It has been a while since I last posted a diary here, but recent events have compelled me to the point where I feel the need to say my peace. When I was a child my father used to always tell me that sometimes you have to “call a spade a spade.” What he meant by this is that sometimes you have to speak up and say the hard truth even though no one wants to hear it. People might not like it, and because of that they might not like you. But in their hearts they know that what you say is the truth, and perhaps a small portion of them will respect you for admitting it.
Everyone knew that big government entitlement programs like medicare and social security were a bad idea from the start. Ronald Reagan himself went on record several times warning against the issues medicare would cause. No one listened. No one wanted to be the unpopular one and call the establishment out on it. Everyone saw all the easy senior votes racking up and were eager to cash in. Flash forward decades later and see where we are now. A presidential candidate finally calls out social security for what it is – a ponzi scheme. And the reaction was just what had been expected. “You can’t say that and expect to get elected.” “You will lose the critical senior vote.” “He didn’t really mean that we need to get rid of it.”
Rick Perry finally became the adult in the room, stepped forward and called a spade a spade. And he was right. Social security is a ponzi scheme. It isn’t going to last, as ponzi schemes never do. He said what he meant and he meant what he said. And he shouldn’t run from it. We need to sit down and make some hard choices. Perry has stated before that social security is unconstitutional. Many people might not like to hear that, but it is true. It is time to stand up and speak the truth that many people already know, but don’t want to hear.
I have heard many conservatives trying to defend Perry by saying he doesn’t want to kill social security. the fact of the matter is – he does. The methods that he proposes for this would do exactly that – kill social security as we now know it. The problem here is that no one wants to admit that that’s what needs to be done. There are three big gorillas in the room – social security, medicare, and medicaid. They all need to be placed on the endangered species list. They are big government entitlement programs that need to go away. They never should have been started to begin with.
But now is much different from then. People are starting to realize this more and more. Whether they want to admit it or not, they know it to be true. Reagan warned us against medicare. It passed anyway and look at the situation it is in now. Conservatives warned against Obamacare. Once it goes fully into effect in 2014 it will begin racking up dependants just like medicare did. And thirty years from now, establishment politicians will be afraid to say it is not sustainable. They will be afraid of ending it because of all those who have come to depend on it. Just like medicare. Just like medicaid. Just like social security.
Perry is right. He should not retract. He should not try to sidestep it. Social security needs to be “killed.” It is time to call a spade a spade.
Moe Lane
PG DeFreese
Victoria Coates
Daniel Horowitz
Dan Spencer
Has anyone noticed that
johnconradarens (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 10:25AM EST (link)“Social Security” has made Society decidedly Insecure?
It is not a Ponzi Scheme, though. Ponzi had to rely on his own charisma and chutzpah to sell useless equities to VOLUNTEER fools. FICA is compulsory.
Obviously, though, Social Security cannot be “killed”. Too many people have organized their lives around it as it is currently constituted. It needs to be seriously reformed, though, or, it will simply cease to exist of its own weight.
That's a technicality, since nobody was forced to invest in Ponzi
usdebateboard Wednesday, September 14th at 9:14PM EST (link)But the concept is the same, a purposeful and deceitful promise of benefits based on a knowingly dwindling pool of those paying into the system.
And Obama proved it by proposing a cut in the tax that funds it. Not a care in the world whether those benefits can be paid for or not.
I think Perry is spot on when it comes to Social Security.
So give me a cookie.
So quit saying you'll vote for Mitt Romney
perry4prez Wednesday, September 14th at 9:19PM EST (link)in other threads. The growth of Unconstitutional entitlements and government spending is the most important issue of this election. I don’t like the in-state tuition stuff any more than you do but that is a minor point.
Are you sure Perry wants to kill social security?
jimmyg Wednesday, September 14th at 9:06PM EST (link)He has called it a ponzi scheme but he has not offered any solutions for the problem. social security faces. Maybe he has a plan, or maybe as you said he is going to kill it, but he has not let us in on on his plan yet.
http://www.rickperry.org/news/rick-perry-i-am-going-to-be-honest-with-the-american-people/
He's hinted that SS is unconstitutional
satchman3 Wednesday, September 14th at 9:24PM EST (link)POTUS takes an oath to protect and defend the constitution so if he persists that SS is unconstitutional he may back himself into a corner.
I’m very interested to see if Perry will back away from claiming SS is unconstitutional. I tend to believe that it probably is and would be very happy if he sticks to it but I’m not sure it’s a winning position to take.
