Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rick Perry. Show all posts
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Rick Perry Says Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme
Michael Tanner of NRO says Yes, It Is a Ponzi Scheme and I agree with him.
Social Security is a tyrannical, coercive ponzi scheme versus the voluntary one used by the original ponzi schemer himself, Charles Ponzi, who duped investors out of their money, absconded with the money by using the later investors' money to pay the later investors instead of using the money to make investments as he claimed he was doing.
Here is Michael Tanner's explanation of how Social Security is a ponzi scheme:
Social Security, on the other hand, forces people to invest in it through a mandatory payroll tax. A small portion of that money is used to buy special-issue Treasury bonds that the government will eventually have to repay, but the vast majority of the money you pay in Social Security taxes is not invested in anything. Instead, the money you pay into the system is used to pay benefits to those “early investors” who are retired today. When you retire, you will have to rely on the next generation of workers behind you to pay the taxes that will finance your benefits.
As with Ponzi’s scheme, this turns out to be a very good deal for those who got in early. The very first Social Security recipient, Ida Mae Fuller of Vermont, paid just $44 in Social Security taxes, but the long-lived Mrs. Fuller collected $20,993 in benefits. Such high returns were possible because there were many workers paying into the system and only a few retirees taking benefits out of it. In 1950, for instance, there were 16 workers supporting every retiree. Today, there are just over three. By around 2030, we will be down to just two.
As with Ponzi’s scheme, when the number of new contributors dries up, it will become impossible to continue to pay the promised benefits. Those early windfall returns are long gone. When today’s young workers retire, they will receive returns far below what private investments could provide. Many will be lucky to break even.
Eventually the pyramid crumbles.
Of course, Social Security and Ponzi schemes are not perfectly analogous. Ponzi, after all, had to rely on what people were willing to voluntarily invest with him. Once he couldn’t convince enough new investors to join his scheme, it collapsed. Social Security, on the other hand, can rely on the power of the government to tax. As the shrinking number of workers paying into the system makes it harder to continue to sustain benefits, the government can just force young people to pay even more into the system.
In fact, Social Security taxes have been raised some 40 times since the program began. The initial Social Security tax was 2 percent (split between the employer and employee), capped at $3,000 of earnings. That made for a maximum tax of $60. Today, the tax is 12.4 percent, capped at $106,800, for a maximum tax of $13,234. Even adjusting for inflation, that represents more than an 800 percent increase.
In addition, at least until the final collapse of his scheme, Ponzi was more or less obligated to pay his early investors what he promised them. With Social Security, on the other hand, Congress is always able to change or cut those benefits in order to keep the scheme going.
Social Security is facing more than $20 trillion in unfunded future liabilities. Raising taxes and cutting benefits enough to keep the program limping along will obviously mean an ever-worsening deal for younger workers. They will be forced to pay more and get less.
Rick Perry got this one right.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Corporate controlled media's unDemocratic process of obscuring candidates that "won't play the game"
Malcolm X said, "I'm not an American. I'm one of the 22 million Black people who are the victims of Americanism. One of the 22 million Black people who are the victims of democracy, nothing but disguised hypocrisy."
Also read:
A Christian Plot for Domination?
Michele Bachmann and Rick Perry aren't just devout—both have deep ties to a fringe fundamentalist movement known as Dominionism, which says Christians should rule the world.
Put simply, Dominionism means that Christians have a God-given right to rule all earthly institutions. Originating among some of America’s most radical theocrats, it’s long had an influence on religious-right education and political organizing. But because it seems so outré, getting ordinary people to take it seriously can be difficult. Most writers, myself included, who explore it have been called paranoid. In a contemptuous 2006 First Things review of several books, including Kevin Phillips’ American Theocracy, and my own Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, conservative columnist Ross Douthat wrote, “the fear of theocracy has become a defining panic of the Bush era.” - The Daily BeastAlso read:
- Why the Mainstream Media Are Clueless About the Religious Right | Tea Party and the Right | AlterNet
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Abortion: Rick Santorum vs. Rick Perry -- 10th or 14th Amendment Issue?
Lisa Graas explains why Rick Santorum is correct on the abortion issue and Rick Perry is wrong. She explains how abortion is NOT a 10th Amendment issue but in fact falls under the 14th Amendment.
I stand with Lisa Graas and other pro-lifers in supporting the Republican Party's 2008 pro-life platform. Here is the part which discusses abortion in relation to the Constitution:
Lisa goes onto explain why abortion has everything to do with the 14th Amendment and not the 10th Amendment:
Faithful to the first guarantee of the Declaration of Independence, we assert the inherent dignity and sanctity of all human life and affirm that the unborn child has a fundamental individual right to life which cannot be infringed. We support a human life amendment to the Constitution, and we endorse legislation to make clear that the Fourteenth Amendment’s protections apply to unborn children.
Lisa goes onto explain why abortion has everything to do with the 14th Amendment and not the 10th Amendment:
Do you see anything in there about the 10th Amendment? No. There is a very important reason for that.Abortion has nothing to do with the 10th Amendment. It has everything to do with theFourteenth Amendment or potentially a valid Human Life Amendment.
Why is that? Simple. An unborn child is a “person“. All “persons” are protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Here is the specific provision in Section 1 of the amendment which protects unborn children…and the rest of us, from being destroyed by a rogue state legislature.
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The rights of “persons” to equal protection of the laws trumps state legislatures. Read McDonald v. Chicago, a recent Supreme Court decision in which the Court ruled (correctly) that States must extend the Second Amendment right to bear arms to citizens within that state. If it were not for the Fourteenth Amendment, any state could ban guns. Because of the Fourteenth Amendment, NO state may ban guns.
This goes the same with abortion. NO state may allow abortion. Period. Because the unborn child is, objectively, a person.
It is true that prior to Roe v. Wade, the States handled the abortion issue. But that doesn’t mean it was legitimate for them to. It was not legitimate for slavery to be a “state’s rights” issue either. The reason is that…hold onto your hats, libertarian Tea Partiers, states do not have “rights”. They have “powers”. People have rights. The unborn have rights. Rights come from God Almighty, not the federal government and not state legislatures. They come from God alone. America is supposed to be on a journey toward a greater respect for human dignity. The Founders did not end slavery. Slavery was rightly ended because of that journey.
Those who argue that abortion is a “states rights” issue are taking us backward to the Founders….who did not end slavery. America rightly ended slavery. America must also journey forward and end abortion by recognizing the personhood of the unborn child, thereby acknowledging that the child is protected under the Fourteenth Amendment.
Rick Perry does not understand this. Sarah Palin doesn’t either. Ron Paul certainly does not. Michele Bachmann “may” understand this, but I’m just not sure. RICK SANTORUM understands that our rights come from God, not government. He understands that all levels of government, both federal and state, must defend our God-given rights.
And you thought I supported him because of his cowboy boots? Nuh uh. He’s the only one who “gets” that our rights actually trump both state and federal powers.
Are we clear now? I certainly hope so because I blogged on this ad nauseum during Kentucky’s U.S Senate primary and ended up writing in the name of a real pro-life Republican during the general election. I won’t compromise on personhood and the Fourteenth Amendment, no matter how many trillions of dollars Obama spends. You can take that to the bank. I’m voting for Santorum.
We cannot build a decent America on top of a pile of dead babies and brutalized women. Anyone who claims to be for freedom while claiming state powers trump our rights is just (knowingly or not) giving you a different brand of salt water to drink than the Left is giving you through their brand of “economic justice”.
Refresh and strengthen this nation. Quench the thirst of the downtrodden and uplift them by freeing them from their oppression. Vote for Rick Santorum.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)