26 Things Non-Paul Voters Are Basically Saying

[SweetChildofMine]

mikepegg44 wrote: RON PAUL WILL NOT CUT MEDICARE, MEDICAID OR SOCIAL SECURITY for those currently on it.


Key words:

"for those currently on it"


What is with the attack on Social Security? A program that has been sustainable by its citizens for many years. Why? Cuz yah all cant wait to get your hands on the cash. That was also part of Bush platform if I remember correctly in 2000.

[SweetChildofMine]

Besides he is all into leading this 99% movement when its all about the people joining leading "the people." As far as I can see this man has been an insider for years.


I always say...... its the in information. What did you do with it?


Co-opted movement trying to make the GOP smell like a f'n rose when the smell like another dirty barrel of dead fish.


Sorry this is my opinion.

[Sludge Factory]

mikepegg44 wrote: RON PAUL WILL NOT CUT MEDICARE, MEDICAID OR SOCIAL SECURITY for those currently on it.


Key words:

"for those currently on it"


What is with the attack on Social Security? A program that has been sustainable by its citizens for many years. Why? Cuz yah all cant wait to get your hands on the cash. That was also part of Bush platform if I remember correctly in 2000.

If you think the current Social Security system is on a path of sustainability, I can't wait to see what you think 20 - 30 years from now when it is on the verge of being broken because we didn't ever do anything to fix it. People ALREADY have their hands on the cash there. Congress has already dipped their hands in the Social Security fund plenty of times.

[Sludge Factory]

Besides he is all into leading this 99% movement when its all about the people joining leading "the people." As far as I can see this man has been an insider for years.


I always say...... its the in information. What did you do with it?


Co-opted movement trying to make the GOP smell like a f'n rose when the smell like another dirty barrel of dead fish.


Sorry this is my opinion.

You are welcome to your opinion, but I hope you realize there are informed opinions and misinformed opinions. Your opinions throughout this thread reek of misinformation. When asked to back up the flip flop statement you can't provide proof let alone even say what it is you saw on TV that he was flip flopping on. I would think if you felt so strongly about how much of a flip flopper Ron Paul appeared to be to you, you would actually remember what it was he was flip flopping on.

Furthermore, you are lumping Ron Paul in with the rest of the GOP party. He is, if anything, not a typical GOP establishment insider. I think the proof that the GOP itself tries to ignore and marginalize him can attest to that. Ron Paul is essentially shaking the very foundation of the GOP, not towing their line for them.

[Prince Of Dorkness]

Social Security is not going out of money and will be solvent as things are for decades.

Don't believe the hype spread that it's going bankrupt... it's not.

And if we would just tax the people who have the money, we'd be doing even better.

[WaveRyder]

I just did. It happened. Ive seen alot of things. The things I worry about and fight for then to see that shit is an instant toss.

no you didnt.

[WaveRyder]

For sweetchildomine

‎"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be." – Thomas Jefferson

[mikepegg44]

mikepegg44 wrote: RON PAUL WILL NOT CUT MEDICARE, MEDICAID OR SOCIAL SECURITY for those currently on it.


Key words:

"for those currently on it"


What is with the attack on Social Security? A program that has been sustainable by its citizens for many years. Why? Cuz yah all cant wait to get your hands on the cash. That was also part of Bush platform if I remember correctly in 2000.

It isn't about getting hands on THE cash...it is about getting our hands on OUR cash...I think I can do a better job investing that money than social security can offer me. If you think that Ron Paul is about the federal government getting their hands on more cash than you have never listened to him once. Cannot really have an intelligent conversation with you about him if your going to attribute stuff to him that isn't true in the least. You can find faults with his program but come on...he hasn't co-opted anything...his message has been exactly the same for 30 years and every vote and speech on the floor of the house has echoed that sentiment...the occupiers are just co-opting parts of his movement...

I am going to echo what Sludge said...if you think we are on a path to sustainability you are sadly mistaken. remember this..a million experts have said that social security on its current path is unsustainable...are you just assuming we can continue borrowing infinitely to pay for it with no repercussions? Didn't you find it strange that if we didn't raise the DEBT ceiling the administration said that we weren't going to be able to pay social security benefits...what is sustainable about infinite borrowing? Not raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with the amount of money we take in from payroll taxes and social security taxes...

from an article on the huffington post:

President Barack Obama told CBS News' Scott Pelley Tuesday that he cannot guarantee that Social Security checks will go out as planned if Democrats and Republicans fail to reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling by August 2.
"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3 if we haven't resolved this issue, because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Obama said in an interview on the CBS Evening News Tuesday evening.

from factcheck.org
Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra of California said that he would "fight to take [Social Security] off the table" in budget negotiations, because it "hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion." We take no position on whether Social Security should be cut, but it's wrong to say it's not contributing to the deficit.
Social Security benefits paid were more than payroll taxes in 2010, leading to a cash deficit of $49 billion. For 2011, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees project a $46 billion deficit. And those figures don't include the billions more the government will have to borrow to cover that reduction in payroll taxes that was in last year's deal to extend the Bush tax cuts

yep, it certainly is a solvent program...you know...the kind of program that pays out more than it takes in

[mikepegg44]

RON PAUL WILL NOT CUT MEDICARE, MEDICAID OR SOCIAL SECURITY for those currently on it.

