Thiessen on Those Wonderful GOP Solutions for Poverty
Marc Thiessen has a piece attacking Obama’s new tax proposals. So far, so good. But then he runs off the rails talking about GOP solutions to poverty. All involve more government:
There are plenty of innovative proposals to choose from. Last July, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) — now the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee — laid out serious anti-poverty initiatives, including “opportunity grants” that would allow states to test different ways of fighting poverty and an expansion of the earned-income tax credit for childless workers, paid for by eliminating ineffective programs and corporate welfare. Other good ideas include my American Enterprise Institute colleague Michael Strain’s proposals to create relocation vouchers for the long-term unemployed, which would help those in high-unemployment areas move to states where jobs are abundant, as well as a lower minimum wage that would encourage firms to hire the long-term unemployed while supplementing their income with an EITC-like payment. In the Senate, Mike Lee (R-Utah) has put forward proposals of his own that include criminal justice reform, education reform and policies to strengthen families. For his part, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is out with a new book brimming with ideas for a conservative effort to restore the American Dream.
I have an idea. Start repealing the laws and regulations that hamper the free market economy — since the free market economy is the best thing that ever happened to the poor.
I recently mentioned that among the books I have read recently are Ron Paul’s “The Revolution: A Manifesto”
Whatever you might say about aspects of Ron Paul’s positions, on issues like this he wasn’t proposing ways to use government to fix societal problems. He was proposing downsizing government and allowing the market and society to address (not “fix” as there is no “fixing” them) societal problems.
Where is the GOP candidate for President of today making such arguments? Ted Cruz would. I think Scott Walker probably would. The rest of them? Nope. They’re looking for more ways to use the government. That’s the wrong approach.
But, it seems to be the approach the American people want. Those who believe in the market have to keep talking about it and trying to persuade people. It seems like a futile effort, but what else can we do?
The frustration is endless. I just have to let it go.
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 1:17 pm“Whatever you might say about aspects of Ron Paul’s positions, on issues like this he wasn’t proposing ways to use government to fix societal problems. He was proposing downsizing government and allowing the market and society to address (not “fix” as there is no “fixing” them) societal problems.”
Patterico – While Ron Paul may not propose using the government to fix societal problems I was always under the impression he was pretty self-serving when it came to downsizing the government.
http://www.aei.org/publication/ron-paul-big-government-libertarian/
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:07 pmwith this relocation voucher there’s no limit to what I can achieve!
thank you, America!
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:12 pmThe EITC is a huge welfare scam that pays enough lower-middle class people to make it popular, but most or all recipients of it paid little or no income tax. It’s just a giveaway.
This should be target #1 of tax reform (well, all credits and deductions should go). No credits, deductions other than the direct cost of doing business eliminated, and rates reduced across the board. We could not only stimulate the economy with a revenue-neutral bill because of the greater efficiency, but also eliminate at least 75% of IRS employees. That would be the icing on the cake.
Estragon (ada867) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:25 pmIt is a futile effort, Patterico. When we now have at least 4 generations of kids to adults who have been brain washed with the constant leftist propaganda spewed in public schools and colleges what would you expect? How can we talk “free market” when they have no idea what the hell the term means? Plus, they’re inundated with leftist theory in the news media as well as TV and movies. Even some shows I consider very good the bad guy is invariably some rich, greedy businessman. And the answer to every problem with these people is always government force rather than individual initiative. Sure we’re frustrated because it is at the point where it really is futile and probably irreversible.
Hoagie (4dfb34) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:27 pm2. I have a hard time playing the ‘Hypocrite’ card at every turn against Americans who take what they can get from the greased skid of Our Republic.
Hell, I’m one the SS dole now.
DNF (df0496) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:34 pm==I have an idea. Start repealing the laws and regulations that hamper the free market economy ==
==The frustration is endless. I just have to let it go.==
No, you don’t have to let it go, and you should not. But it does help to be realistic about what is achievable both long and short term. Which particular laws (other than obviously Obamacare of course) would you start with Patterico? Are there some that you think the current president might let go through and not veto–or some repeals that could generate sufficient cross party support to overturn a presidential veto? It has to start somewhere or it will never happen. Waiting for the next president or the next congress or a new party does not seem to be the best answer.
elissa (65cb15) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:37 pmRand Paul is a far better strategist than his father, though I imagine his core beliefs are little different. Cozying up to the party’s moderate wing – and especially to fellow Kentuckian, Mitch McConnell – is great strategy. Although, for me, Cruz has struck all the right cords, my guess is that an un-scripted Rand Paul is a close second. And don’t forget sister Sarah, who has seemed mighty prescient over the past few years. I am, most likely, a bit warier of Scott Walker, whose bona fides outside the small pond of Wisconsin have yet to be proven, but that’s just a quibble.
