Perry’s scorn for Social Security won’t be issue in GOP primary
In his 2010 book “Fed Up,”, Texas Gov. Rick Perry didn’t hold back in expressing his scorn for Social Security and Medicare.
Social Security, he wrote, is a “Ponzi scheme,” “a crumbling monument to the failure of the New Deal” created “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government.”
It’s going to be fascinating to see how that language plays out politically. In a recent CNN poll, 64 percent of Americans said they oppose making “major changes in Social Security and Medicare” as a means of addressing the debt problem, while only 35 percent supported the idea. Those numbers suggest that Perry’s statements could become a serious problem in a general election.
(A Wall Street Journal/NBC poll released in March produced similar numbers. Only 18 percent said Medicare cuts were necessary to “significantly reduce” the deficit, while 54 percent said they were not. Just 22 percent said cuts to Social Security were needed, while 49 percent said they weren’t.)
At first glance, you might think that Perry’s position would be a liability in the GOP primary as well. According to the CNN poll, only 42 percent of GOP voters say they would support major changes in Social Security and Medicare, while a large majority of 57 percent reject the idea.
Theoretically, that should open up a two-pronged attack against Perry for somebody like Mitt Romney. By defending Medicare and Social Security against major cuts, Romney could align with a majority within his own party. It would also allow him to make the case that Perry’s extreme position might cost him the general election against Barack Obama.
But Romney hasn’t taken that course, and I don’t think he ever will. Here’s why.
It gets down to the difference between music and lyrics. Lyrics provide the words, but the music is what makes people get up and dance. It’s true in entertainment, and it’s true in politics as well.
If Romney criticizes Perry for taking an extreme view on Social Security and Medicare, he’d be getting the lyrics politically right. However, the music that GOP primary voters would hear is there goes RINO Romney, defending government entitlement programs. It is not a tenable position. It would be like standing in front of the GOP convention and singing “My Country T’is of Thee” to a hiphop beat.
It’s the music that matters.
– Jay Bookman
UPDATE: I should also point out that in the CNN poll, 80 percent of those identifying themselves as tea-party supporters say they support major cuts in domestic programs as a way to cut the deficit.
However, only 47 percent of tea-party supporters back major cuts in Social Security and Medicare; 52 percent oppose it.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
426 comments Add your comment
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:39 am
jm: Your evidence and assertion were wrong.
So my evidence and assertion that insurance isn’t a Ponzi scheme is wrong?
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:39 am
“aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand I stopped reading …”
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand you probably stopped doing that long ago. Would explain a lot actually.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:40 am
G$ — “Insurance is an investment. By nearly every concievable definition of investment.”
No, it’s not.
If you take out a term life policy, you should be fully aware that you can outlive the policy term and receive NOTHING in return for your payments. If you buy a term life policy and DON’T realize that, then you’ve got no business buying life insurance anyway.
“But hey. If you think that you choosing to buy a life insurance policy is the same thing as being forced to pay into SS then I am really not sure if you can be helped.”
I neither said nor thought such a thing. But hey. If you’re going to engage in discussion by putting words in my mouth and thoughts in my head, then I’m pretty sure that *you* can’t be helped at all.
I pointed out that SS *is* an insurance policy, not an investment. YOU made up and attributed the mistaken claim above to me, and I’d appreciate you showing a greater degree of honesty and character if we’re going to engage in discussion.
Dusty
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
USinUK
You are so cute! “Laugh flippin’ riot!” That will make me think of liberals here everytime I read it.
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
Adam, that wasn’t your assertion. Your assertion was three fold.
1. Social Security is an insurance program
2. Insurance isn’t a ponzi scheme
3. Therefore, Social Security isn’t a ponzi.
Item 2 in your logic is correct. Item 1 and 3 are completely wrong. Try again dude.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
Up to the end of Page 6 results:
Anti-Obama posts = 10
Individual anti-Obama posters = 8
Anti-Bush posts = 3
Individual anti-Bush posters = 3
Posts meant to skew the results = 2
New since Page 5 results:
TruthBe (AWARD WINNER) @ 11:29a – Congratulations, you are the most anti-Obama poster today. Be sure to write the RNC to claim your check.
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:32 am
No posted under same name except changed the S to a $ cause it kept getting caught and not posting my comments, hasn’t happened since the change.
Paul asked for my ideas he was given them.
And no I would not throw my parnets out in the street. They didn’t do that to me as a baby, I wouldn’t do that to them.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:34 am
May be the W collapse. Thats fine. But what has the presidnet one lately to change that trend?
