In introducing last night's "decoding Rick Perry" segment, Melissa showed Rick Perry doubling down on his anti-Social Security position:
"It is a Ponzi scheme for these young people. The idea that they're working and paying into Social Security today, that the current program is going to be there for them, is a lie," Perry said. "It is a monstrous lie on this generation, and we can't do that to them."
Nick Baumann at Mother Jones has a nice round-up of why Social Security is actually not a Ponzi scheme, culminating in the Venn diagram above.
But more to Melissa's point and the trope that Perry is speaking in code is this point from Jonathan Bernstein on the Plum Line blog:
Of course, this has nothing whatsoever to do with a Ponzi scheme, which involves deliberate and outright fraud. It's irresponsible to say that Social Security won't be "there for them" when, in fact, the only way that will happen is if politicians choose to eliminate it.
Social Security is only a Ponzi scheme if you make it one by destroying it. If this is your intention as a candidate, and as a candidate it is also your intention, your expectation even, to win the office of the presidency, then it makes sense that your present view of Social Security is distorted by the damage you intend to inflict on it.
Leave a Comment:
I prefer the word of two Nobel economists:
Milton Friedman http://www.hoover.org/publications/hoover-digest/article/7523
Paul Samuelson Newsweek, February 13, 1967
....you might want to pick an institution that doesn't have a decidedly single-handed bias. Le sighs. My generation is going to be screwed by this libertarian streak of stupidity.
Breaking: Supreme Court Rules Social Security Is Constitutional
Ok, as everyone who was paying attention in High School knows, this news actually broke in 1936. But Rick Perry was not paying attention so this is for him. You might enjoy it also.
LOL but then again who would say a Texas republican would know anything past 3 weeks.
oh that is a head line from DailyKos
That could change. Clarence Thomas is pretty obviously both in favor of a very narrow reading of the Commerce Clause and unconstrained by stare decisis. He's also very influential with the majority of the Roberts Court.
We could be only one Justice away from a Court that would not only reverse Roe v. Wade but Helvering v Davis
oh thats right the Roberts court,
i will only call balls and strikes and will not turn back 100 years of law.
until i get in then my true colors will show.
It is so very evil that men like Perry are well aware of the criminal graft and misuse of American tax dollars for decades . . . and the banking fraud . . . and the wall street fraud . . . and the foreign dictators fraud . . . etc etc
And yet they are trying to say that a tax program that pays for it self and always has that helps elder Middle Americans survive . . . IS A PONZI SCHEME ???
I have just one question for you and your criminal congressional cronies Mr. Perry . . . HOW IN THE HELL DO YOU SLEEP AT NIGHT ????
O.T. perhaps a tad ---- but methinks the SCOTUS should not be a life-time appointment. Also, this is probably impossible, but composed of non-partisans, if there is any such thing.
Article III, Section 1:
"The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office."
Since there has been no amendments that effect this passage, I believe that it is just a matter of getting the house in order to impeach the Justices that have stepped outside the bounds of said 'good behavior'.
You are talking about the party of "Death panels" and "Hangs around with terrorists". Give it up! Republicans don't consider honesty to be an important value! (Somehow they missed that part in the bible.)
I am beginning to doubt the authenticity of the Rick Perry candidacy, it is looking more like a Palin/Gingrich book tour.
Adios, Rick "MoFo" Perry. How's that evangelical angle working out for you?
Can we please allow Texas to recede? The state is ugly, uninteresting, and it's elected leaders are unpleasant, unloveable, offensive zealots.
I think you mean secede, Flex ol' buddy. Or maybe not...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recede
Good to see another open minded, tolerant, non-judgmental, liberal enlightening us bigoted, self-righteous, uncaring conservatives! Thanks.
I don't think one needs to be open minded about Texas. Do you live there RobDon? Austin is however, the saving grace of Texas.
I'm so sick of Rick Perry I could vomit.