So what’s there to be frustrated about? For the first time in my lifetime there is a multi-candidate list of what appear to be acceptable and, apparently, nominate-able presidential candidates. It seems like somewhere a small corner of hell has actually frozen over.
ThOR (a52560) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:39 pmRepeal would sorta undo all that hard won governing we’ve been blessed with, would it not?
Anyone know how to turn off spellchecking wit the damn iPhone?
DNF (df0496) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:40 pmWalker and Cruz would, but the former would do so without the smarm and preening that I’ve seen the latter employ. His mannerisms remind me too much of Obama and he might want to address that at some point.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:42 pmJMO
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:43 pmWhoops: Premature “enter.”
I was saying: Congress cannot repeal State laws and regulations, so the idea of relocation grants – helping someone willing to work for a living relocate from, e.g., Illinois to Texas – doesn’t sound so bad.
Brian (a280d1) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:47 pmdaley,
FWIW, Ron Paul favors earmarks as a part of his philosophy. The idea is that earmarks have virtually nothing to do with the size of the budget — but if money is going to be allocated by bureaucrats or by Congresscritters, it should be allocated by the latter, because they are far more accountable.
Agree or disagree, but it’s a reasonable argument.
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:51 pmI think it’s the only answer. This clown won’t sign anything meaningful. Paul wanted to abolish the Departments of Education, Interior, Commerce, Energy, and HUD. Sounds good to me. Anyone think Obama will go for that? No? How about eliminating foreign aid, which often props up the worst regimes and has been shown to be positively counterproductive by numerous studies? Not going to happen no matter which party is in charge. Eliminating taxes on gold and silver transactions to allow them to compete as currencies? Not a chance. Ending the Fed or at least end its manipulation of interest rates? Good luck.
About the only thing I can think of that could have some appeal to the American people as a matter of common sense might be to pick a budget from recent history — 2006, or better yet, from the late 1990s — and say that’s our budget. I bet even if we adjusted for inflation we would still see a massive set of cuts. Yet if we explicitly tied it to a government that we survived with in the past, it seems to me some segment of the population might see it as reasonable.
But proposals that will be signed by Barack “Let’s Raise Taxes by Hundreds of Billions of Dollars” Obama? Dream on.
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:59 pmIt’s a problem with society and with our education system, to be sure.
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:00 pmConservatives in blue states must reject all of team rinos hypocritical candidates.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:01 pm“2. I have a hard time playing the ‘Hypocrite’ card at every turn against Americans who take what they can get from the greased skid of Our Republic.”
DNF – I didn’t see a hypocrite card anywhere in sight. I saw a big government card. That RINO card is easy to play, though isn’t it?
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:09 pm“Agree or disagree, but it’s a reasonable argument.”
Patterico – I disagree and I think it’s laughable to attempt to say earmarks have nothing to do with the size of the budget. Not a reasonable argument for a libertarian to make.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:12 pmmg–Gaining the presidency next time but possibly losing the senate (whose votes are needed to pass and repeal laws) won’t help achieve what Patterico is talking about here.
elissa (65cb15) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:13 pmTime for republicans and democrats to meld into one lying party.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:18 pmelecting Romneycare Mitt Romney or an amnesty whore like whatever p.o.s. Bushtrash is on offer this year is not the same thing as “gaining the presidency”
just so we’re clear
it’s different
like how when you put pickles in s’mores
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:18 pmelissa-my approach is team rino has to go away no matter what. I see them as useless as teats on a boar.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:20 pmPatterico is clearly focusing on Walker and Cruz and possibly Paul for the presidency in this thread. For the purpose of this exercise so am I.
elissa (65cb15) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:20 pm“Time for republicans and democrats to meld into one lying party.”