Shovel ready was not so shovel ready, and I haven’t seen a plan lately from him have you?
Still doesn’t change my position that there are many benefiting from medicare and SS that don’t really need it. they simply abuse it because it makes their life a little easier.
oldguy
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
OK,
The truth
SS became a Ponzi scheme when LBJ and the Democrats STOLE the trust fund money in 1963 to pay for the “Great Society!” and the Vietnam war. Now all contributions go into the general tax rev fund!
SOOOO Perry is correct but since the government Forced us to pay into the scheme all these years we have no choice but to find some way to keep it afloat.
Medicare- Obozo says there are Billions in savings to be had by stoping fraud (see his Obozocare fiasco). OK Sport……SHOW US!! SHOW US THE SAVINGS and them reinvest them into the program to make it solvent instead of stealing them to bribe your non-participent voters!!!
Have to go move furnature…..later!
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
jm — “You’re factually wrong, my friend. Insurance funds purchase assets that are available to pay off liabilities. No such thing occurs in Social Security.”
The payments and investment proceeds from customers who DON’T make a claim simply go back to the pot in order to pay customers who DO make claims.
Insurance = Social Security.
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
11:42 am
get,
yes, what did the dems spend all that money on?
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
11:42 am
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
You didn’t count the “w collapse” by getalife at 11:34.
wouldn’t want you to have an artifical count.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:43 am
Come on th,
Use some personal responsibility and tell me what he spent the money on.
Never use those words again because he had to toss the kicken sink at the w collapse to save your 401k.
You take no personal responsibility for your party’s disasters.
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:44 am
“The payments and investment proceeds from customers who DON’T make a claim simply go back to the pot in order to pay customers who DO make claims.
Insurance = Social Security.”
Ahhh, the stupid it hurts. Between USinUK, Adam and Joe Mama, its enough to make me want to do what USinUK loves to do, go bang head on keyboard repeatedly.
But I’m smarter than that. Instead, I’m going to go lunch and a cappuccino.
oldguy
August 26th, 2011
11:44 am
Adam,
+1 to the anti-obozo posters!
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
11:44 am
Perry had the following to say about his thoughts on Social Security and it seems to make some sense when read sans a pre-conceived bias. I hope we can all agree that something needs to be done to shore up the entitlement programs. The status quo=down they go. I am not a big fan of Perry, at least not at this point, but he is willing, even if ill-advised, to discuss big issues. That may not serve him well in the whacked out system our election process has become, but…
Rick Perry defends stance on Social Security
By Maeve Reston
2:18 p.m. EDT, August 18, 2011
Reporting from Dover, N.H. — Texas Gov. Rick Perry told a voter in Dover, New Hampshire Thursday that he had no plans to change the Social Security system for those who are nearing the point where they would receive benefits.
“You don’t have to worry about anything,” Perry told an older man who asked him to explain his position during a visit to Harvey’s, a coffee shop in Dover. “There’s not going to be any changes in the program that we’ve got for folks that are your age. We’ll have a conversation with the rest of the country about what is the age that we start transitioning away from the program we’ve got now.”
“The folks who are either on or soon to be on, they don’t have anything to worry about. The program is going to be there,” he said.
Elections Earlier in Portsmouth, Perry faced a small crowd of protesters who took issue with what they described as his past statements questioning the constitutionality of Social Security.
In an interview last fall with Newsweek’s Andrew Romano, Perry questioned whether the Constitution gave Congress the power to enact Social Security.
“I don’t think our founding fathers when they were putting the term ‘general welfare’ in there were thinking about a federally operated program of pensions nor a federally operated program of health care,” Perry said, according to an interview trancript released last week by The Daily Beast. “What they clearly said was that those were issues that the states need to address. Not the federal government. I stand very clear on that. From my perspective, the states could substantially better operate those programs if that’s what those states decided to do.”
In his book, “Fed Up!: Our Fight to Save America from Washington,” Perry refers to Social Security as “an illegal Ponzi scheme.”
“Now, if you say Social Security is a failure, as I have just done, you will inherit the wind of political scorn,” Perry wrote. “Seniors might think you want to cut the benefits they have paid for. Politicians will seek to take advantage, stirring up fear about benefits that will be lost if you elect another ‘heartless Republican.’ I get it. That’s why only retired senators chair entitlement commissions.”
http://www.fox8.com/news/politics/la-pn-rick-perry-defends-stance-on-social-security-20110818,0,5596772.story
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:44 am
jm: I made no such assertion. I referenced all insurance programs, but did not specify Social Security as an insurance program.