They don't recycle because they believe Jesus will rapture their garbage away one day. Texas, the biggest consumers in America. This shocked me, when I visited there.
Oh, I'm open minded, but not about that! Jeez.
Nope, don't live there but visit often on business. Know some very good folk who do live there.
There are good folks everywhere...of all makes and models...unfortunately, we humans have a tendency to forget this.
We Texans are not that bad. I moved here almost 10 years ago. It is not that bad. The Tea Party here is what is making it bad.
The Tea Party is making a lot more than just Texas bad...
The hope is give the SS savings/money to wall street to be invested. That is what Bush tried and failed to do, apparently someone wants the peoples investment for retired workers plus the money to be made for handling the account. Lots of money to be made and eventually lost to those with more than they can count or spend.
The stock market is like a roller coaster weekly if not daily, can you imagine what would happen after the peoples money entered the trading. I guess the fall in 08 wasn't enough of a wind fall for the big boys, they want it all.
There aren't enough stupid investors on Wallstreet to make the rich richer, and now they have their eye on the SS piggy bank. Plain and simple. Unbelievable greed.
Too late Marie, Congress already raided the SS piggy bank. So I guess that makes all of us "investors" in SS stupid....
Back in the days when the American tribes had land, whites justified their insatiable greed for said land by insisting that any lands still in tribal possession were not being used properly. Clearly, the finance-capital class has a similar view about money: money in other people's hands is money going to waste.
Social Security will continue to provide full benefits to your grand children and their grand children by making one simple change in the law. It would require 1 sentence.
There shall be no income cap on withholding earnings.
By adding this one sentence to the Social Security law the system would be solvent for hundreds of years. There would be no reduction in benefits and no change in the working age. In fact, the withholding rate could be reduced due to more people contributing more.
The only problem is that the rich would have to pay their fair share.
Thank you
The other thing we need to do is return to the Pre-1993 approach of slowly increasing SS and Medicare tax rates. The income cap was increased every year, partly in order to keep up with inflation. That has continued, though the pace of increase in the last decade has slowed. Rates increased every few years in order to maintain solvency and public confidence. There's no good reason why we can't continue to do that. Few people are going to notice a .2% increase in rates, yet it would make a huge difference in the surplus/deficit position of the funds.
That one sentence would make your good idea impossible to implement, sad to say.
A. the number is 46%
B. all american's pay taxes- what you're complaining about is that they don't pay an income tax
C. this number does not take into account the recession
SS, and Medicare are not funded from federal income tax, and the SS, and FICA withholding are not subject to refunds like the Income tax.
Wingers have bizarre ideas about what constitutes "fair". Taxing a good-sized hunk of the income of someone who makes more money than God and who can therefore afford it is somehow "unfair". But squeezing dry someone who is barely scraping by and living on Ramen noodles and ketchup is very "fair" indeed.
Sick, sick, sick.
Funny, but the only reason that SS and Medicare might fail is if the IOUs don't get paid back.
My Favorite: Is NOT a deliberate fraud.
Too, too funny. They didn't (or couldn't) write "Is NOT a fraud," they had to include the word deliberate as if to say, "it is not a fraud on purpose...thus it must be all right." I'm laughing out loud!
Everyone is missing the major point about Social Security. It is funded by employee and EMPLOYER contributions. If you eliminate SS, the workers will have to rely on 401 k programs for retirement IF THEY ARE OFFERED BY THE EMPLOYER. The end of SS will put billions of dollars back into the pockets of the corporations
Sorry, but SS and Medicare are funded from the SS and FICA taxes withheld from employee paychecks, the ONLY parts that the employer has to do with the money is the parts where he withholds the money, and then makes interest on the money while he waits for the quarter to end when he turns it over to the government.
