Does Ryan have Free Market views?

Compared to whom?
Compared to us? Well, no, not compared to us,
But compared to his colleagues he is very far to the economic right.

At lease he doesn't have to be persuaded that Capitalism is a GOOD thing.
Unlike his fellows who gaze upon the markets with a baleful eye.

Like I said, he's a politician - I'll take what I can get.

If we truly live in the Gulch, why are we speaking of voting for or favoring this one or that one? We are on the outside looking in (or vice versa) and can only, as Voltaire said, tend our own garden.

There's an old saying: "Computers will never take over until they can find other computers to blame their mistakes on." Like my Grandpa would say, "Ve shall see vhat ve shall see. Here have some bourbon. I splurged, a dollar eighty nine a pint."

I strongly disagree that Paul Ryan has strong free-market views. His voting record shows he is pretty standard conservative republican.

I do agree that he will be better than Boehner

This will be interesting to watch, but I expect his power to change and improve will be in small increments, not in spectacular alterations in budget or philosophy. Politics is, and will always be, a gamed system.

He has more power now; let's see what he does with it.

Jan

I don't believe Ryan to be a libertarian at all. He is RINO through and through. He has good aspects but his voting record stinks. He is not fiscally conservative, as he voted for the TARP and bailouts. Is it libertarian to raise the debt ceiling and the debts and increase spending?

Alarm bells should have been ringing for everyone right of socialist when Obama and Reid and Polosi endorsed him! When they want someone, then you know you're in trouble and the constitution will be decimated

So somebody who votes for anybody but a Democrat or a Republican is a non-voter. Interesting how you can so easily twist the meaning of the word non-voter on a site devoted to A is A.

If you mean that their vote doesn't count then I would definitely reconsider whether your vote for a Republocrat or Demublican counts either.

And who he blames the failure on.

According to Wikipedia, “Ryan majored in economics and political science at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio,[27] where he became interested in the writings of Friedrich Hayek, Ludwig von Mises, and Milton Friedman.[20] He often visited the office of libertarian professor Richard Hart to discuss the theories of these economists and of Ayn Rand.” Sure beats the bonehead who just vacated the seat. At least he has heard of von Mises, et al.

All politicians are pigs. Whatever ideas he spouted before he got elected have probably been toned down so he could GET elected in the first place. Politics follows philosophy as Ayn Rand often said. The typical philosophy in this country is pretty irrational, and we see what happens- Obama for TWO terms.

"By their deeds shall you know them."
Lots of interesting stuff coming up in the congress. It won't take long for us to know what kind of Speaker we have.

I hear ya. I'm not planning on it either. There is no money set aside and they can pull the plug whenever the system fails. No one gets anything.

Did Ayn Rand ever create politician character that was a heroic figure?
Maybe she tried but gave up, figuring that such a character would be completely unbelievable.

I agree, I think he's the best option. But, he rejected Ayn Rand once he was Mitt's VP pick.
So, who knows where he truly stands

reason[dot]com/blog/2015/10/29/so-how-much-does-newly-minted-speaker-pa

"Here's what he said to National Review in April: “I reject her philosophy,” Ryan says firmly. “

I wouldn't say that Ryan is either a Libertarian or much of a change. I had great hopes for him when he was pushing the Ryan plan several years ago, but it seems that he has backed away from those ideas because he voted for the most recent budget - which is more of the same-old borrow-and-spend of the political establishment.

Now that being said, even if all Ryan does is move back to giving the House adequate time to study bills, allowing amendments, and not threatening other Republicans who disagree with him, that will be a good step in the right direction.

Social Security and Medicare need to go, as spending, it's about 70% of it. I have zero expectation of it and have planned accordingly, not that I'll ever get that $1000 a month I have sent off for the last 20 years ago to it anyway. Over my career, I will have dumped about a half-million into that shithole, and is why the government shouldn't be in the retirement planning business. Next they will add means testing and tell me I don't qualify for it when I retire in 20 years.

Are you sure? I don't think so. I do not accept Paul Ryan as a libertarian. Why did he demand a removal of the motion to vacate the chair? Why does he play footsie with collectivists in the House and Senate?

When Representative Old Bat (D-San Francisco) starts holding someone to a standard she never could meet, I expect that. But I don't like getting any such hypocrisy from one who pretends to love liberty. I expect honor and integrity. And I just don't see it.

He's not a baby boomer looking to increase their own handout of more pacifiers.

The challenge of shutting down the government before was the horrible media storm that erupted and incorrectly blamed Republicans. I can see where it is basically a stalemate until Obama is gone.

Actually, it's a spending ceiling that includes zero spending authority. It only creates a new debt limit. Spending authority ends December 11 and Paul Ryan will be able to start with that.

He said AS "inspired me so much that it is required reading in my office for all my interns and staff." Assuming he's not out-and-out lying about that, that means he will respond to anti-spending lobbying. If mail is running 50%-60% against some bailout package, like the ones in the last crisis, he has a much higher likelihood of mobilizing opposition to it than someone else would.

I am biased against him because he is a Republican, and that makes him more likely to join with his colleagues in expanding the intrusiveness of gov't. (Both parties expand the cost of gov't, but Republicans are particularly bad about making more intrusive.) I would rather have a Republican, who at least claims to support Ayn Rand's ideas though, than a Democrat.

I could see him having fierce battles with President Clinton over cutting spending, and it will feel just like the 90s.

I would never vote socialist. But I will choose not to vote. It is not about grief to me. As I said it is about not passing on our problems to the future generations.

I agree failure will not be pretty. Not the outcome I want but again if it is going to happen the generation that caused it should pay the price. :)

You may be correct on the balanced budget. Personally, I don't believe a slower slide to the left will produce a balanced budget any more than the path we are currently on. It will take a sharp right turn to get it done.

So... since there is no free-market party, you now vote Socialist.
I guess we all have our own way of dealing with grief.

But, y'know that "rebuild" of which you dream will be bloody - and most likely fatal to US.
Whichever thug takes over to bring "law-and-order" to the anarchy will hunt us down, I assure you.

Let it drag on long enough to give us time to leave. Either off-shore cities or space habs. It's not that much longer.

And besides, if we could just pass a Balanced Budget Amendment we'd still have a chance to save this place.

Improvement..maybe but that is a stretch. Sorry but IMHO Ryan is no Libertarian. At least he does not vote that way.

I also can no longer take a slight improvement. If the candidate does not stand to the far right meeting my principals I will not vote. As I see it, the only thing that can save our country is a hard right. Anything else leads to the same path, complete & total failure. It's just a matter of when it will happen. My generation and the generation before mine allowed this mess to be created. It is our responsibility to clean up the mess and not pass it on to people's children and grandchildren, that had nothing to do or say about it. My choice is to fix it by electing enough people that will move us quickly to the right to save us. If that cannot happen then I vote for quick failure so we can finally start to rebuild. I'm sick of the slow (currently not so slow) degradation that has been going on for so long. Fix or start over, now.

Undecided, but not voting for the statist party.
But its not about me. Its about the millions of conservatives who are lemmings for the GOP.