But I am now. That’s exactly what it is. You claiming that outside assets other than the tax need to be there to make the difference between what’s a Ponzi scheme and what isn’t is where the fault lies, not with my assertions.
md
August 26th, 2011
11:44 am
“You’re the one comparing an insurance program to an investment”
Depends if we are talking “whole” or “term”………one IS an investment.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:45 am
Generation$crewed: Whoops! Added to the page 7 adjustment upcoming
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
11:46 am
AmVet
August 26th, 2011
11:31 am
Are all liberals demcrats?
BTW I’m only 30. The only time I ever was registered with a party was in college and I was a democrat then.
How does that work into your hysterical joke?
You need to understand that many in the younger generations currently 18-35 care waay more about the issue and ideas than we do about the political party. That is something your generation got into not so much ours.
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:47 am
“I referenced all insurance programs, but did not specify Social Security as an insurance program.
But I am now. That’s exactly what it is.”
Do liberals realize just how silly they look twisting in the wind? Do they understand facts at all or just feel a certain way, and make things up to justify it?
Answer to first question must be no, but the second appears to be yes.
USinUK
August 26th, 2011
11:47 am
“Be sure to write the RNC to claim your check.”
I thought they got a toaster.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:47 am
Jimmy62 — “Joe Mama- What SS was officially named when it started has nothing to do with what it is now.”
Educate yourself, Jimmy. It’s STILL called OASDI.
“It’s not insurance”
Yes, it is.
“and it’s not the same program it was when it was first created (for one thing, there was none of this mysterious empty “lockbox” stuff back then”
The “lockbox” never happened. Presidential candidate Al Gore advocated locking SS funds away so that the government COULDN’T borrow from it any more, and conservative pols and commenters alike howled with derision at his idea. Since Gore didn’t get elected, his idea was never implemented.
“and benefits were tied closely to estimated lifespans, which they are not at all anymore). If anything, it’s a massive transfer of wealth from black people (who tend to have lower lifespans) to white people (who tend to live longer past retirement age).”
I don’t think you will find many liberals who are opposed to making small changes to SS now in order to keep it solvent into the future. They may differ on specifics, but there’s no reason that small adjustments can’t be made to share the pain among all stakeholders in the matter. That way, no one group would get screwed.
Jay
August 26th, 2011
11:47 am
So jm, the obvious implication of your argument is that the excess payroll taxes that the working people of America have been paying since the early Reagan years — you know, the funds that were “borrowed” to run the general government — were in effect nothing more than disguised income taxes.
In other words, for almost 30 years the working and middle classes have been paying a surtax on their income that the rich were largely excluded from paying.
Do I have that right?
Seriously, if you make the argument you’re making, that the trust fund doesn’t exist, then you have no logical option but to agree with me.
Of course, that doesn’t preclude ILLOGICAL options…..
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:48 am
Adam really dude. I wouldn’t walk out of your house. Its dangerous out there for the unprepared and dim.
Really, out now.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:48 am
Generation$crewed: Shovel ready was not so shovel ready, and I haven’t seen a plan lately from him have you?
I can’t wait until “Where’s your plan?” Turns into “It took to long to come up with a plan!”
Just like it took too long to kill Osama bin Laden, and it took too long to release that birth certificate.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:48 am
gs,
You are a con.
Look at the jobs added. Two million jobs added trying to recover the over 14 million w lost.
Then your party took the economy hostage to give us our first downgrade.
Their strategy was to stop the recovery for this election and your cons will reward your terrorist party for this unAmerican action.
That is the cold hard truth.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:49 am
jm — “Soooo, insurance companies are just allowed to hold their own bonds and count those as assets? Try again. When I owe myself money, I don’t get to count that as an asset but not a liability USinUK.”
Surely you are not saying that US government debt is worthless, are you?
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
11:49 am
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:41 am
Up to the end of Page 6 results:
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
Thank goodness one amongst us is willing to do the heavy lifting of being the unofficial scorekeeper.
Bless your heart, Adam.
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
11:49 am
get,
just to make sure you know a little something about our government, can you tell me who explicitly determines how much to spend (or not spend)?
Lib In Cobb
August 26th, 2011
11:50 am
Perry will never make it through the primaries. There is an enormous amount of BS following him, which will eventually hurt him. The GOP is a Freak Show right now with a few semi-normals added in.