No, it is not a Ponzi scheme, but since the government keeps taking money out of it and puting in IOUs, I would say that it is "not as advertised" in it's current state. It's all good and fine to say that SS is solvent but if the money isn't actually there (just a bunch of IOU "documents") I don't know if you can say you are solvent. That would be like me loaning $10,000 to my friend who is in serious debt and telling everyone that I have that same $10,000 in the bank. Now if my friend is in serious debt and may not pay me back, can I still say that I am solvent and have the ten grand to pay MY bills?
The only ponzi scheme I've seen tried at the Federal level was when the GOP/Tea Party wanted to default on our obligations. The Tea Party and GOP wanted to default on all those people who bought government backed securities. They basically said, "oh well, sucks to be them."
I mean really...
You got some Chinese family buying American bonds for their kid's education and the Tea Party and GOP tried to stiff them. That Chinese family would have been left holding worthless American securities.
So yeah, the GOP and Tea Party know all too well about ponzi schemes.
Well J. Edgar, you may be right. But at the rate we are going those Americans securities will be worthless anyway. I am truly amazed at how people in this country seem to be rather well versed on the problems we are having in this county EXCEPT when it comes to math. I do understand that the US cannot have a budget like a family, but we do have to have some restaint when it comes to our financial situation. And I DO think that we have to cut spending and increase taxes, but honestly even a relatively large increase will not let us pay off 14,000 billion dollars and fund our current trillion or 2 a year current budgets. Like I said, a lot of people somehow think that there is some new "magic" math out there that will make all this go away. No gonna happen.
The economy needs to be grown back to health, you can't do that by cutting taxes, and expecting the rich to hire people they don't need just because they got a tax break.
What is needed is more buying power in the hands of the poor and middle class, that will increase demand, and then the rich will need to hire more workers just to keep in business.
I think the waters have been muddied so drastically when it comes to SS and other welfare programs because of the constant vilification and "re-branding" of them. If you simply adhere to their original intention then we, as a nation, can make informed decisions and move on. Here's what I mean...
SS is intended to be a social safety net, NOT a personal investment. Like all elements of a secure society, we use the power of the many, to overcome the weaknesses of the few. If there is a disaster that overwhelms a region's resources , say the Northeast, people from the West coast pitch in to prevent that region from being overwhelmed. A famine in the plains could be prevented by produce from the south...you get the idea. SS is us, as a nation, coming to the aid of people in one sector (lower income brackets) from other sectors (higher income brackets).
So, we can just stop using arguments about "Ponzi schemes" and "insolvency" or "poor return of investment" or "better managed if privatized" etc etc...
The first thing you have to do is stand up and admit what you believe in...
A) I believe that I should help out those less fortunate than myself or....
B) Everyone is on their own to suffer their own fate.
So which is it gonna be???
SS and other welfare programs? SS has been an investement for many working citizens paid into for 40 50 years. It is not welfare..
Yes Tamlea social security is a form of welfare. Welfare is simply a word that refers to assistance given by the government to it's citizens. Whether you paid into it directly by an itemized tax or paid into it indirectly by a general tax is irrelevant. You pay for (i.e. invest in) all forms of welfare. You are then given that trade out any time you meet whatever particular qualifiers are set up for each individual welfare plan. So, as an example, I pay payroll taxes, sales taxes, and other wage-based taxes every year on my income. This money then goes to help fill the pool for FASFA. I then, because I am a low-income student, apply for that program and am approved because I meet the qualifications to receive that type of welfare. I then use that type of welfare until I no longer need it's assistance (i.e. until I graduate).
Interestingly enough, dfabs premise here that we are using branding too much was proven by this misunderstanding of the term "welfare." Welfare has came to mean a dirty word in the United States, whereas many of the welfare programs (like, as an example, the Veterans Administration) are seen as good things. This schism should not exist. The government gives you money and services (i.e. welfare) and you enjoy that money and those services. Let's start being more honest about what we're talking about and stop all of the spin games. I'm in agreement.
