Seen as Paul Ryan is committed to "self-reliance" does he intend to get rid of all corporate welfare?

[Andy]

"About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs. $92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies."
http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spe...tatistics/

Arguing about empowering the poor by taking away their entitlements is one thing, but if you're seriously worried about budget deficits and systematic dependency, this is surely the place to start. It seems pretty hypocritical to me to argue for the virtues of a free market and that assisting the poor is stifling individuality and innovation while simultaneously providing handouts to massive corporations. And it's not enough to pretend you are yet act otherwise: http://uppitywis.org/blogarticle/paul-ry...es-just-he

I guess the next question would be: If they do pledge to eliminate corporate welfare, who is going to want to bankroll their campaign?

BTW: I'm not arguing Obama is any better here, but at least he is somewhat consistent.

[bigvossman]

I have not seen any cuts in the Ryan budget. It is mainly aimed at slowing down increased spending, ad doesn't even balance the budget for 30 years. I also do not see all the fuss about Dems wanting to raise taxes. Their proposal would fund current spending for about 8 days.

I mean, like the Romney comment 47% don't pay income tax.Really. Since most of the upper income class derives income from investments, and at best, pay cap gains, not payroll income taxes, they probably make up a large part of that percentage. It's all a game of words with very little substance