The Extra List: 5 Facts About Vice-Presidential Candidate Paul Ryan's Wife

Paul Ryan holds that self-interest is the only reasonable motivation.
He does not embrace the entire Ayn Rand philosophy, but he admits that ”Ayn Rand did the best job of anybody to build a moral case of capitalism”.
I want to show him that by combining these two premises and by helping to implement them the new US Presidency can balance the budget even before 2040, which is their goal.
I do not know how to get in touch with Paul Ryan. Maybe you can relay to him this comment of mine.

To balance the budget the demand for products and services must grow. A much larger demand will create productive jobs and increase the demand even more. Keeping taxes at rates not higher than now, the government revenue will increase and the government will be able to balance its budget.
So the problem is how to increase demand.
Very rich people may spend much more than rank-and-file employees, but rich people are not numerous enough to create the bulk of demand. A significant increase in demand can come only from the workers; a worker always wants to buy more than his wages can afford him to buy.
Printing more money to pay higher wages is not the solution. I do not have to explain that, do I?
So here is the problem and the solution to implement.
The problem is that employers regard themselves only to be eligible to profits. They say that their employees do not risk anything, while they do, and therefore their employees must do their best for the (always above average) wages they pay them.
This fallacy cost employers an arm and a leg.
Employees do carry risks. They may be injured and killed on the way to their workplace, on the way from it and at the workplace. They come to the workplace with a skill that may be overridden by new technologies. They may lose their job due to worsening market conditions or corporate mismanagement. They age on the job and may find it impossible to find a comparable job at their older age.
Employees do not come to the workplace to enrich their employer. They come to obtain their wages and make sure the employer stays in the market, so the job will be there. The employee’s productivity is adjusted to a level of corporate survival. Peers make sure no one among them exceeds this level of productivity. Immediate supervisors work toward the same goal, because eager beavers raise the superior’s question, “Why only him?”
So, now we know the problem. And here is the solution.
An employer should offer to all his employees an option to take responsibility for corporate losses, if and when they materialize. I know from personal experience that about 10% of employees will take this option right away. These 10% should be paid out the profit their labour generates.
These workers-entrepreneurs (not employees any more, not usees) will not stay satisfied with a level of profit they used to create for their employer. Now they are motivated by self-interest to maximize the profit on their labour. Their productivity will multiply. They will also make sure the remaining employees keep their noses to the grinding wheel. The employees won’t like it. They will join the Entrepreneurial Mode of Labour Utilization (MLU) at the next opportunity their employer will grant them.
The workforce of this enterprise brings the enterprise to the forefront of the industry. Other employers in the industry must join the new MLU for fear of being defeated in competition.
The employer makes much more profit on his means of production (all expenses minus wages) than he made before on all expenses including wages. The workforce earns much more, in wages and profit on labour. They buy much more and create the bulk of demand. The increased demand creates productive jobs. More jobs and higher workforce’s earnings increase government revenues and budget can be balanced early.
Besides, there is no cause for “overproduction” and recessions.
Look up www.ProfitOnJob.com