mg – Candy Crowley is the one you have been waiting for. A lot of melding going on right there.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:21 pmI would say she is melded together with twinkies and onion rings.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:25 pmCruz and Walker have no chance of becoming president if they continue to be associated with team rino.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:27 pmMr. Governor Walker is like when you put dark chocolate bark from Trader Joe’s in your s’mores and you use fun-colored hand-made marshmallows and the night is alive with stars and in the distance James Taylor sings plaintively about friendship and all the woodland creatures gather round and you feel a peace in your heart like nothing you’ve ever felt before
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:29 pmBrian (a280d1) — 1/19/2015 @ 2:47 pm
Not such a bad idea, although very many members of Congress would oppose it because they don’t want to lose constituents, and then others will argue that immigration is bad, this too too is bad for the receiving community.
Not such a bad idea, but you will have to accept that:
1) 80% or more of the money will be “wasted” that is, go to pay for moves that would anyway take place. And also most of them will have nothing to do woth jobs. Perhaps peple retiring to a lower cost of living place.
This is a problem for Congress. They don’t want to “waste” benefits
Even more than this is some kind of enormous, and it will have to be enormous to affect behavior, tax credit for hiring people who have bene unemployed for a long while, or better yet, had less tahn X amount of taxable income in either of the past two years. Obama, a few years ago – he’s forgotten about this now – had some kind of a proposal for tax credits for businesses hiring the long term unemployed, but it was hopelessly bureaucratic. This has to happen automatically.
They also were pondering making it illegal to discriminate by length of unemployment, but this was a non-starter, and would regulate too much. And the trouble they had with a tax credits is that so muchof it would be “wasted” and they try to design a system so that it doesn’t gte “wassted” but such a system would not accomplish anything.
Sammy Finkelman (e806a6) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:32 pmThe table is set for a conservative to break away from the status quo of the two party malaise.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:33 pmIt is laughable to think d.c. will change with democrats and rinos in charge.
go! closet commies
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:35 pmtake your instruments of shame
put them in dank place
hey you gonna take that job in Baltimore?
now way dude they denied my voucher – they say I’m needed here more cause of there’s a shortage of my job code
oh. Well that happens sometimes, comrade. The imnportant thing to remember is that what you’re doing is for the good of the State.
I know… it’s just… nevermind. You’re right. The State has to come first.
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:36 pmThe *important* thing to remember i mean
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:37 pm“[if Romney or Bush are nominated] the same people who sat out 2012 will sit out 2016 and the Democrats will win”
– Sen. Ted Cruz
Just the sort of folks who are a big part of the problem.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:49 pmit must be very frustrating for establishment-trash like Meghan’s coward daddy or weirdo willard when people don’t support them 110%
but this time will be different
you’ll see
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:52 pmGo Speed Racer, Go!
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:53 pmi got a monkey in my trunk!
i’m unstoppable
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:54 pmMake your case if you want.
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 3:55 pmWhat % of the budget did earmarks represent? IIRC it was less than 1%.
JD (0b5351) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:00 pmIt’s amusing to read people who eat tofu Thai pancakes describe others as “weird”… lol.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:03 pmAnd, if the money is not earmarked does that mean it will not be spent?
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:05 pmlol!
happyfeet (831175) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:06 pmThe earmarks are bribes they pay each other to keep their mouths shut about the money they all steer to their pockets, like that billion that Feinstein’s husband is going to get that was just recently not in the news. 1% of the budget? What’s 1% of $3.9 trillion? Chump change.
But Libertarians need to get a clue. 3% of the vote is a pretty good one.
nk (dbc370) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:37 pmIts an oldy but goody.
Gil (27c98f) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:46 pmMilton Friedman – The Pencil
When we now have at least 4 generations of kids to adults who have been brain washed with the constant leftist propaganda spewed in public schools and colleges what would you expect? How can we talk “free market” when they have no idea what the hell the term means? Plus, they’re inundated with leftist theory in the news media as well as TV and movies. Even some shows I consider very good the bad guy is invariably some rich, greedy businessman. And the answer to every problem with these people is always government force rather than individual initiative. Sure we’re frustrated because it is at the point where it really is futile and probably irreversible.
