• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Perry no longer thinks SS is a Ponzi scheme.

RandFan

Mormon Atheist
RandFan
Joined
Dec 18, 2001
Messages
60,135
Perry releases op-ed on Social Security, honesty

"We must have a frank, honest national conversation about fixing Social Security to protect benefits for those at or near retirement while keeping faith with younger generations, who are being asked to pay," stated the USA Today op-ed.

Perry, the governor of Texas, has made waves in the past for calling Social Security a "Ponzi scheme." Perry doubled down on at Wednesday's Reagan Library debate, repeating his "Ponzi scheme" charge while also calling Social Security a "failure."

In response, a number of other GOP hopefuls made statements supporting the program. Mitt Romney, the former governor of Massachusetts, called his position "reckless" and "wrong."
Click to expand...
 
Perry doesn't think social security is a Ponzi scheme, but he does think this about it:

"The people who are on social security today need to understand something: slam dunk guaranteed that programme is going to be there in place for those."
Click to expand...

Can someone explain what that means, please?
 
It means Rick Perry has talked himself out of the Old People vote. Not a winning strategy for a Republican candidate.
 
Puppycow said:
Since he hasn't taken back those words or said that they were incorrect, I disagree with the thread title.
Click to expand...
Right. The thread title is a lie. The debate had some exchanges between Perry and Romney where Perry stood by this, and where Romney did not argue with the facts - only with the use of the word "Ponzi scheme", saying it might scare some people.

To which Perry replied "Well Obama scares people every day".

Perry said that younger people, who were not going to benefit from SS in their future, should be allowed to "opt out of the government scheme" and get some private insurance type plan.
 
mhaze said:
Right. The thread title is a lie. The debate had some exchanges between Perry and Romney where Perry stood by this, and where Romney did not argue with the facts - only with the use of the word "Ponzi scheme", saying it might scare some people.

To which Perry replied "Well Obama scares people every day".

Perry said that younger people, who were not going to benefit from SS in their future, should be allowed to "opt out of the government scheme" and get some private insurance type plan.
Click to expand...
This prompts the searching question, what are you paying tax for? I'm sure the guy at Philip Morris, Pfizer or GM are appreciative, but surely your tax should be used to help you in your time of need?
 
This sounds like his same position to me. He wants to do away with Social Security, except for the people now receiving benefits, or something like that.
 
mhaze said:
To which Perry replied "Well Obama scares people every day".
Click to expand...
As much as I dislike Perry, I felt a teensy weensy bit sorry for him when he said that. Actually, more embarassed than sorry, because it sounded like something a none-too-bright third grader might say.

Then again, we need to consider the audience he was catering to.
 
mhaze said:
Perry said that younger people, who were not going to benefit from SS in their future, should be allowed to "opt out of the government scheme" and get some private insurance type plan.
Click to expand...

Do I get back all the money I've paid for SS so far?
 
Skepticemea said:
Perry doesn't think social security is a Ponzi scheme, but he does think this about it:



Can someone explain what that means, please?
Click to expand...

What it means is that he intends to force people under 50 to keep paying into Social Security but doesn’t want to give them benefits when they retire.
 
Skepticemea said:
Perry doesn't think social security is a Ponzi scheme, but he does think this about it:



Can someone explain what that means, please?
Click to expand...

A quick translation:

Hey all you highly politically active folks who are currently collecting Social Security benefits, I will let you keep your Social Security checks if you don’t use your massive political clout to prevent me from slashing benefits for people down the line. I know that you will find this acceptable because you are all like me, sociopaths motivated purely by self-interest with no concern for the well-being of your children or grandchildren.
Click to expand...
 
Random said:
A quick translation:
Click to expand...

Hey all you highly politically active folks who are currently collecting Social Security benefits, I will let you keep your Social Security checks if you don’t use your massive political clout to prevent me from slashing benefits for people down the line. I know that you will find this acceptable because you are all like me, sociopaths motivated purely by self-interest with no concern for the well-being of your children or grandchildren.
Click to expand...

Appreciate that. :D
 
JoeTheJuggler said:
This sounds like his same position to me. He wants to do away with Social Security, except for the people now receiving benefits, or something like that.
Click to expand...
A choice to opt out is not the same thing as what you allege.
 
mhaze said:
A choice to opt out is not the same thing as what you allege.
Click to expand...
A couple of questions need to be answered first, otherwise it's all urine and gas flowage:

What percentage of income tax will be cut from the payees contributions and will that be required to be placed in private provision?

Will it buy you a finite amount of cover and what happens to you when that cover expires?

Will it be as reliable as private healthcare provision in the US and if so, is that a good idea considering 15%* of US citizens don't even have that?

*WHO stats.
 
Skepticemea said:
A couple of questions need to be answered first, otherwise it's all urine and gas flowage:

What percentage of income tax will be cut from the payees contributions and will that be required to be placed in private provision?

Will it buy you a finite amount of cover and what happens to you when that cover expires?

Will it be as reliable as private healthcare provision in the US and if so, is that a good idea considering 15%* of US citizens don't even have that?

*WHO stats.
Click to expand...

Are these trick questions? Because your questions don't appear to be based in reality.
 
mhaze said:
No. Not a dime. It was a Ponzi scheme. Remember?
Click to expand...

So Perry proposes a plan in which younger people can opt out of Social Security, but in doing so they would lose any money already put it into, thus proving Social Security is a Ponzi scheme?

Wonderful logic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom