Posted on 09/09/2011 7:02:13 AM PDT by shield
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
What this means..is that they’ve already decided that OBama can’t win..so they’re starting to distance themselves..
The NYTimes on Palin and NOW this? EVERYONE hurry look out your windows and tell me if you see pig’s flyin!
From what I’ve read/heard...the dems know barry is burying the dem party...and they are in the mod to rid their selves of him...they want him out...they are even working with republicans to help that to happen.
“Certainly, poor people did pretty well,” Matthews replied. “That’s the idea.”
So...communism.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Ponzi Scheme is traveling ... people are talking of it ... this is how Rick Perry and his team campaign...nothing new to me since I’ve watched him campaign for years like this.
Right, but it makes everyone else poor in the process. I don’t think that works.
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” Winston Churchill
I’ve got a very liberal step-daughter who’s called it a Ponzi scheme. I think this is one area Pubbies can make inroads if they explain it carefully. Of course the Dems will demagogue the issue. As they always do.
Why is it OK for the Gov’t.?
It is just a system of corruption so politicians can have ready access to funds to buy votes and keep office.
PERIOD
So...communism.
Poorer people have fared well, because there's a lot of productivity in the system right now, or at least there had been. But communism has not historically treated people well; if anything, communism assures that if one person is living in misery, everyone will be living in misery!
Exactly. By being bold and telling it like it is, at a prez debate no less, the idea gets talked about a lot and this prepares the way for further discussion as the campaign continues. Perry is right for calling ss a ponzi scheme and I think most people agree with him. This can only help him. Mitt’s schadenfreude was premature and will get thrown back at him. What a fool, and what a windsock.
The point I was making was; “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”
Those moderators thought it was a gotcha question...they fell right into the Perry and his team’s trap so did Mitt. Nothing happened that the team didn’t won’t to happen in this debate. It’s even thrown supporters of Perry off...those folks do not know how to look at the big picture Perry and his team are looking at. They are most cunning...
The only way to shut down a Ponzi scheme is all at once.
People whining about “I just want back what I put in” don’t understand the problem.
There are some rather smart ideas out there. Dealing with Social Security and Medicare as the Ponzi schemes that they are — would pull the plug on the deadly third rail, cut the central government’s real estate (30% of all land in the US) down to Constitutional size, make the victims whole, and give everyone a non-inflationary 15.3% increase in after tax wages that could be used for real productive capital investments in a Chilean type system.
Samuelson called it a Ponzi scheme in 1967:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2775889/posts
The LEFT knows that voters know this is doomed, so their line has to change — it now must be used to rally their base, — scare old women, the poor and blacks — have them all marching with the union thugs.
This is not a defense of Social Security. I would prefer that it didn’t exist. It is an attempt to view things from a 1935 perspective:
1. I doubt that even FDR envisioned that the government would take Social Security funds and use then for general spending
2. In 1935 people never envisioned birth control pills and abortion. Since Roe vs. Wade, there have been 55 million abortions. This represents approximately 43% of the country’s 127 million population in 1935. If approximately 35 million unborn that were aborted were in the workforce, making Social Security payments, things would be different.
3. I doubt that even Roosevelt could have imagined 20-30 million illegal immigrants in the country, sucking up welfare rather than making a contribution.
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.