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:50 am
Jay
darnit. now i have to stay
“In other words, for almost 30 years the working and middle classes have been paying a surtax on their income that the rich were largely excluded from paying.
Do I have that right?”
Yes I agree. Taxpayers were robbed. People should PO’d about having their taxes looted. I accept that.
Now, one has to look at the current situation with massively ballooning deficits and say: what are we going to do to fix it?
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:50 am
jm: make things up to justify it?
pot, meet kettle. That’s exactly what you did to justify your unsubstantiated claim that SS is a Ponzi scheme. You defined both Ponzi scheme and insurance programs incorrectly.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:51 am
jm: darnit. now i have to stay
No you don’t. You can just up and leave and do what you need to do, and come back later. Lots of us do that and it’s fine!
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:52 am
Uncle Jed: I’ll keep doing it until I get enough of you to admit more people bash Obama than Bush here. And this is supposedly a liberal cesspool of hate!
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:53 am
Jay – and to follow up, the reason it sucks but there’s not much you can do about it is: the people who benefited from the looting are mostly dead, or in retirement. And since changing benefits for current retirees is off the table according to both parties…..
That leaves fixing the problem on the back of current workers (which includes me obviously). I am willing to accept it, liberals don’t
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
11:53 am
Adam-
Staying on topic here: Perry knows Social Security needs re-tooling and he also knows that Obama is the head of a failed administration. There, it was said. Add it to your tally
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:53 am
th,
I follow American politics very closely.
You have to do better than that or I will ignore you.
I doubt you watch c span when they are in session.
I do so step up your game.
jm
August 26th, 2011
11:53 am
now have to go, will check this later.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:53 am
Seriously, more cons come on here to bash Obama than I see on just about ANY OTHER liberal blog I have been to. What exactly are you trying to prove?
TruthBe
August 26th, 2011
11:54 am
TruthBe: Adam, Yes this economy is now ALL obama’s.
Weak. Very weak.
If you are referring to the economy, yes it is weak. But this economy is ALL Obama’s little boy Adam.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:54 am
Uncle Jed: There’s a reason I have a “Posts meant to skew the results” tally
md
August 26th, 2011
11:55 am
“Surely you are not saying that US government debt is worthless, are you?”
Well………S&P says worth “not as much”………..and heading down……………
We best figure out a way to shore it up………..or it may end up worthless.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:55 am
TruthBe: I’m referring to your response to my post. Assigning the entire economy to Obama is not only intellectually dishonest, it also has NOTHING to do with socialism.
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
11:55 am
And this is supposedly a liberal cesspool of hate!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Jay will not be pleased
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:56 am
Uncle Jed:
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
11:57 am
get,
ok since you obviously don’t know, i will tell you
Congress, Congress explicitly determines how much to spend (or not spend).
Now since you are a follower of politics, can you tell me which party controlled Congress, the body that explicitly determines how much to spend (or not spend), from Jan 2007 to Jan 2011? Can you also tell me what the deficits were for those years?
John Birch
August 26th, 2011
11:57 am
SS – Take off the cap make every dime of earned income subject to SS tax. MedicAre – Raise the participation age to 68, make everyone self insure until then.
Jay
August 26th, 2011
11:58 am
Well, jm, I appreciate your candor.
It seems we agree that for the past 30 years, working and middle-class Americans have been paying a surtax on their wages that more affluent Americans have largely avoided. As you put it, “Taxpayers were robbed. People should PO’d about having their taxes looted. I accept that.”
Your next question is perfectly logical: What do we do about it NOW?
For starters, we could let more affluent Americans begin to pay that same surtax that you and I agree has been imposed on their less affluent countrymen. Only fair, right?
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
11:58 am
Uncle Jed: There’s a reason I have a “Posts meant to skew the results” tally
++++++++++++++++++++++
Is there a FAQ section or an online tutorial available.
I really want to be counted in your “anti-O” column.
JKL2
August 26th, 2011
11:59 am
getalife- Jimmy62@1132 is for you.
md
August 26th, 2011
11:59 am
“Take off the cap make every dime of earned income subject to SS tax.”
Will never fly unless both caps are removed…………………….
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:59 am
jm — “Ahhh, the stupid it hurts. Between USinUK, Adam and Joe Mama, its enough to make me want to do what USinUK loves to do, go bang head on keyboard repeatedly.”
I’m perfectly willing to hear your explanation of why term insurance and SS are different, if you’ve got one. If, OTOH, you’re going to insist on comparing SS to whole life or universal life insurance policies, don’t bother.
