Meet The Candidates: 2012 GOP Thread

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

First my Disclaimer: Didn't watch the debate. Don't know much about the candidates yet except what I have gleaned here. From what I know, I would like to take bits and pieces from each candidate but don't fully endorse any of their complete agendas.

With that said, if Perry insinuated that SS reform needs to be done - good for him. SS functions on the same structures that drive ponzi schemes and, if such an investment structure was attempted by a private party, it would be an illegal. The difference, of course, is that a true ponzi scheme is created with the intent to defraud which most certainly is not the intent of SS. At the same time, while not created to defraud, it will, in the not-to-distant future, be unable to provide the benefits it currently guarrantees. While not fraud in the strictest sense, it is certainly not beyond the pale to point out the inherent untruthfulness of the current system.

To argue that pointing out inherent flaws of "one of the nation's most sacrosanct programs" should be verbotten smacks of 1984's Newspeak and discourages accurate discussion about the problems created and faced by the Social Security system. In its current, the SS fund will be exhaused in 2036 and, after that on a pay as you go basis, it will only be able to pay 75% of the benefits it is currently promising to its "investors".

People entering the workforce should be made aware that, because of its basic Ponzi structure, SS cannot continue indefinitely without a drastic reduction in services or a hugely increasing the burden on current and future workers. Regardless, it is unlikely that current and future employees will get any where near the ROI they have been promised or expect from SS in its current form.

You're right, demagogues will undoubtedly use scare tactics to make it seem that any reform of SS is tantamount to an attack on the most vulnerable of society that will leave our elderly to die in destitution.

Do I worry that Perry sees "one of the nation's most sacrosanct programs in modern American history" for what it is - a legalized ponzi scheme? No.
I would rather my President have an accurate and honest understanding of the nature of our system for caring for the elderly rather than be afraid to advocate for its reform because it is "sacrosanct". The Social Security system fulfills to an important and necessary role in our society and to discuss it in anything but the most brutally honest measures does everyone - young and old - a disservice.

Okay, rant over.

For the part I made bold; see Greece….

I too dont get why its taboo for a politic to call social security is a Ponzi scheme, when it is. All Perry is doing is being honest with the American people. SS is a sophisticated ponzi scheme although probably less so then Madoff’s or Allen Stanford’s. The only potential disqualifiers are like you said the intent of ss is not to defraud and ill add that with ss participation is mandatory if you work. Any attempt ive heard or read that trys to explain why its not a ponzi scheme uses completely flawed arguments.

I do disagree with Perry and agree with you in that I think also SS is a good/necessary thing. However like GW tried accomplish and what Romney referenced as the Chilean model, I would like the option to control some my contributions.

[Chico23231]

Think i might officially be on the "Chris Christie should join the race bandwagon"...anyone else? Im not throwing full support, but want to hear what he has to say.

[12thMan]

More style than substance. I think he's a very smart and capable pol, but his appeal is he's a little brash and a straight shooter. I'll be interested to hear what are his policy positions on a range of issues.

He has his work cut out for him big time. The longer he drags it out, the longer it takes to put a campaign infrastructure together.

[Chico23231]

Romney jabs controversial speaker at Values Voter Summit – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Shoulda I be surprised Rick Perry would roll like this?

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Chico23231

Romney jabs controversial speaker at Values Voter Summit – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Shoulda I be surprised Rick Perry would roll like this?

From that article:

...Romney did take aim at Bryan Fischer, a director at the American Family Association, who was slated to speak directly after the candidate took the stage Saturday.

Fischer has claimed that Mormons and Muslims have "a completely different definition of who Christ is" than the founding fathers did, and do not deserve First Amendment protections as a consequence.

How utterly absurd and pathetic. Mormons and Muslims deserve no First Amendment protections? The ignorance of this fellow is overwhelming. It baffles me that the candidates have to try and cater to these "Values Voters" people.

Unbelievable. I mean really. What a collossal cluster fornication these knuckledraggers are. The Family Research Council, the American Family Association, the Christian Coalition -- all of them make the sane voters of this country do one giant facepalm.

If the GOP as a whole could just lose these nutbags, and concentrate their platform on economic and personal freedom, they would be amazed at how many elections they would win.

[SmootSmack]

Bit surprised there was no mention here of Palin and Christie deciding not to run

[12thMan]

Christie has been saying no since May, so it would have been more of surprise had he decided to run.

It's funny that candidates give all kinds of reasons for not running except for I don't think I can win.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

Christie has been saying no since May, so it would have been more of surprise had he decided to run.

It's funny that candidates give all kinds of reasons for not running except for I don't think I can win.

As a politician now would be a great time to run for office. Obama is probably done and I'm not but so impressed with everyone else running.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

As a politician now would be a great time to run for office. Obama is probably done and I'm not but so impressed with everyone else running.

You guys keep saying Obama is done. It's just a bunch of bullshit. Are his poll numbers good, no. But for someone that's "weak", why are all the big hitters too chicken to take him on?

[dmek25]

Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube

really didnt know where to put this, but found it very interesting

[Chico23231]

Originally Posted by dmek25

Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube

really didnt know where to put this, but found it very interesting

Yeah ive heard it before, but thats old republican. There are no more Regans in Washington anymore or running on the GOP tickets. Sure is hell none in Tea Party movement. Paying fair share used to be conservative ideal. Now their in line with Big business, Big Corporations. U can one again see that aligning with Wall Street and big money than any protest against an institution that lead us head first into near economic collaspe. Their against Tarp and bailouts, but with Wall Street now? Funny

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by dmek25

Reagan--No Loopholes For Millionaires - YouTube

really didnt know where to put this, but found it very interesting

Warren Buffet pays the capital gains tax, while his secretary pays federal income taxes. They are two completely different things.

Now, if you are saying that the capital gains tax rate should be the same rate as the top level income tax rate, fine. But if you think your 401k didn't take enough of a hit over the last few years, don't worry. Jacking the capital gains rate up will clean out whatever you have left.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather not have Congress find a way to make it less profitable to invest.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

You guys keep saying Obama is done. It's just a bunch of bullshit. Are his poll numbers good, no. But for someone that's "weak", why are all the big hitters too chicken to take him on?

Which 'Big Hitters' are you talking about?

All an opponenet has to do is hide BHO's teleprompter and the debate would be over.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by RedskinRat

Which 'Big Hitters' are you talking about?

All an opponenet has to do is hide BHO's teleprompter and the debate would be over.

Gov. Mitch Daniels
Gov. Chris Christie
Rep. Paul Ryan
Gov. Haley Barbour
Sen. John Thune
Gov. Mike Huckabee
Gov. Sarah Palin

That's a pretty good list of candidates that don't think they can beat Barack Obama. Within GOP circles, I would consider them hitters.


Jon Huntsman still in single digits in every poll, he'll be out of the race in a couple of months if not before. #fail
Rick Perry is fading faster than a pair of Levi jeans.

Your nominee will be flip-flopping Mitt Romney.

[budw38]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Warren Buffet pays the capital gains tax, while his secretary pays federal income taxes. They are two completely different things.

Now, if you are saying that the capital gains tax rate should be the same rate as the top level income tax rate, fine. But if you think your 401k didn't take enough of a hit over the last few years, don't worry. Jacking the capital gains rate up will clean out whatever you have left.

Call me crazy, but I'd rather not have Congress find a way to make it less profitable to invest.

Exactly .... well written JB&7 .