney is a billionaire). As a conservative, I loathe Mike Bloomberg (yet another billionaire) and his nanny state. Yet, I have to admit that he is correct about super sized sugary drinks. He says it like it is, and that's an instance where I know he is correct but I refuse to accept it because he's this billionaire telling me what to do.

Anyway, just this morning as I was stepping into work, I encountered a couple of college kids who are very obviously of the OWS persuasion. So, I proceeded to engage them in a conversation and I bought the three of them coffee and bagels from the street vendor cart. I said no, even this banker drinks from the street vendor cart, and not SixBucks Coffee (usually FourBucks, but this is Manhattan). I spent 15 minutes listening to their grievances, and then I asked them if they believe that I should buy them all $829 iPad 3s with 3G and 64 GB because I oppress them and their parents to make my living. They replied in the affirmative. There's the mentality of financial dependency. I rest my case.

---

Well done. I have my truth dosage for the morning. Until Rush, that it :joking:

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted September 19, 2012 10:03 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by katatonic:
since no one knows what kind of taxes romney pays

---

From what I understand, based on 2010 returns, Romney paid 38% on about $340K in income and around 13.8% on about $16 million in capital gains. This sums to a gross tax liability of about $2.4 million, which is obviously offset by whatever investment tax credits and other deductions he received. If you believe that he got about $1 million in deductions, then he would have an effective tax rate of about 8.6% and a net tax liability of about $1.4 million.

posted September 19, 2012 01:18 PM            

@YTA: Good job talking to the youngsters and gaining insight on their mentality. However, our success increases from making the youth change their entitlement mentality. Human Behavior always changes when there is a better option made available. The moment the youth can be convinced that it is better to earn enough to buy their iPads and grow to become tax payers than suffer living off handouts, they will change for certain.
In this matter , Obama and Romney have both failed the youth.

posted September 19, 2012 01:27 PM            

Fluctuations over a 5 year span, whether gains and losses, have to be taken in context of economic cycles and the general long-term economic expansion.

posted September 19, 2012 01:29 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by iQ:
Obama is the worst, cr*ppiest, pathetic, Socialist of all time. He boosted the Dow by just 70% after the great Capitalist and Market Economy Guru [and even one who spoke to god!] Lord Dubya tanked the Dow by 70%. What a Loser Socialist, this Barack. Never learns his socialism properly...

@YTA: Good job talking to the youngsters and gaining insight on their mentality. However, our success increases from making the youth change their entitlement mentality. Human Behavior always changes when there is a better option made available. The moment the youth can be convinced that it is better to earn enough to buy their iPads and grow to become tax payers than suffer living off handouts, they will change for certain.
In this matter , Obama and Romney have both failed the youth.

---

Well said, IQ.

------------------
Passion, Lust, Desire. Check out my journal

posted September 19, 2012 01:35 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by iQ:
@YTA: Good job talking to the youngsters and gaining insight on their mentality. However, our success increases from making the youth change their entitlement mentality. Human Behavior always changes when there is a better option made available. The moment the youth can be convinced that it is better to earn enough to buy their iPads and grow to become tax payers than suffer living off handouts, they will change for certain.
In this matter , Obama and Romney have both failed the youth.

---

IQ,

I was once a very broke college student myself.

Ex nihilo nihil fit. Parmenidis argued it best and Shakespeare included it in "King Lear." Nothing will come of nothing.

There is a Roman poet named Lucretius who said it even better. The English translation is: "Nothing from nothing ever yet was born."

The bottom line in my down-to-Earth Capricorn banker style is: "bust your butt, make a lot, save a lot, and give away a lot." That is exactly how I run my life.

All I told those kids was, with all due respect, make the best possible grades they can make, and get the best possible jobs they can get in the industry of their choice. Then they can get whatever they want, within reason, including their iPad 3s.

posted September 19, 2012 02:46 PM            

The public that couldn't put 2 and 2 together, well..they've been educated.
But the conservatively conservative are quite pleased (!) since Romney speaks their minds. They're saying to themselves "damn straight."

posted September 19, 2012 05:58 PM            

someone i heard was suggesting that the real reason he doesn't want to publish is not tax cheating, but TITHE cheating, ie, lots of undeclared income that he has not included in his "10%" to the mormons...

who knows? that is the main point. romney expects EVERYONE to accept his gentlemen's word for what he pays - is this the basis on which he is reckoning 47% don't pay INCOME taxes? he's taking someone's word for it?

not confidence-inspiring.!

posted September 19, 2012 06:01 PM            

anyway, our NJ is not a dependent nor violent, and she is more informed about OWS than most of us. just because they have moved off the streets - to get away from the tarnished reputation vagrants and hangerson have given them - doesn't mean they are gone.