“But I’m smarter than that. Instead, I’m going to go lunch and a cappuccino.”
I gratefully accept your concession, jm. Do enjoy your lunch!
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:00 pm
th,
You dodged about what they spent the money on so you are just another con with no personal responsibility for your party’s destruction.
Next.
RGB
August 26th, 2011
12:01 pm
That you would term Perry’s concern for a system that is universally recognized as unsustainable and doomed to failure as having “scorn” for Social Security marks a new definition for the word.
Would you rather he express “ecstasy and delilght” for a system that is actuarially headed for Obamageddon?
md
August 26th, 2011
12:01 pm
“For starters, we could let more affluent Americans begin to pay that same surtax that you and I agree has been imposed on their less affluent countrymen. Only fair, right?”
Sure……….as long as both caps are removed……………
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
12:02 pm
Yo, Jay:
Social Security, he wrote, is a “Ponzi scheme,” “a crumbling monument to the failure of the New Deal” created “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government.”
++++++++++++++++++
I notice the “quote” attributed to Governor Perry has a couple of breaks as posted. I can only assume you used your editorial license to condense while preserving the entire essence.
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
12:03 pm
get,
i thought it was as you said, what Bush spent the money on…now its “they?”
i hope i’ve enlightened you a little today
Joe the Plutocrat
August 26th, 2011
12:03 pm
TruthBe; really?
Government controls their money in the form of taxation for the start. and whom, pray tell, ‘controls” the government?
Restrictions, laws and bylaws, who they can sell to and where. You know stuff like that for example. – I “don’t know” but again, from where do these “restrictions, laws, and bylaws” originate? ever heard of a lobbyist? every heard of crony capitalism? every hear of an oligarchy?
Also since you listed Goldman Sachs you should read about the inside deal that the obama administration gave to Warren Buffet. where did you read this, on Glenn Beck’s blog? Goldman Sachs “gave the deal” to Buffet and BUSH gave a deal to Goldman Sachs (it was called TARP and AIG was bailed out, instead of Lehman because AIG owed GS $90 billion and Hank Paulson was a GS employee).
No wonder Buffet’s up obama’s ass. I would too if I was given a inside trader deal on Goldman Sachs for 5 billion. Lets see how much is Goldman sachs worth today after we the taxplayers bailed them out. 200 billion? And Warren and company controls them because they got all the best voting stocks and were given control of Goldman Sachs. – see above. you got your “deals” messed up. AGIAN, Buffett invested $5 billion in GS in 2008 (while Bush was POTUS and BECAUSE of TARP). he also invested in GE, if you recall, and his “deal” came at the expense of other GE shareholders, just like his current “deal” with Bank of America comes via the B o Am shareholders (he has “preferred” stock, not common stock, and he is guaranteed a 5% ROI, whereas the rest have a .01 divident each Q.
No other large investor was given the same deal or opportunity Read a little more and some names like Shore Bank of Chicago, Climate Change Carbon Credit exchange, Chicago Excahange, Brokerage deal with Goldman Sachs, 4% worldwide commissions would come up. Yes folks it’s the oldest game in town the rich get richer by using their money and influence to bull politicans like little ole obama and the rest. Remember the golden rule” He who has the gold,Rules”.
listen, I ain’t saying Obama is not in Wall Streets pocket, I am saying every POTUS is, and that’s why Wall Street loves entitlements; the money is used to buy stuff.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:03 pm
jm — “I am willing to accept it, liberals don’t”
Well, that’s not true at all.
I’m sure we differ on specifics, but we accept that changes need to be made. However, opposing the GOP plans to dismantling SS or privatize it certainly aren’t refusing to accept the gravity of the situation — it’s simply opposition to the GOP’s opportunistic attempts to do away with SS or to cripple it if they can.
JKL2
August 26th, 2011
12:04 pm
Adam- So my evidence and assertion that insurance isn’t a Ponzi scheme is wrong?
Yes. Insurance is gambling. SS is a ponzi scheme. Hope that clarifies it for you.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
12:05 pm
Up to the end of Page 7 results:
Anti-Obama posts = 10
Individual anti-Obama posters = 8
Anti-Bush posts = 4
Individual anti-Bush posters = 4
Posts meant to skew the results = 3
New since Page 6 results:
getalife @ 11:34a – a Bush bashing that was on page 6. I missed it, oops.
Don’t worry, I’m sure you’ll get your chance 
Uncle Jed @ 11:53a – add one to “Posts meant to skew the results.”