No, social security is NOT a form of welfare. Welfare is something you get without paying for it. Social security and medicare are social insurance programs designed for everybody. The return on social security depends, to a great extent, on how much you pay in. Medicare represents an insurance program with the premiums paid over the working lives of the recipients.
Yes, under each program, some people fare better than others based on what they pay in. No, it is not "welfare." Better check your definition.
Mpguy it is impossible for you to get assistance from the government without paying for it. This, again, is the problem with welfare messaging. People have been so convinced that their social security is earned but everyone else's welfare hasn't been earned. This is as hypocritical and silly as the people complaining about the government touching their medicare.
Mpguy you are correct. I have always felt SS is an insurance program as is life insurance, however when you finally qualify for life ins. someone else gets it.
Mouzer only some people complain, those that are selfish and terrified someone might get a penny more than them. Those are the ones saying let society care for those in need, but would not help a sick or starving human being because they apparently did not earn it or they would not be sick or starving. Yes the whole thing is hyprocritical and stupid.
Well what I was trying to explain was that it's a neoconservative argument going all the way back to the Regan Administration that somehow social security and medicare are outside of "welfare." The term welfare comes from the general welfare clause in the US Constitution. More specifically it was the argument put forward in the New Deal to justify creating safety net programs like social security and medicare. The problem is most US citizens will at some point use medicare or SS, but the percentage of the citizenry who will use other forms of welfare, like food stamps or unemployment, is generally very low. Thus conservatives have ingenuously kept repeating over and over for 40+ years now that welfare is something unearned and things like medicare/SS are earned. Since most people never touch the "unearned" forms of government assistance, they generally believe this talking point to be true when it is in fact false. All Americans pay taxes whether they are legal citizens, visitors, or undocumented immigrants. All Americans pay into the social safety net. Then when certain qualifiers are met you will be given assistance out based on the criteria set up for each welfare program (I used student loans as an example earlier). SS/medicare just happen to be programs that most Americans will use, but they are still forms of welfare. You still pay for them as you do unemployment, disaster relief, student loans, etc, etc. It's all part of the same bucket from which you are drawing and it's important to know this because all Americans need to realize that when you talk about cutting welfare you are talking about cutting SS/medicare.
...continuing on my thought, apologies for the double post. When you receive social security or when you use medicare you are using welfare. The same if you're using student loans. The same if you're a veteran who uses the GI bill or goes to the VA for medical treatments. These are all forms of welfare. And that's OK. That's the point I was trying to get at. You are correct Tamlea that we need to look at how we pay taxes as being an investment. When you pay into the government you are investing your finances into programs that will be there for you when you need them. Social security and medicare are more than likely going to be the only programs you use, if you ever use direct government assistance at all. And that is OK. We need to stop letting this neoconservative argument that goes back to the frickin' 1930's dominate the conversation. There is nothing wrong with receiving welfare. There is nothing wrong with receiving welfare. There is nothing wrong with receiving welfare. If you receieve social security and/or medicare, you are receiving/using welfare. And that is OK. I am sick and tired of letting the conservatives dictate the talking points and in turn the general political knowledge that people have.
I don't like the right framing the debate, either. I like to slap their framing aside whenever I can. But Rick Perry has given me an idea. Every time a winger opens their mouth to speak, just shove a pastry down it for them.
On an unrelated subject...is that you, Mickey?
Yes Meddling...how are you my friend? =)
Relieved, actually. You and your old Newsvine page vanished. I thought I'd either missed an epic blow-up or you'd taken another jump off a balcony or whatever it was. I'm not going to pry, but I really was kind of freaked for a while. All is good, I hope?
I don't like "freaking people out" I seem to do that way more than I'd like to. Whatever the opposite of 0 is seems to be what I'm accomplishing. Le sighs. I haven't tried to kill myself per say although I went on a binge for about a week after I broke up with my girlfriend that was fairly suicidal in nature (although that wasn't the intended purpose). I'm undergoing pretty aggressive treatment right now. I'm at the point now where I'm debating if I just want to be institutionalized full time or not. It means selling all my stuff off (what little I have left) if I decide to go that route. But I will be fine, regardless. Hope you are well my friend. Apologies for any scare I caused- apparently I caused a lot of people concern here as DQ informed me. It was unintentional, I promise.
