Replies

What if the investments/savings had to be FDIC insured investments but otherwise managed as an IRA is? Democrats could argue again that Wall Street might lose the money again, but right now they are arguing for (consumer) spending that FICA tax money now, so it definitely won't be there for retirement anyway. I think this would be an easy one for Republicans to win.

That would be an improvement, although Dems might argue that "FDIC Insured" can also lead to a kind of bailout (in fact, some in the GOP might oppose it for the same reason). But it would show that the GOP is aware that the Dems are trying for an ambush every time, instead of happily walking into the ambush, followed by a quick surrender.

"I think this would be an easy one for Republicans to win" may be a little optimistic, but it's better than a guaranteed defeat.

If the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of our government and the SEC were doing their jobs, we wouldn’t have to worry about this sort of thing.

These entities laid this at the feet of the financial institutions, even though they essentially forced those institutions into bankruptcy, and or watched on as sub-prime mortgages and the paper created by them, were devised and traded with glee.

Who stepped in to stop it in it’s tracks? NOBODY!

They essentially destroyed the credibility of Capitalism in on fell swoop.

Capitalism produces prosperity, when it is implemented properly. If we don’t understand that, believe it, and champion it, who will?

Seriously folks, either we say what I have said and support Capitalism, or we should simply lock the doors and go home, then allow socialism to rear it’s head so tens (if not hundreds) of millions more people can die in it’s sharp cold talons.

RE :”That would be an improvement, although Dems might argue that “FDIC Insured” can also lead to a kind of bailout (in fact, some in the GOP might oppose it for the same reason). But it would show that the GOP is aware that the Dems are trying for an ambush every time, instead of happily walking into the ambush, followed by a quick surrender.”

Maybe but it would force Democrats to oppose :
1) Taxpayers getting a personal choice/option on the FICA tax cut
2) Americans saving for their own retirement rather than having to beg the Obama type POTUS to tax the rich so they can get a few crumbs from SS in the future retirement. If any savings is a crap shoot rip-off with Wall street then we have no choice but to beg for welfare when we retire. They would be making that case.

And like I said, Democrats came up with the FICA tax cut with the Pelosi House a year ago, and they will demand it's extension through the election. Even after that who in DC will call for it to expire after these debates between parties?
Because of this the retirement savings option is essentially free and cannot be accused of taking money from SS.

If Republicans continue the same arguments they been using since the 90s we are doomed. Romney was already repeating Obama’s SAME DAY talking points on how Americans need this $40 FICA break to survive. Wait till the general election.

You are right about Republicans not able to send clear messages, it's pathetic

Thanks for playing devil’s advocate on this thread.

One key thing missing from many of the thoughts and ideas in the Republican echo chamber is how arguments will hold up in practice outside the echo chamber when put into real debate in front of voters/viewers moderated by the sometimes hostile MSM.