Posted on 09/08/2011 3:41:18 AM PDT by justiceseeker93
It is both a ponzi scheme and intergenerational theft.
listen, if i’m gonna get raped, let it be by my enemies and not those who call themselves my friends. i will NOT vote for romney. period.
And that is the only reason it was asked.
I receive SS. I also believe that my country and my progeny would be far better off if the whole scheme were terminated right now.
Thanks for the ping!
And therein lies the problem. How can a people become dependent upon a system that has stolen from generations and yet is now empty? The system needs to be scrapped as it was a monstrosity the day it was first proposed. Why should we trust the system if it has shown time after time that it cannot be trusted adn continues to break the Constitutional restraints that have held tyranny at bay thus far?
Inreased national debt, increased entitlements, increased illigal immigration, etc. etc.
Two words—Roberts and Alito.
Spoken like a TRUE PATRIOT! Hats off!
He said that last night. The more I think about the events of last night, it is clear that Rick Perry is the one with the courage to take on Obama. He was the one that was right on the issues of SS, jobs, the scam of global warming and the death penalty.
With Gore or Kerry we would have had all of the bad things in spades, and none of the good.
It just isn't credible to say that Bush was as bad as those running against him.
Good grief, it is a long way until the election. There will be much more said than just last night. How much can one explain in a minute or two? You had unrealistic expectations.
Thank you for some sanity. Obama is so bad, even Ron Paul would be superior and he doesn't even know radical Islam exists.
No, make it seven--illegal immigration, entitlements, deficit, economy.
No. It isn't.
As a man and as a human being, George W. Bush towers over the likes of Kerry, Gore, and both Clintons by light years. He is a man of decency, principle, and honor.
We agree on that 100%!
Perry can and will achieve it. He does things in his own way and time. Cannot be put in the mold of someone else.
Palin could also probably do it. However, I don’t know what she has said about the issue in the past or how she said it.
I do know Perry’s book “Fed Up” put that issue right out there in the plain light of day, so I’m more familiar with that. I admire Perry for becoming known as someone who will tackle that issue head on, looking Americans straight in the eyes and delivering the truth.
I would proudly vote for Sarah if she is nominated. However, I don’t subscribe to the notion that she will quickly overwhelm everyone and sweep to victory if she is. Therefore, I have nervous qualms about her being the nominee, not because of who she is but because of her vulnerabilities being exploitable out the wazoo.
I will say this. Both Perry and Palin might just benefit from who their enemies are.
They have many of the same enemies. Rove and company don’t like either one of them. The Lamestream Media despise them both. The Dem Left would like to see them dead, I’m convinced, just for the fact they breathe air and they believe what they believe and have the “gall” to say it in the Left’s faces.
Both are from politically incorrect states, AK and TX.
The good news is, their worst enemies whether Republican or Democrat or Media, aren’t very well liked by a lot of Americans, either.
Exactly!
I'm not a Romney supporter, but I'd suggest you go through his bio more carefully before making that crass statement. Yes, it helps to have a father who was CEO of a large corporation and a governor of a large state for three terms. But, to the best of my knowledge, Mitt is a Harvard law school alum and founded a successful company. And getting elected governor of Taxachusetts in the 1990s is no mean feat for any Republican, let alone one whose roots were out-of-state, who is a Mormon, and who comes from an upper crust background. So he has some impressive accomplishments which many sons of celebrity fathers have never even approached.
IF you think of it like Madoff’s ponzi scheme, it will make sense. It was bad of Madoff to run an “investment” that was actually a Ponzi scheme. But his investors were duped — it isn’t their fault they invested.
So to the degree possible, we try to get the money Madoff stole back, and return it to the investor who lost money.
In this case, it is much more serious than investors who were putting up their excess for big returns. Social Security, sad fact though it is, is the only money for a lot of seniors. And the crook who ran the ponzi scheme is our own government.
SO yes, we are going to make the government live up to it’s promises, at least for those who are so close to retirement that they really can’t recover from the failure of social security.
Every plan to make SS solvent does that — sets a cutoff age where people will be held harmless, and then for the rest, tries to offer changes that still let them get back some of what they paid in, while keeping it from bankruptcy.
And if the democrats threaten that SS checks will stop, they are absolutely right — if we do nothing, the checks will stop, because we will go broke.
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.