I warned people here that there was a reason smart conservatives like DeMint didn't talk like that
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:31PM EST (link)The term “unconstitional” should not be tossed around lightly. I think many of us at the time of its creation would say that the SS is unconstitutional. However, it has survived challenge in the courts and more importantly, the Constitution has been de facto or implicitly amended to support the SS program.
The Constitution is in many ways simply a requirement that supermajority exist for an extended period of time for a new enumerated power. SS is supported by the vast majority of the country for decades. Frankly, someone in the Republican party should propose an amendment to make that point clear. Maybe Perry could get behind it?
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
For example . . .
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:36PM EST (link)If the House passed a requirement that all bills needed to include a constitutional justification, how do you reform social security if it isn’t constitutional?
How do we reform any pseudo-constitutional legislation?
This is of course another reason NOT to require constitutional justifications in every bill.
On a side note, the impact of a Balanced Budget Amendment is also worth thinking about. Would the Reagan tax cuts ever happened if there was a BBA?
Conservatives should be careful with the constitutional pronouncements. The Constitution is both powerful and fragile at the same time.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
A Republican amendment to enshrine Social Security?
usdebateboard Wednesday, September 14th at 9:36PM EST (link)You’ve moved from DeMint’s benign indiferrence to it being Constitutional to giving Social Security a big wet sloppy kiss just to placate some constituency you let out maneuver you, and stop the left from asking Republicans, “when did you stop beating your wife?”
Bad idea.
Enchilada sauce
acat (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:46PM EST (link)1 small onion, diced
1 tsp. vegetable oil
2 tbsp. poblano pepper, diced
1 tsp. oregano
1/4 tsp. cilantro
2 c. tomatoes, diced (fresh or canned)
6 oz. can tomato paste
1/4 tsp. brown sugar
1 tsp. cumin
1 clove garlic
1 sm. carrot, shredded
1 bay leaf
1/2 tsp. thyme
2 tbsp. parsley, chopped
1 tsp. salt
1/8 tsp. black pepper
1/4 tsp. cayenne pepper (or to taste)
Cut and remove seeds from pepper. (if you can’t find poblano peppers, green peppers will work, but it may need more cayenne pepper)
Saute onion and garlic in oil until onion is soft. Discard garlic.
Add carrot, poblano pepper, bay leaf and herbs. Stir well. Add tomatoes, paste and seasonings.
Simmer 1/2 hour. Remove and discard bay leaf!
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator
I knew usdebateboard would come through!!!
snowshooze (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 10:14PM EST (link)With a recipe comment!!!
So, usdebateboard, thank you so much for the recipe grade comment!!!
And Acat, this really looks like it might be the sauce I am looking for!
Betty Crocker, Joy of cooking, internet…everything was polluted with cheese or flour…
I think I am going to run home and give this a whirl!!!
( Unless dearest Wife Cindy has planned otherwise )
I have one other request, Acat for a recipe should usdebatebord find it in his heart to contribute just a bit more insanity…
BBQ Pork.
Chineese… the wonderful and horribly expensive stuff we dip in horseradish and roll in sesame seeds… oh geee… I attempt suicide with the stuff.
I bought 1/2 dozen pork loins and started in.
All my recipe research again… led me off to some distant variation… I never wound up with the red and slightly sweet product I wanted.
I invested in a bunch of spices, and tried two or three recipes, none were bad. But none were excellent, either. And none were red.
I am looking for the cats-meow…presentation grade…everybody worships me, butt kicking BBQ pork!
So… Acat… if you might have that one secreted away..
and if usdebateboard can unleash some more wisdom upon us…
If doing so would help support reform of the program, why not?
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:48PM EST (link)Maybe you are wrong about who would be out maneuvering who?
The goal is to actually accomplish meaningful reform. If we could create a private option with SS, and increase the magnitude of that option over time (say 5% in private accounts in 2012, 10% in 2020, etc)—amending the Constitution to PERMIT what we already have is a small price to pay.
If a reporter sais to Perry, “What if someone challenges the constitutionality of SS while you are President? What will your DOJ do?”
Maybe the best answer is to say “I would support an amendment”?
This is hardly a wet kiss to anyone. We could use more out of the box thinking on these issues. Our in the box thinking after all has worked so incredibly well.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
Because Perry is not afraid of the Republican establishement's shadow on SS
usdebateboard Wednesday, September 14th at 9:50PM EST (link)1) Nobody on SS or close to being old enough to collect it believes Republicans are gonig to yank it away from them.
b) Nobody who is 30 years old believes the lie that SS can always work the way it works now.