You guys mind if I weigh in? Let's get a few things hashed out.
1. America has a Social Security Act of 1935 with current Amendments. This act provides for many things like social security, disability, unemployment insurance, medicare, medicaid, and yes.....FOOD STAMPS.
2. There is no WELFARE program. Welfare is just a slang word used by the right wing zealots to define FOOD STAMPS.
3. Any and all benefits received by anyone under the Social Security Act of 1935 is called SOCIAL SECURITY. Put it like this... Instead of calling it food stamps you can call it social security stamps.
4. Right wing zealots equate the slang word WELFARE to FOODSTAMPS.
5. Food stamps make up less than 1/2 of 1% of the total federal budget.
6. Right wing zealots would rather spend a thousand dollars a week to house someone in JAIL than give them 50 bucks a week to eat. These people are not going to just sit in a corner and die. They will eat one way or the other. If that means robbing someone then that's what they will do.
One way or another, Mick, you're going to be just fine. It's not open to debate. You're going to be fine. Period. ;)
Mouzer things DO get better and they will for you.
That's Mickey? Oooooooooooooooooo.....I was one of the kindo worried ones.
You will be okay...breathe....stay present :) Good to see you here again.
Welfare was a program that if you qualified you could get benefits from, and having worked to have paid in was not a requirement to qualify. Welfare was truly a giveaway. It's good in my opinion that it was ended.
Aren't we as a nation still in 2 disastrous wars, have high unemployment, have jobs that have hemorrhaged to no/low wage nations, and a "Supreme Court" that actually believes "corporations are people" thanks to the last Shrub from Texas that was in the Oval Office?! I realize that Americans like to forget, but please, don't be dolts about it, again!!!
Our priorities have been wrong ever since, you guessed it, Ronald Wilson Reagan.
RWR set us on the path of moral corruption. He is the King of Sodom and Gomorrah.
The Honorable President Ronald Wilson Reagan was one of the greatest Presidents in history... You are brainwashed by the liberal media, liberal public education and the mainstream media moguls. Billionaire George Soros is not your friend as he is a sick power driven elitist using his financial clout to bring back Collectivism and government control over the worlds masses to make your lives much less comfortable with a drastic lowered standard of living that you would hate and fight against if you understood what the powerful elite think. Stealing your wealth (your stuff and bank account) and losing most of it through government wasteful paper shuffling to control the indigent people of the world. Private organizations have been good at feeding and helping the poor with minimal waste, more tax incentives are needed to do the job better. I guess Liberalism really is a serious "MENTAL ILLNESS" since all LIBERALS refuse to let their ego's admit they are wrong... SAD.. VERY SAD...
If private organizations are so "good at feeding and helping the poor with minimal waste" why do they need more tax incentives to do the job better? I do not see the connection between the two, can you explain?
I'm still trying to figure out how, since receiving public funds does not impede on your reception of private funds in any way, the government's assistance to the poor prevents the poor from using private charities. I mean if there are so many private organizations to help the poor out there, and if the government doesn't impede on them from doing so, then why is it that the poor don't go to the private organizations first instead of the government? I'd love for a libertarian to explain this phenomenon to me, ty.
I don't think they can explain it. Their praise of private charity is simply cover for callousness. They don't want people to receive help when they need it, and they wish to be in a position to refuse to give it. Public welfare programs takes that option away from them. Everything else is just a fan dance.
The thing is, while there is a place for private charity, it is unable to cope with anything but small, localized problems. They have neither the funds nor the reach. Only the federal government has both.
