Posted on 09/08/2011 7:17:47 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Anyone hoping or fearing that Rick Perry would crash and burn in his first GOP debate last night can either feel depressed or rest easy.
In his debut on the national stage, Perry proved he possesses a somewhat indefinable star quality -- exactly what Republicans were distressed to feel was missing from the field.
That quality emanated from him even when he struggled with difficult questions about his views on climate change and Social Security that present complex electoral challenges for him and his party in a national race. He knew when to speak strongly and when to underplay.
......The real controversy arose from his decision not to run from the attack he launched on Social Security in his 2010 book “Fed Up,” but rather to say that politicians need to be honest about the Ponzi-scheme nature of the old-age pension system.
......He’s right -- it is a Ponzi scheme. The challenge for Romney now will be making the case to primary voters that it will be fatal for the GOP’s shot at denying Barack Obama a second term to have a candidate who calls it a Ponzi scheme. He’ll have a strong case to make.
But there is something striking in the contrast between the two men. Romney looks like a casting director’s idea of a president, and after running for the office for four years solid now, he has an enviable fluency and command of the stage.
Alas for him, there’s a reason he was unable to solidify his own status as a front-runner: He just doesn’t seem to have “it” -- that elusive quality populist politicians who find a connection with ordinary voters seem to possess.....
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Don’t get me wrong. I agree with him 100%. SS is a ponzi scheme. No doubt about it.
I’m just not so sure bringing it up now, at the beginning of the R primary season is the right thing to do.
What is to be gained? There are enough issues to run on without this one: repealing ObamaCare, defunding federal agencies, and a whole host of other issues.
I would rather Perry had introduced the subject of SS more slowly, after he’s elected president.
The Social Security system in my opinion is definitely a ponzi scheme. I am also against the Ryan plan because it fleeces those of us who are in our forties and early fifties, millions of Americans who have contributed to the social security system for 20 to 30 years and would be totally screwed by the government raising the eligibility age, reducing benefits, means testing, etc..
However, there is a relatively easy way to fix the social security problem. For those of us in our early fifties and younger and who have contributed for 20 - 30 years into the “system,” it is apparent that we are not going to get out of social security what we put in.
The government is either going to have to reduce benefits, means test benefits, or raise the age of eligibility or a combination of the three. These solutions are already being proposed and a combination of the three being enacted is a given.
So go ahead and raise the retirement age, reduce benefits and means test. But in conjunction, a relatively equitable solution is for those of us who are ages 51 - 55, give us a lifetime future 70% federal income tax credit on federal income taxes owed on amounts up to $100,000 per year from now on so that we can start to save the difference now for our retirement years.
Those younger than 51 can have the tax credit percentages staggered downward. For example: 46 - 50, 60%; 41 - 45, 50%; 36 - 40, 40%; 31 - 35, 30%; 26 - 30, 20%; 21 - 25, 10%.
This way the federal government can go reduce and reduce its substantial entitlement obligation, but will forced to reduce its entitlement obligations in other areas given the immediate reduction in its tax revenue stream(unemployment benefits, medicare, medicaid, welfare, etc.).
The benefits will be that the general tax burden will be decreased, spuring job growth and resulting in an eventual increased tax revenue stream from a healthy, growing economy, and people won’t be entirely deprived after having contributed up to 35 years into the social security ponzi scheme.
With increased tax revenues from a growing economy we would hopefully be able to reduce and eventually retire the debt.
However a fair tax and/or low flat tax would be necessary so the federal government doesn’t just enact the above referenced tax credits while raising taxes in general.
Now this would be change we could believe in and would incentivize and reward the work ethic once again, while recognizing the reality that the Social Security system as we know it is broken and we can’t fix it without substantial restructuring.
For those of us who are in our mid 50s and younger, we have to recognize that those Social Security “income projections” which we receive in the mail from the government are false promises and will never come to pass.
What bothers me is why the RNC allows Republican debates to be moderated by leftists. That is insane. Why don’t they get Hannity or someone like him to moderate? Who’s really running the show here?
I would so LOVE to see any Pubbie candidate bring up the subject of TSP accounts, because it would put any incumbent Dim in an very awkward position to have to tell how much they--or their fellow Congress critters--have earned through investments in this PRIVATE investment plan.
I would so LOVE to see any Pubbie candidate bring up the subject of TSP accounts, because it would put any incumbent Dim in an very awkward position to have to tell how much they--or their fellow Congress critters--have earned through investments in this PRIVATE investment plan.
He told me what I want to hear on the domestic front. I still don’t know his foreign policy philosophy. Foreign policy is where Santorum loses me. Paul is way too far to the left, but enough of the wars to democratize the world where the American people get nothing out of it.
PERRY DIDN'T BRING IT UP....he has never brought it up...he is asked the question and he answers the question. It'd look pretty pathetic if he dodged the question every time it was asked, wouldn't he? So he is damned if he does and he is damned if he doesn't. So let us get real here.
Which GOP presidential candidate do you think won the Politico/NBC debate?
Online Poll: Who won Wednesday’s GOP debate at the Reagan Library?
Who ‘won’ the GOP Reagan Library Debate on Immigration? (Poll)
Was Ron Paul even there?
Well, when Bush RAN on fixing SS through private accounts, among other things, he WON. So SS may not be the third rail anymore - but Perry is going to have to get a proposal out there pretty quickly to show how he intends to address the problem. He has rightly identified the problem, but people want to see a solution as well. If he can do that, and can reassure current and near-future recipients that they will not lose their benefits, he can actually make this argument a winner.
All those polls point to one thing - a failure of leadership. By Obama, of course, but also by the vast majority of politicians in both parties - and also by a biased media that sees the issue more as way to advance their agenda than as a problem that needs to be addressed.
Everybody knows the current SS system is unsustainable but most politicians are afraid to begin to explore fixes. Since the Democrats are lying suckasses for the socialistatusquo, its on the GOP leadership to start the movement.
And they need to ignore the reprehensible bleating from an agenda-driven press corps, determined to score political points rather than right the nation.
This didn’t happen over night and it’s basically busted. People know this.
Either we make changes around the edges and whistle past the graveyard, or we can have something good come from this and make it something other than our money passing through government fingers and out the door to someone they want to attract to their camp. Government needs to get out of our way and stay away from our earned resources.
I see this as an opportunity, not as a problem.
I did not expect any GOP “stars to be born” on an MSNBC forum. It was framed as a “gotcha” attempt to decimate Rick Perry and it didn’t work.
I'm reminded of a couple quotes from wise men of history...
"Some men run for office because they want to do something. Others run for office because they want to be something."
"Those are my principles. If you don't like them I have others."
I have no interest in helping Mitt fill out his resume.
I wonder why the GOP thinks the only viable candidates are those coming out of TX or NH? It’s like any other Republican candidate doesn’t stand a chance in h_ll!
Perry’s not my first choice, but I’ll hold a soft spot in my heart for anybody who can rid the body politic of Romney.
You make good points in your post#51.
We have two Governor Goodhairs. Perry and Romney. Just on looks and presentability they can beat Bammy by 10-15 points. Just comparing Moochelle & Bammy Boy to Mitt and his wife and Perry and his wife the Republicans come out way ahead. Don’t laugh, people vote based on what they see on TV with “the issues” being secondary. They will like the way Rick and Mitt come across on the boob tube much better than the mangy mopey Kenyan
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.