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:06 pm
th,
I will just add you to the other cons that deflect blame and take no personal responsibility.
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
12:06 pm
Adam,
I can’t wait for the debate between Bush and Obama…oh wait
md
August 26th, 2011
12:07 pm
I have to disagree with the premise Joe that ts is like term insurance…….with term insurance, one only gets the benefit if one dies within a specified period. SS is not set up that way. It is set up where one pays a premium for a specified benefit later down the road.
If one wants to compare it to other insurance products, it is more like an annuity……………
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
12:07 pm
get,
i will add you to the “already gone” list
Common Sense
August 26th, 2011
12:07 pm
if it’s not a Ponzi scheme, then there would be no risk of shortfalls to Social Security without either A) telling some folks they are no longer entitled to what they should otherwise be, or B) being forced to find a new source of funding for the payouts to continue.
Yet we have both.
Insurance, on the other hand, collects enough in premiums to cover the future payouts/liabilities in the future.
Is this happening with Social Security today? No.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
12:08 pm
md: both ice caps?
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
12:08 pm
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
11:40 am
Do you get a return on all investments?
Could one not say you are investing in insurance, in case something happens?
MrLiberty
August 26th, 2011
12:08 pm
Social Security, he wrote, is a “Ponzi scheme,” “a crumbling monument to the failure of the New Deal” created “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government.”
Why is this a controversial statement? Every word is true. Yes, millions have been lied to and stolen from and are now dependent on this monumental con job, but everything he said is right on the money. Indeed, the solution to this bankrupt ponzi scheme must take into account the millions of victims of this government swindle, but the solution can only be found by first admitting that you were conned and that government is a fraud and a liar of the greatest sort.
Ron Paul proposes bringing home all the troops and cutting the empire budget by massive amounts and using those funds to shore up SS, Medicare, and other failed government entitlement programs and allowing those who wish to get OUT of the system. This will end the perpetuation of these failed systems and allow folks the opportunity to begin saving, etc. for their own futures. Of course this will require ending the federal reserve, restoring a sound currency, etc. so that savings are not destroyed by government caused inflation as is the case today.
Ron Paul 2012. Perry is just a pozeur.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:09 pm
“I can’t wait for the debate between Bush and Obama”
We had that debate last cycle and our President crushed him but you cons are the sorest of losers.
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
12:09 pm
Adam- did you catch this one?
++++++++++++++++++++
actuarially headed for Obamageddon?
Adam
August 26th, 2011
12:10 pm
Talking Head: I do count Perry = Bush posts as anti-Bush posts. So far I have seen NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THOSE today.
Your point is moot. I am tracking because of the assertion that there are more Bush bashers on this blog than Obama bashers. Who do you think has more?
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:10 pm
JKL2 — “Yes. Insurance is gambling. SS is a ponzi scheme. Hope that clarifies it for you.”
Sorry, nothing doing. SS has *always* defined itself as insurance, and it works like a term life policy. You either live long enough (to collect payments) or you don’t (and you get nothing) in the case of SS. For term life, you either die before the term expires (and your heirs then collect on the policy) or else you outlive it and receive nothing (I recognize there are ROP term life policies, but most policies sold are not that kind).
There’s no bucket of money anywhere with your name on it in the case of term life policies or SS. The only time you receive something is when you meet the terms of the ‘policy,’ be it the insurance company’s or SS’s. Otherwise, you get nothing, specifically BECAUSE there’s no bucket of money with your name on it.
This notion that SS is an investment is completely wrongheaded. It never has been was never meant to be and has never been meant to be comparable to them. It’s insurance, whether you like it or not.
Adam
August 26th, 2011
12:12 pm
LUNCH
Royce09
August 26th, 2011
12:12 pm
We voters have scorn for Rick Perry and we will show that scorn in the next several months, esp come voting time.
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
12:13 pm
“I can’t wait for the debate between Bush and Obama”
We had that debate last cycle and our President crushed him but you cons are the sorest of losers.
++++++++++++++++++++++
The last cycle was 2010. Not sure, but I seem to remember Team Obama was shut out.
The previous cycle was 2008. Bush had completed two terms and wasn’t seeking a third.
(note to Adam: You will count that as another Anti-Bush post, right? )
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:13 pm
Well, our President will not hand over a big pile of stinking crap if he loses like w did so to be factual, there should be more w bashing.