It's worth remembering that at the start of the Depression, there were no federal help programs, and the crisis was so great that private charities were going bankrupt. They couldn't keep up with the problem. Relying on small, ad hoc solutions is to rely on a broken reed.
"Conservatives" like to say that help should come from communities. What they fail to understand, or wish to cause people to misunderstand, is that a nation is a community. Or, better, a meta-community. There are some things that people can do better as individuals, there are some things people can do better as a family or in small communities, but there are many things done best by the meta-community of the nation.
Pretty much was my point MM- great post =)
Who cares what the dollar amounts were? Or about what the rich give? It's not a pissing contest. The real question is, how sustained and effective private vs. public efforts are. When it comes to disasters, there is a lot of private giving in the first few days, and then attention shifts to the next shiny thing. Jetting in, hosing some money around, and jetting out is not an argument in favor of private charity.
What about my generation? I've been paying into SS for longer than I want to say here and just when I need it he's going to take it?
I cannot find one good thing about this guy...I don't like his hair...wtf is up with that anyway?
You should be happy Perry keeps shooting his mouth off about Social Security. That issue will defeat him and the Republicans. They know it from the special elections. Perry should be the presidential candidate and Bachmann as VP so they can drive that car right off the cliff together. These Republican candidates are not going to be able to take back their words nor the vote on Ryan's plan.
Puck Ferry!
I don't like his hair, his attitude, his face, his ideas, his persona, or anything else about him, but I am definitely on board with your "Puck Ferry" - LOL
Perry should know about ponzi schemes. Down here in Texas, they routinely use property taxes as a ponzi scheme. If you need money to build a baseball stadium, then raise property taxes to pay for it.
And he's doing the same thing with education. That moron cut 4 BILLION dollars from education, the first time it has been cut since 1949. Thousands of teachers layed off, now public schools are broke and even thinking of charging kids to ride the bus. But, Slick rick knows these schools cannot last on this kind of money shortfall but knows for damn sure what will ultimately have to be done and thats raise property taxes, all for the sake of giving huge corporations their 150 Billion dollar tax cuts. Now thats a ponzi scheme.
Folk, please do not lump Gov. Perry with the good people from Texas. The people of Houston, Texas are friendly, compassionate warm and loving. The Governor's views are not the views of Houstonians
I'm still scratching my head wondering how Rick won that last election. Not only won it but crushed Bill White. Once Houston goes then so does the GOP. I live in Houston. Either there is an underground GOP network or the election was stolen. I can't for the life of me understand how Rick won that election.
They don't even legislate long enough for Texans to even know what the heck they do.
dam Ricky can you say OUCH!!!!!
LOL
TUE AUG 30, 2011 AT 01:00 PM PDT
CBO estimates recovery act saved up to 2.9 million jobs; Perry vows opposition to any new stimulus
Sorry, republiscum/teabaggers. None of your "leaders" have a chance at the presidency.
President Obama has another term to serve.
Try again in 2016.
I owe President Obamma and the Democrats an appoligy. All of my life I voted for the company party thinking they were looking out for me. When the Republicans went belly up for the Tea Party it woke me up. I now read and surf the media to be informed with facts and differing views instead getting my political education in a Texas bar. I am now have home with the Democrats!!!!
Since when did the word welfare become a dirty word? Isn't that word in the preamble of this great country?
predictable. LOL yuppers that`s exactly just what you are!!!
Predictable.
i already have your come back que up but lets see if you can maybe come up with something new.
America was founded in the middle and thats right where we need to be CENTERED!!!
maybe one step left of maybe one step right but mainly in the center!!!
and that show the FOUNDING FATHERS wanted it to be!
My mom couldn't afford the new plan. I think that is enough for me to be against it. Paul Ryan is an idiot attacking our elders in this way. He is going to turn Medicare into a Ponzi scheme. Like most Tea Party they don't know what they are talking about.
Simple solution, call in all IOU's from other branches of gov and leave it as SS was enacted!!!!!!!!!!!