Further, they don’t want to know. There are too many stakeholders unwilling to see the gravy train end and stop their sucking the government teat. Also, as individual initiative is something that is learned from parents instilling and nurturing a strong and solid work ethic and having that reinforced by our schools – which it was at one time – it’s unlikely much change will occur. It will take something catastrophic that the public can’t be shielded from by puffed up numbers and bureaucratic lies of omission.
Dana (8e74ce) — 1/19/2015 @ 4:52 pmAnd last November, we saw how meaningless that approach is, except to divide the conservative vote … in 2012, it depressed the conservative vote – and in 2014, the various conservative sides didn’t allow it to split them apart (or keep ’em home) …
Who in their right mind cares about the teats on a boar ? Those same teats are there because, at some point, it was better for the species for them to be there …
In Congress, better that those RINOs elected be there than have Democrats/Progressives representing those seats … those who disagree with that statement are either Democrats/Progressives (or they (intentionally or unintentionally, naively or covertly) support Democrats/Progressives) …
Alastor (2e7f9f) — 1/19/2015 @ 5:20 pmActually that’s getting it backward, the establishment spent all it’s time and money, smashing the Tea Party segments that the IRS hadn’t gone to, delivering goose eggs in Wisconsin, Florida, and Montana if memory serves.
narciso (ee1f88) — 1/19/2015 @ 5:28 pmdaley,
Paul says: “The total level of spending is determined by the Congressional leadership and the appropriators before any Member has a chance to offer any amendments.” Do you contend this is false, or irrelevant?
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 5:53 pmAlastor- I disagree, I see it as anyone who agrees with the lying establishment gop is a progressive twit.
mg (31009b) — 1/19/2015 @ 6:23 pmSmart enough to unite to ensure victory… incremental gains… you have to get elected first to get it done. Too simplistic?
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/19/2015 @ 6:38 pmTo get what done? Increase the minimum wage like Mitt Romney wants to do?
Patterico (9c670f) — 1/19/2015 @ 9:49 pmAnother note about relocatiob benefits:
Right now, moving expenses for job purposes can be deducted. But it has to be for a specific job.
Per Publication 17:
Often this is after getting hired. Usually, this has to be no later than one year after starting work. But an example of later is when the move was delayed till 18 months in order to let a child finish school in the same place.
This is not just very long distances. This is also if the move brings you closer to your new job location than your old home was, so many moves inside California would count. Sometimes even if the distance is less, or at least the commuting time or cost is lower. And also if there is some kind of requirement to live at the new home as a condition of the job. But the new home also must be at least 50 miles closer to your new job location than your job location was, so if somebody previously commuted a great distance and the new distance would not be more than 50 miles further away, they can’t do it. (But what about lower commuting costs if you move?)
If there was no previous job, then it’s 50 miles further from the old home. there are rules for determining the main job location if there is more than one job or location or in the case of a union hall (the union hall becomes the main job location because that is where you go first)
And also: you must work at least 39 weeks during the first 12 months after you arrive. If you lose your job shortly after moving, you’re out of luck. But it does not have to be for the same employer to count. Nor does it have to be 39 weeks in a row. But illness, srikes, layoffs and natural disasters do not subtract from the 39 weeks of work, nor does any vacation count, or periods of time off (like schoolteachers during the summer) so long as there as the work period is at least 6 months out of 12.
If self-employed, not only do need to work 39 weeks out of 12 months at the new location, but you have to work 78 weeks out of 24 months. Self-employment work can be combined with work as an employee. This is full time work only. In a joint return, either you or your spouse can qualify, but one of them must qualify individually.
If you deduct moving expenses and it turns out later that you did not meet the test you can either amend the earlier tax return or report the amount of the deduction you took as other income on he second year’s tax return. Or the third year if you miss the 78 week self-employment test.
You can also deduct and then add reimbursement back to income in a separate year if there is a legitimate reason for doing things that way. It might be simpler to avoid taking the deduction until a reimbursement is received. As with failing the employment test, you can either amend the earlier return or include the reimbursement as income on the second year’s return.
Members of the armed forces can deduct unreimbursed moving expenses regardless.
People living and working outside the United states may deduct expenses for moving back to the United States are not limited to moving for new work, with its length of time of work at new community tests, but can also move to permanently retire. And this deduction of costs for moving back to the United States also applies to survivors of decedents.