Kudos to Perry to moving toward that. We need more of that.
I support Perry, but you are wrong about nobody believing the scares
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:54PM EST (link)To call it the “establishment’s shadow” is to mischaracterize what the obstacles are.
I support Perry. I support entitlement reform. There is no rule that says we have to go about in a clumsy manner. The ponzi scheme talk is one thing. Unconstitionality is another. Its a distraction to people. Lets just proceed with a plan. I am looking forward to hearing some specifics on this from Perry. I hope people like Rubio, DeMint, Ryan, et al. share their thoughts with him as well.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
P.S. DeMint is NOT "indifferent" to Social Security
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 9:51PM EST (link)He passionately and consistently reassures seniors than the government must make good on its commitment, and that reform is the only way to make that happen. Paul Ryan, Rubio, and even folks like Rand Paul use similar language.
I am in favor of having explicit plans like the Ryan Roadmap that set a course for what we want to achieve. I am not wedded to using particular soundbites or catch phrases that may be counterproductive to the cause.
Substance over style . . . every time.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
He's indifferent to all the gum flapping about its constitutionality
usdebateboard Wednesday, September 14th at 9:54PM EST (link)Even the Republicans who don’t are hiding in the tall grass about the Ryan plan, which is not, as you propose, a Constitutional ensconcement of Social Security, just a small downpayment on making it sustainable.
I didn't say the Ryan Plan ensconced SS
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 10:01PM EST (link)My point is simply that substance is more important that style. Big broad brush pronouncements on the Constitutionality of a program that enjoys sufficient support to actually amend the Constitution if necessary is not productive.
The folks in DC who appear to be conservative leaders that we have clearly go about things differently. I wouldn’t dismiss the implicit advice of a Senator DeMint.
My choice: Fix the programs, don’t get sucked into a history of the constitution debate on this issue.
Your choice: Use the broadest brave language possible, don’t worry about scaring anyone, and what?
My approach could actually work. The people in DC who actually want to fix these programs are clearly more towards my way of thinking than yours.
We should go out of way to reassure independents, seniors, etc that we want to reform entitlements not end them.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
That sounds like a living document argument
satchman3 Wednesday, September 14th at 10:32PM EST (link)I would agree that the term unconstitutional should be parsed carefully by political figures. I don’t see the basis for your comment:
“The Constitution is in many ways simply a requirement that supermajority exist for an extended period of time for a new enumerated power”
I don’t think that’s the case at all – so if SS was unconstitutional when it was passed then it still is since we’ve had no amendments to the contrary.
The Constitution CAN be amended by a super-majority
JSobieski (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 11:14PM EST (link)Sustained over a period of time. That is what the amendment provision is all about. The Constitution protects minority rights but it can’t stop a supermajority that is sustained long enough to amend it.
My rules of the road for primary season.
Rule #1: Vote for YOUR first choice in the primaries
Rule #2: Vote for the R in the general.
Rule #3: Don’t let anyone convince you to violate Rule #1 or Rule #2
Rule #4: When in a center-right argument, reaffirm Rules #1-#3–it will help us all to get along better.
Rule #5: If you are using the language of the left, you probably aren’t furthering conservativism
Rule #6: The priority is issues first, candidates second, and supporters third. Nobody is bigger than the issues. Conversely, if you spend your time focusing on supporters, you are wasting everyone’s time.
STOP THE MADNESS!
A reduction in the rate of spending increases is NOT a cut!
In-state tuition for illegals is NOT amnesty!
Requiring someone to pay their medical bills is NOT an individual mandate!
Reducing tax rates is NOT a tax increase!
In other words, you support no constitution at all
perry4prez Thursday, September 15th at 2:05PM EST (link)“The constitution has been de facto or implicitly amended to support the SS program, the Constitution is in any many ways simply a requirement that a supermajority exist for an extended period of time” – how can you make arguments like that and quote Ronald Reagan in the same breath?
You sound just like a judicial activist stretching the words of the Constitution by talking about penumbras and the “living Constitution”. “Implicit amendment”, that is no different from “living Constitution”.
Reagan nominated Bork who wanted to put and end to all this!
Row v. Wade has been the law of the land for more than 30 years now, Griswold even longer, do you think that abortion should now be constitutional just because a long time has passed since then?
There is only one way to understand the Constitution, namely what it says, and if what it says is unclear, what the Founders thought. A living constitution is no constitution at all.
