Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Post-Debate Tweet of the Day

    Post-Debate Tweet of the Day

    I thought Romney did well last night, as did Perry (although expectations were higher for Perry).  Newt was the star.

    But, Romney’s post-debate performance by his messaging team was horrid, playing the “kill social security card” on Perry.  We can quibble about whether the social security system has characteristics of a Ponzi scheme (aren’t all pay-as-you-go systems, in the sense of requiring future investors to pay prior investors, similar to a Ponzi scheme?).  I don’t like using the phrase because it detracts from the message.

    But whatever you say, it’s not fair to play scare tactics similar to what the Democrats do on Medicare.  Perry isn’t going to kill social security under any interpretation of his remarks.  Yet after the debate Romney’s team immediately claimed otherwise, as pointed out by John McCormack of the Weekly Standard:

    Here’s the linked quote in the Tweet:

    “The Republican Party has to defend the position of the nominee,” said top  Romney adviser Stuart Stevens. “Every House candidate that runs, every Senate  candidate that runs, would have to run on the Perry plan to kill Social  Security.”

    Challenging other candidates is both fine and good.  But don’t regurgitate meaningless Democratic talking points and smears.  Romney did fine during the debate, he should get control of his staff.

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments


    Shikha Dalmia’s: Social Security is Not a Ponzi Scheme, Mr. Perry does a pretty good job of explaining this issue.

    Hint:   SS is worse that a Ponzi Scheme!
    .


     
     0 
     
     0
    Midwest Rhino (not RINO) | September 8, 2011 at 1:04 pm

    Perry will have to come out with his clear plan to fix SS. But he is correct, SS IS a big lie. The “locked box” people think they pay into, like they would an IRA, is nothing of the sort. The funds are gone, replaced with IOU’s. The IOU’s run out in 2037 (supposedly), but the payments on those IOU’s comes from future taxes above and beyond current incoming SS taxes (they are taxes, not investments into a “trust”, as I understand it).

    Perry seems to be putting himself in a better position to argue the Ryan plan (or whatever plan he has), than if he said we have till 2037 to fix it. It is already a current cash flow liability, and is only getting worse.

    The Democrat Mediscare had Repub’s pushing grandma over the cliff. If fear works, people should know what to really fear, which requires using the “It’s a Big Lie” attack on many things .. a majority already KNOW our government lies to us, especially Obama.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Mutnodjmet | September 8, 2011 at 1:20 pm

    Frankly, I enjoy seeing that Perry is not backtracking on the matter. We have had other Presidential candidates who used the word “fix”, yet SS remains the same and on a failure trajectory. Now that Perry is using the word “kill”, perhaps the vaunted “compromise” position is a real fix.

    Professor — you are spot on. Romney lost the debate in the aftermath.

    “We can quibble about whether the social security system has characteristics of a Ponzi scheme (aren’t all pay-as-you-go systems, in the sense of requiring future investors to pay prior investors, similar to a Ponzi scheme?).”

    No, we can’t. It is a Ponzi Scheme, and so is every other “pay as you go” plan. That’s why all such plans are a bad idea. The initial idea behind SS was that everyone would be forced to pay (unless you worked for the government, in which case you could opt out), but most people would die before they could collect benefits, and get nothing. This failed for a couple of reasons, the main ones being growing life expectancies, and politicians seeing a big pool of money and deciding to spend it. SS is crap, and it should be killed.

    Romney playing this game has moved him from my “like” column” to my “tolerate” column. In 2008 I went door to door for McCain (because of Palin). In 2012, I don’t think I’d go door to door from Romney.

    Before you can convince the electorate that a program needs fixing, you must first convince them that the program is broken. I think Perry made some progress in that regard. The details of the fix can come later.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend