Kaine leaps into the Ponzi Pool
By Norman Leahy | Tuesday, September 13th, 2011 | Politics, VirginiaI don’t begrudge Democratic Senate candidate Tim Kaine’s desire to stir-up the base with this meeting, or forum, if you prefer, on Social Security. It is amusing, though, to read the quote Wes Hester pulled from the Kaine campaign’s press release announcing the event:
A release from Kaine’s campaign announcing the Tuesday morning said that Perry “will no doubt promote the extreme Republican agenda which labels Social Security a ‘Ponzi’ scheme and seeks to privatize it.”
Damn those extreme Republicans and their wicked attempts to denigrate the most successful of entitlement programs…it’s puts them in the same league as that equally nefarious Paul Krugman:
“In practice it has turned out to be strongly redistributionist, but only because of its Ponzi game aspect, in which each generation takes more out than it put in. Well, the Ponzi game will soon be over, thanks to changing demographics, so that the typical recipient henceforth will get only about as much as he or she put in.”
One can only imagine what Mr. Kaine will have to say about that…
(H/T: Don Boudreaux)
Tags:
Contribute for Conservatism!
Share this post
About the author
Norm Leahy has written about Virginia and national politics online since 2002, beginning with One Man's Trash (OMT), and continuing through Bacon's Rebellion (both the blog and the e-zine), Sic Semper Tyrannis, NBC12's Decision Virginia, Richmond.com and Tertium Quids. He is the chief blogger at "The Score" and a producer of "The Score" radio show as well as being a Washington Examiner contributor.
We're 75% there! Thank you to everyone who has so far contributed! Just $2000 to go!
Comments
11 Responses to "Kaine leaps into the Ponzi Pool"
I don’t think George Allen’s campaign will be dumb enough to double down on dumb.
While Rick Perry might be foolish enough to want to change the 2012 election from a referendum on Barack Obama (where the GOP has the advantage at this point) to a referendum on Social Security (where the Perry position would get crushed), I’d expect Allen to be smart enough to put a lot of distance between himself and the Texas governor on this one.
Any other Republican who wants to get elected in 2012 will too.
In a “Ponzi” scheme “investors” have a choice whether or not to participate and can walk away. SS or Obamacare are “forced” participation in which there are legal consequences if you don’t. George Allen would be served by pointing out the difference and advocating a better idea that has “choice” somewhere in the narrative. The “Ponzi” label is being used as a lightning rod by Dems to shape the argument and to scare voters.
A Ponzi scheme doesn’t pay out to its “investors.”
Social Security has never missed a payment, ever. And that’s with politicians constantly ruining its integrity.
The Republican mantra of government has been, lets trash and ruin anything and everything so that they can claim there isn’t a need for government because its ineffective and unnecessary and then they can eliminate it or privatize it.
Actually a Ponzi scheme does pay out to investors. While technically speaking, social security is not a Ponzi cheme; it quacks enough to be close enough for government work.
Have talked to many people who were actually there when the law was passed. FDR told everyone that social security would provide all the money that you would need for retirement. Did not need to save or do anything else. All the money you would need.
Amazing the reactions you get when you talk to younger voters about social security. They do not want to pay those taxes.
“The Republican mantra of government has been, lets trash and ruin anything and everything”
That sounds like demagoguery.
What a lie; social security was designed to ensure that the old and sick did not suffer decrepitude. It was never designed to be the sole source of retirement savings. That said, if we take Perry at his word, and he has promised that no one now receiving benefits would be threatened, how would he continue to pay their full benefits with no more revenue coming into the system? Will he raise taxes to keep his promise to pay these benefits? Those who don’t yet receive benefits, but pay into the system, how would they be compensated for what they have paid in? This guy has waded into quick sand, and the other republican candidates have only started to attack. He will be devoured in a month.
From where I sit, Social Security was “designed” to be the tip of the spear of the government effort to destroy the family. How? By instituting intergenerational warfare and by beginning the effort to disconnect parents from their children. Aging parents would no longer rely on their own families, they would learn to see government as their family. Progressivism 101: substitute government reliance for self reliance and local community reliance. Substitute “public” responsibility for personal responsibility.
And they’ve succeeded massively. Haven’t they?
I hate to agree with anything Rick Perry says, but Social Security IS a Ponzi scheme.
Mike, I guess we won’t see you trying to get an autograph at the Perry/McDonnell event tomorrow in Richmond?
So Jamie, you are saying that the industrial revolution was a government plot to destroy the family? Talk about Perry being a loose cannon. Yes, in TJ’s day, 95% of the population lived on farms, and families took care of their own. So you want to go back to those days? You want individual opportunity to be restricted to the few square miles of your county? You want the U.S. to compete in a global economy with an essentially agrarian society? Please, get real.
And no, I won’t be getting an autograph, and I suspect that soon, Governor McDonnell will rue the day he threw his hat into that ring.
@ Jamie,
“From where I sit, Social Security was “designed” to be the tip of the spear of the government effort to destroy the family.”
Are you kidding me; that’s actually what you believe?
@ bandeja
I am a young voter, I have no problem with social security; I fully support it. Again, provide me with an example of when it hasn’t worked. I’m too young to remember any discussion, but everyone should have known there’d be a day when the Baby Boomers would retire and it should have been prepared for.
Now, fast forward to the Republican’s ideas. Why would I want to pay Social Security when everyone from the right keeps advocating for its destruction. If I’m not provided for under the Social Security System, I should receive all that I’ve paid in, plus interest. How do you pay for that?
Finally, considering the gains, or lack there of, in my Roth and 401 K, the small guarantee that Social Security provides is an excellent safe guard. How does the free market replace that?
Regretfully Tor, if you are not within the top 1% of income earners in this nation, there is nothing in the republican agenda for you. Fact is, their announced agenda is devoid of any policy for improving the lot of the middle class, unless some job or work happens to trickle down as the result of the benefits that have accrued to the rich and wealthy. Ironically, as a centrist, I reject the view that this is best for job creation or prosperity. Fact is, with an economy that is 70% or so dependent upon the consumer, we need all classes to have enough to participate in our economy, and frankly, tax and fiscal policy has a role in ensuring that we have a prosperous nation for more than the top 1% income earners.
About 35 years ago, was discussing social security with a retired gentleman who was doing the finishing work on a house that I was building. He was born in 1914. He told me that the government and politicians had promised the people that social security would provide all the money that they would need for retirement. Did not need anything else. All the money that they needed. Asked others in this age group about that. After 2 other people confirmed what he told me, stopped, end of subject.
Remember that this was in 1935. What was the economy like at that time? Politicians over promising and under delivering. So what else is new?
Think of social security as a underfunded ponzi scheme. However all my life have heard that social security was a ponzi scheme and that it would go broke. Perhaps made my retirement plans based on the idea that would never receive a single penny from social security. Might have a out of box way of looking at the problem of social security.
And there must be problems. Only a month ago, Barry was telling the world that the US did not have the money to make social security payments unless we borrowed that money from The Captalist Chinese Communist Party.
Hold on Houston, I think we have a problem.
Leave your response