555
runner12 (Diary) Thursday, September 15th at 5:42PM EST (link)NT
Great diary
perry4prez Wednesday, September 14th at 9:23PM EST (link)There are two big reasons why I decided to support Governor Perry, one his willingness to stop Unconstitutional social programs, and two his faith. We need to get out of the business of having Government be the answer to everything and getting back to having families take care of their own. That is the whole point of having Covenant families, we raise our kids right and they take care of us in old age. It’s obvious that Governor Perry believes this and only the liberal media is making him hide it somewhat.
Just to show you I like Perry (I really do)
usdebateboard Wednesday, September 14th at 9:39PM EST (link)I don’t think he (or you) should throw the word “unconstitutional” around like Obama throws around shrimp tails at an all-you-can-eat fried seafood joint.
Makes him sound like Ru Paul or Bachmann.
I certainly cheered when Perry dropped the bomb
lastgopinillinois (Diary) Wednesday, September 14th at 11:55PM EST (link)(that Social Security is a Ponzi-scheme). Finally, a politician telling it like it is, I said to myself.
I am not concerned with semantics so much at this time as I am with selecting a candidate who would at least support some type of meaningful reform.
I have always been in favor of “phasing-out” the entitlements, but privatizing, or making the contributions voluntary would be fine with me for now, as long as the plan can get them on a sustainable path.
The most important thing right now is learning who truly has conservative values on all the issues. The details can be worked out later, and i’m sure we can produce something meanigful if we elect a GOP majority senate with our new President !
In the beginning, God created earth to be an extension of his vast Kingdom and his LOVE was so great that he wanted to share it with man, whom he created in his own image and likeness and gave him free will.
To this very principal, the Founding Fathers of our nation decreed that freedom is a God-given in-alienable right of all the people.
Ponzi scheme?
mort Thursday, September 15th at 6:21PM EST (link)History: Social security was never intended to be a program to help retirees. Of course it was portrayed as that, but its real purpose was to fund the new deal. As correctly stated, FICA is a payroll TAX, not a voluntary contribution like any of us could make to an IRA or pension plan. Therefore the collected tax is no longer the contributors, it’s the governments. There should be no expectation of getting “your” money back. In a ponzi scheme, the investors do expect a return.
By law, at its inception, the tax collected had to be invested in US treasuries. Meaning the collected tax was loaned to the feds to fund FDR’s recovery programs of the 1930′s. The hope was that most people would die before 65, so little of the tax would have to be used for its stated purpose. They knew it would take years until the payout would exceed the tax collected. Someday we will reach those years. Sooner if we cut payroll taxes any deeper. But in the meantime (75 years), it has successfully given the feds money to spend (waste) to buy votes.
Gov. Perry does not have a plan for SS
jimmyg Friday, September 16th at 8:22AM EST (link)I question the usefulness of throwing out the Ponzi Scheme rheoric, when Gov. Perry has no plan to reform SS. The diarist seems to think that Gov. Perry’s plan is to kill SS. I am sure others have a different impression as to what Gov. Perry’s plan is for SS. As it is he does not have a plan. It could be said he is trying to have it both ways.
“No one gets confused about the point I was making, that we have a system that is now broken. We need to make sure that those on Social Security today — and those approaching it — know without a doubt it will be in place. It will not go away. We’ll have a transitional period for those in mid-career as they’re planning for their retirement. And our young people should be given some options. I don’t know what all of those options need to be yet, but they know instinctively that the program that is there today is not going to be there for them unless there are changes made.”
Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2011/09/15/rick-perry-exclusive-the-gops-fiery-front-runner-on-his-rise-record-and-rhetoric/#ixzz1Y7JAVuJQ
H/T Time
For a number a years now
funwithknives Friday, September 16th at 4:52PM EST (link)Social Security sends me and my wife a yearly tally of *Voluntary Contributions* and projected income at early and full retirement points. If I’m not mistaken, this was started right around the time privatization was initially bandied about, and is now an annual event.
I save ‘em all to use for future reference, even though there are Lotsa “Qualifiers” and exceptions, all over them.( “We will, but maybe we won’t…”)
I remember the first time one of those showed up..
acat (Diary) Friday, September 16th at 4:59PM EST (link)I initially thought it was fron a 401k from a previous job that I’d forgotten to transfer… then I realized what it was and laughed.
And yeah, this came up about the first time privatizing SS gained traction. Another well-packaged little lie, eh?
Mew
——
Caveat Suffragator