Now only reasonable moving expenses are deductible. If you travel by car, don’t include the dcost of side-trips for sightseeing. You can use either your actual cost of gasoline or a standard mileage rate, as well as tolls, but not any insurance or maintenence, or of getting or keeping your driver’s license or license plates, or the cost of repairs for your car, and certainly not depreciation.
Any member of the household counts, except if that person is an employee. Tenants even if the person would be atenant in both places, do not count.
The cost of packing, storing, transporting and insuring hosehold goods counts, as well as any cost involved in connecting and disconnecting utilities. But if the goods are now in storage or in some other place, you cannot deduct more than it would have cost to move them from your former home unless it is a foreign move. The only sorage charges allowed are for those costs incurred in transit, or in the case of foreign moves.
Losses from memberships in places that you can’t use cannot be deducted, or security deposts, even ones given up, or the cost of breaking a lease or any loss on your home, or any expenses involved in selling your home, or any part of the purchase price of your new home or house-hunting
expenses.
Also any lodging expenses within one day of moving the furniture from your old home (if you and your furniture don’t move the same day) Also the cost of one trip from your old home to your new home by any member of your household. But not the cost of any meals. (you have to eat anyway, don’t you?)
And all this comes before determining Adjusted Gross Income.
Sammy Finkelman (e806a6) — 1/20/2015 @ 12:23 amAs a result of some editing one thing came out looking wrong.
The expenses mentioned in the paragraph before last (the cost of one trip from your old home to your new home by any member of your household and lodging expenses within one day of moving the furniture from your old home can be included in the deduction, but not the cost of any meals.
The relocation credit, of course, would just be flat amount, maybe adjusted for distance. It would not accomplish much, especially if it was low. People stay where they are for a lot of reasons, and move for a lot of reasons, and sometimes move temporarily without their family. Many people also are locked into their homes and cannot move anywhere without increasing their living expenses.
Sammy Finkelman (e806a6) — 1/20/2015 @ 12:30 amWhy would a conservative unite with a traitorous rino?
mg (31009b) — 1/20/2015 @ 3:01 amOf course we are having another bubble! And this time American Enterprise Institute is in with the usual suspects in the scheme.
It used to be that the GOP were crony capitalists with only different clients than the Dems; now they are all in the same bed together.
http://www.latimes.com/business/realestate/la-fi-equity-building-mortgage-20150103-story.html#page=1
Patricia (5fc097) — 1/20/2015 @ 8:17 amLOL
The earmark provision of the constitution says I gotta get my district some stolen taxpayer money while the gettin’ good.
Nice rationalizations boys.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/20/2015 @ 8:33 amAnother “Just the tip” argument. Big government is bad but earmarks are great.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/20/2015 @ 8:36 am“To get what done? Increase the minimum wage like Mitt Romney wants to do?”
I don’t perceive that to be a key issue. “To get what done?” To start on the path of actions required to remove all traces of a socialist regime… much less regulation, for starters. Countermand nearly all executive orders.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 1/20/2015 @ 8:44 amColonel – It was the VAT
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/20/2015 @ 8:52 amdaleyrocks, I’m sure you are familiar with the legendary Chicago alderman Paddy Bauler who, some time in the early decades of the last century when he and his compatriots were being challenged by “reformer candidates” confidently and presciently said, “Chicago ain’t ready for reform.” He was correct of course that the voters must be ready for reform, and he knew they were not.
Sun Times columnist Bill Brasher:
NBC further explains:
http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Chicago-Will-Never-Be-Ready-for-Reform-221742351.html
Chicago is not all that unique or uniquely corrupt despite what some people commenting here like to say. This political grooming is what goes on into modern times and is what we who want to shrink government are up against across the country depending on who holds the reins of power in that particular area.
elissa (54cf9b) — 1/20/2015 @ 9:37 amelissa – I am also familiar with the saying “Watch what they do, not what they say.” Rationalizations like it’s just a teensy tiny amount relative to the total or the leaders establish the overall amounts and it will get spent whether I take my share or not, at the same time the same person is banging the drum for smaller government, seem more like the tripe we hear from liberals as opposed to libertarians.
daleyrocks (bf33e9) — 1/20/2015 @ 10:41 am