Breakdown of Vivek Ramaswamy’s Heterodox Policy Positions

Anthony Galli
8 min readOct 7, 2023

Imagine running for president where basically your only credential is you got rich off of convincing a lot of people to invest in failed drugs.

Imagine running for president where you largely kept your mouth shut about politics because you didn’t want to upset the powers-that-be only to start speaking out once you saw a way to personally gain from it.

It’s one thing if such a person said, “Yeah, I profited from failure and cowardice, therefore, I know how to fix our socio-economic system so these shortcomings aren’t as profitable in the future!” But instead, Vivek acts like he got rich from good ol’ fashion honest hard work.

But I don’t want to focus on how he prioritized self-preservation over the national interest as much as I want to focus on his policy positions because on the macro I like that he’s against raising overall taxes (signed the taxpayer protection pledge) and spending (opposed the debt deal), but let’s focus on some of his more interesting heterodox policies that have garnered him so much of his notoriety

He says he supports more child care, “I’m unapologetically pro-life, but I believe we need to walk the walk when it comes to being pro-life… by helping women get to ‘yes’ through child care, including some ability to draw from Social Security earlier on in life when you actually need it in order to provide for child care. And then also foster, even through the law, greater responsibility for men. Now that we have paternity tests I think there should be greater responsibility of confirmed fathers.”

But why is child care a federal responsibility?

And there’s nothing in Social Security to “draw from.” Social Security is a redistribution of wealth from those who are currently working to those who are currently retired or disabled. The rest is just rhetorical smoke and mirrors.

And then he talks about using the law to force confirmed fathers to take greater responsibility, but clearly, Uncle Sam is in no position to tell fathers how they should parent. I believe fathers should be equal to mothers — equal rights, what a concept!? — so both should automatically get 50/50 custody and then only if a parent is found guilty of a crime such as physical abuse should the…

--

--