Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Perry Proposes Economically Impossible State Takeover Of Social Security

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
cal04 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:13 PM
Original message
Perry Proposes Economically Impossible State Takeover Of Social Security
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/15/296096/perry-states-social-securit/

Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) has made it quite clear that he believes Social Security is an unconstitutional “Ponzi scheme.” In his book Fed Up!, Perry writes that Social Security is “by far the best example” of a program “violently tossing aside any respect for our founding principles.” Today, at the Iowa State Fair, Perry responded to a question from Politico’s Ben Smith by saying that he thinks one of the ways to deal with his vehement objections to Social Security is to simply send the program to the states and let them figure out what to do with it:

I’m for having a conversation with the country about how we find some solutions to have programs that are going to be sustainable. And I think having the states doing it is one of the ways. I’m not saying it’s the only way

Watch it:
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/15/296096/perry-states-social-securit/

Perry has said before that he wants to give states the option of allowing workers to opt out of Social Security. “So the states will let people opt out of Social Security?” asked CNN’s Eliot Spitzer. “They should,” Perry replied. But as ThinkProgress’ Ian Millhiser has pointed out, making Social Security a state program is simply economically impossible:

A workable plan to allow states to opt out of Social Security would require draconian provisions, such as a mandate that everyone must retire in the same state that they worked and paid taxes in. Otherwise, workers who are too young to receive Social Security benefits would move to an opt-out state to avoid paying Social Security taxes — and then promptly move to a state with Social Security benefits the moment they became eligible. Eventually, the entire system would collapse under the weight of too many Social Security beneficiaries who had not paid into the system

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
livetohike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. I give the newest GOP clown to climb into the clown car
about two weeks before he wears out his welcome. Bright, shiny, new object.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. Would he intend to payback the people who had paid in to the
system for years or does he have in mind the out and out abandonment of the funds?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Well that's the whole idea.
Put something in place that can't possibly work after selling it as a good idea. Still, it's risky. After all, the economy wasn't supposed to collapse until after Bush left office. That didn't work out too well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. So there are states that plan on you dropping dead young?
Founding principles life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Hmmm... a program designed to help you live at an old age certainly not a founding principle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. This guy would be easier to run against than Romney
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. Set up right, this might solve the problem of retirees moving to TX, AZ and FL with their benefits?
On the other hand it is symptomatic of the problem that people in the south and west think of states as legitimate governmental regions.

In the Northeast, you can live in one state, commute across a second, and live in a third state. State boundaries are pretty irrational and giving states more functions just leads to more complexity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-15-11 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
7. Is this view really all that popular?
How does he expect to win saying this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-16-11 02:48 AM
Response to Original message
8. K & R
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC