Stop playing lame political games. You know damn well the intent is to honor financial promises to people too old to go back to work and transition to a system that would work for everyone else of a younger age. That has been the conservative position for a long time well before his book was even written.
Then it would be nice if Perry said how he plans to honor the financial promise to people too old to go back to work, and what that transition for younger employees would be. And also a definition of 'too old to go back to work' would be nice as well. Are you saying some people already drawing benefits would be told, "You can work. Hit the bricks and find a job?"
Thank you.
Perry in no way suggested that “it’s a Ponzi scheme but it’s a good Ponzi scheme”, to quote the poster’s comment.
Our kids won’t get any of it, because the money won’t be there when it’s their turn. That is the “monstrous lie” part that Perry was calling it.
I don’t know of anyone who seeks reform who doesn’t have a two pronged approach...one, pay benefits to those who depend on it now and to those soon to receive it, because it’s what they planned on and need, and two, change the system for our kids so they will have something for their senior years.