Talking Head
August 26th, 2011
12:15 pm
Adam,
hard to tell..i think varies by day and by topic
prob more anti Obamas right now…later today could be opposite
Uncle Jed
August 26th, 2011
12:15 pm
Your point is moot. I am tracking because of the assertion that there are more Bush bashers on this blog than Obama bashers. Who do you think has more?
+++++++++++++
Just curious, Adam. You getting paid for your services or working pro bono?
I’m out for vittles and fresh air…
md
August 26th, 2011
12:17 pm
Wrong Joe………just check your SS Statement…….it defines the benefit as contributions are made……..yes, one must reach the magic age, but after that, they are entitled to the payments…..which is why it is like an annuity.
Term also relies on an age, but also an outcome……death.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:17 pm
md — “I have to disagree with the premise Joe that ts is like term insurance…….with term insurance, one only gets the benefit if one dies within a specified period. SS is not set up that way. It is set up where one pays a premium for a specified benefit later down the road.”
I’m willing to grant you that it’s not *exactly* like term insurance, but you do have to die within a particular bound of time in order to collect. With term insurance, you have to die before the policy expires. With SS, you have to live long enough to collect.
“If one wants to compare it to other insurance products, it is more like an annuity……………”
Sort of, with limitations as above. With an annuity, you can buy in with a lump sum and never have to pay in again (if you’re that well off), although there are plenty that let you buy in over time (analogous to how SS works). However, SS has never described itself as an annuity, and that’s why I keep going back to that.
Surely this sniping back and forth serves no constructive purpose. How about we talk about ways to preserve SS for the future? Here are some ideas:
Modest increase to payroll tax
Modest trimming of benefits to retirees
Modest increase in retirement age
Lifting or eliminating the income cap
Instituting means-testing for retirees for reduced or waived benefits
Perhaps you have some ideas as well?
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
12:19 pm
Adam
August 26th, 2011
11:48 am
Can I borrow your crystal ball? Since you can predict what I will be saying once a plan is delievered.
Do you think it is a good thing that our president has not given a plan on the economy, or hell even a budget for his years in office?
Is that a good way to lead? Does our commander in chief not having a plan make you comfortable?
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:21 pm
md — “Wrong Joe………just check your SS Statement…….it defines the benefit as contributions are made…….”
That’s IF you reach the magic age. If you don’t, nothing. Ergo, no bucket of money with your name on it.
“yes, one must reach the magic age, but after that, they are entitled to the payments…..which is why it is like an annuity.”
Unless you die, in which case the payments stop — which is *unlike* annuities with periods certain. You can buy an annuity that continues to pay out to your estate or heirs even after you die. SS offers no such option (though your dependents, if any, may be entitled to benefits on your behalf).
“Term also relies on an age, but also an outcome……death.”
So does SS, in large part.
Royce09
August 26th, 2011
12:22 pm
Corporate/Rich welfare far exceed expenditures both on social security and medicare many times over. This does not count the TRILLIONS of dollars that have been scraped off the top of the American ecomony, via LOBBYING manipulations by actually writing and sponsoring laws, presented and passed by their flunky politican puppets which all have been designed to buke/steal trillions from the American consumers/government contracts. If a fraction of this money could be recovred social security, medicare and a national healthcare plan for all Americans would exist right now.. However that greedy 1 percent of the richest American will never let this happen – seems like it is time for our 200 year plus revolution to start – Americans will ONLY be trampled on SO LONG. I wish i was still young enough to take part.
Generation$crewed
August 26th, 2011
12:23 pm
getalife
August 26th, 2011
11:48 am
When do any of the effects on the economy become those of Obama’s?
All 14 million lost were a result of W?
So none of the policies inacted by President Obama have cost anyone their job?
All 14 million are soley Bush’s fault. Interesting take, how objective of you.
Continue to call me a con, it shows that massive level of maturity that you are able to achieve. My 5 year old does the same thing when he doesn’t have anything intelligent to add to the conversation. He usually goes with stupid head though. maybe you can try to incorporate that in as a curveball from con.
Not So Casual Observer
August 26th, 2011
12:23 pm
As for Perry’s comment, as presented by Bookman – truth is always best defense. Bernie Madoff went to jail for much less a scam than Social Security. SS was originally designed to take the money and run without paying. The life expectancy at the time was 58+/- and benefits started after most were dead.
As for SS being most like whole life or an annuity, only someone who does not understand the concept could make such a statement. Whole life/annuity are still there for the heirs of the decedent while SS ends at death. Pay a hundred thousand dollars into SS and then die at 55. Say goodbye to the money!
Only the average Democrat or Obama supporter is too dense to see that SS and Medicare are unsustainable in their current form unless all of those who are currently outside the system are included – like Congress, federal, state, county and local government employees, teachers and the like are included.
Of course when a political party such as the Democrats panders to those too lazy or unmotivated to provide for themselves and thus waste a lifetime looking to the government for support, you should not expect an informed, intelligent voter. And the result is Barrack Obama.
Jm
August 26th, 2011
12:23 pm
Jay 11:58 you are assuming the rich were the ones that benefited
They did. And so did a lot other people that weren’t rich. It can’t be backtracked.
So, u have to say what are we going to do to fix it? And saying “the rich owe us” is oversimplification.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:26 pm
Extremely Casual Observer — “As for SS being most like whole life or an annuity, only someone who does not understand the concept could make such a statement.”
Yeah. That’s why I clearly compared it to TERM life insurance. Read more closely, please.
“Whole life/annuity are still there for the heirs of the decedent while SS ends at death. Pay a hundred thousand dollars into SS and then die at 55. Say goodbye to the money!”
Once again, I compared it to TERM life insurance. Go back. Reread. Repeat. Kthxbye.
md
August 26th, 2011
12:28 pm
With term insurance, you have to die before the policy expires. With SS, you have to live long enough to collect.”
With the difference being spousal/family distributions……….with term, one loses the benefit if one dies outside the specified term. SS has survor benefits even after death……….
Not trying to be snippy, just pointing out that I don’t see it like term………
As for fixing……I have no problem with most of your suggestions……except the cap. Taking off the cap on one end without taking off the cap on the other is basically a tax on prosperity………
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:29 pm
gs,
It is not just me.
Many Americans know it was the gop did not see it coming global economic collapse that cost us a decade of growth.
It is a accepted fact.
Donna P.
August 26th, 2011
12:32 pm
Silly Jay, it is over for Obama and you Progressives. Perry will be the President in 2012 and again 2016. The economy will recover, unemployment will drop, Obama Care will be repealed, the housing market will bounce back, and life will be good again for everyone. Corporations are not hiring until Obama is out of office because of his regulations and Obama Care. They are just sitting on their millions and waiting….
md
August 26th, 2011
12:33 pm
“As for SS being most like whole life or an annuity, only someone who does not understand the concept could make such a statement. Whole life/annuity are still there for the heirs of the decedent while SS ends at death.”
This is wrong…….you may want to do a bit more research…………
SS has survivor benefits………………………..
John Lewis
August 26th, 2011
12:33 pm
Perry will beat Obama’s Martha’s Vineyard butt!!! Obama will have the country in total government control and himself as the Grand Czar if the dumb masses continue to worship him!
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:35 pm
donna p,
Sitting on trillions when the American people desperately needs jobs is okay with you?
Party over country right donna?
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:35 pm
md — “……….with term, one loses the benefit if one dies outside the specified term. SS has survor benefits even after death……….”
Sure, but the benefits are recalculated. It’s not like there’s a fixed amount that transfers to your heirs. And under some circumstances, your heirs may not be able to collect at all.
“Not trying to be snippy, just pointing out that I don’t see it like term………”
Not at all; I appreciate your willingness to be both serious and polite in this discussion. I enjoy discussions where the participants disagree but can do so politely.
“As for fixing……I have no problem with most of your suggestions……except the cap. Taking off the cap on one end without taking off the cap on the other is basically a tax on prosperity………”
When you say “the cap on the other,” are you suggesting that there should be no upper limit on benefits?
Many forms of income are exempt from SS taxation; would you support removing those exemptions? Because I see them as a subsidy to the already-wealthy.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:36 pm
Sure deregulate the banks again.
Then don’t bail them out next time.
gop depression.
Joe Mama
August 26th, 2011
12:36 pm
getalife — “Party over country right donna?”
Shhh. Don’t wake her up. She is having a dream just now.
getalife
August 26th, 2011
12:39 pm
Joe,
I guess they really wanted a depression.
If they win, they will accomplish this goal.
I would hedge on it.
Grits
August 26th, 2011
12:45 pm
The important thing in the next election is to replace Obama. Joseph Stalin said that America could be destroyed from within and Obama’s accelerated that process to warp speed. Just imagine the damage he will do with another four years following in the path of Marx, Lenin and Stalin. He’s poison.
Steve
August 26th, 2011
12:45 pm
Seems an Amendment requiring all Goverment personnel to use SS & Medicare would get the dumbazzes in Washington to correct the flaws in both.