Maybe Ron has said more about the issue of Medicaid than what's on his web pages, but what's on them regarding Medicaid is pretty narrow and dim. On Ronnpaul.com, he hooks the 'I'm a victim of taxes' crowed with the question: "Why should anyone be forced to subsidize the medical care of others?" and then goes on to essentially say that poor people will get free healthcare through charity. He doesn't directly say that Medicaid would be gone, but that's what can be taken from it, as he also goes on about government not being involved in healthcare (as he will work to prevent 'opportunist politicians' from having any sort of unhealthy influence over out bodies).

On Ronpaul2012, the only reference to Medicaid I could see was that he wants to keep the money intended for it to not get "raided" for other things. Maybe you could see that as a flip-flop by omission.

here you go, it starts at 3:55


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqxbliegpA8

[WaveRyder]

mikepegg44 wrote: RON PAUL WILL NOT CUT MEDICARE, MEDICAID OR SOCIAL SECURITY for those currently on it.


Key words:

"for those currently on it"


What is with the attack on Social Security? A program that has been sustainable by its citizens for many years. Why? Cuz yah all cant wait to get your hands on the cash. That was also part of Bush platform if I remember correctly in 2000.

It isn't about getting hands on THE cash...it is about getting our hands on OUR cash...I think I can do a better job investing that money than social security can offer me. If you think that Ron Paul is about the federal government getting their hands on more cash than you have never listened to him once. Cannot really have an intelligent conversation with you about him if your going to attribute stuff to him that isn't true in the least. You can find faults with his program but come on...he hasn't co-opted anything...his message has been exactly the same for 30 years and every vote and speech on the floor of the house has echoed that sentiment...the occupiers are just co-opting parts of his movement...

I am going to echo what Sludge said...if you think we are on a path to sustainability you are sadly mistaken. remember this..a million experts have said that social security on its current path is unsustainable...are you just assuming we can continue borrowing infinitely to pay for it with no repercussions? Didn't you find it strange that if we didn't raise the DEBT ceiling the administration said that we weren't going to be able to pay social security benefits...what is sustainable about infinite borrowing? Not raising the debt ceiling has nothing to do with the amount of money we take in from payroll taxes and social security taxes...

from an article on the huffington post:

President Barack Obama told CBS News' Scott Pelley Tuesday that he cannot guarantee that Social Security checks will go out as planned if Democrats and Republicans fail to reach a deal to raise the debt ceiling by August 2.
"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3 if we haven't resolved this issue, because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Obama said in an interview on the CBS Evening News Tuesday evening.

from factcheck.org
Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra of California said that he would "fight to take [Social Security] off the table" in budget negotiations, because it "hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion." We take no position on whether Social Security should be cut, but it's wrong to say it's not contributing to the deficit.
Social Security benefits paid were more than payroll taxes in 2010, leading to a cash deficit of $49 billion. For 2011, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees project a $46 billion deficit. And those figures don't include the billions more the government will have to borrow to cover that reduction in payroll taxes that was in last year's deal to extend the Bush tax cuts

yep, it certainly is a solvent program...you know...the kind of program that pays out more than it takes in

to be fair, he did change his mind on capital punishment about 20 years ago.

[SweetChildofMine]

Why are you trying to fix something that isnt broke. Getting our hands on our cash? Social Security runs fine.


Why dont we try programs and legislation that have big piece OF OUR CASH earmarked for some blowhard superpac? I mean that would make much more sense? Why dont we try to fix and target politicians who have vested interest in capitalistic ventures which are detriment to ourselves and economy only puffing up their own means? That is the corruption in big government not grandma getting her social security check after she worked at JC Penny's for 50 years.

Bilderberg billionaire supports Ron Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aybZBlZ9DjQ

[WaveRyder]

Why are you trying to fix something that isnt broke. Getting our hands on our cash? Social Security runs fine.


Why dont we try programs and legislation that have big piece OF OUR CASH earmarked for some blowhard superpac? I mean that would make much more sense? Why dont we try to fix and target politicians who have vested interest in capitalistic ventures which are detriment to ourselves and economy only puffing up their own means? That is the corruption in big government not grandma getting her social security check after she worked at JC Penny's for 50 years.

Bilderberg billionaire supports Ron Paul

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aybZBlZ9DjQ

i know you can read because youre able to make posts so it must be that you just don't read information that proves youre wrong on this.

Social security is broken.

"Democratic Rep. Xavier Becerra of California said that he would "fight to take [Social Security] off the table" in budget negotiations, because it "hasn't contributed 1 cent to the deficit that we face today, nor 1 cent to any of the national debt, the $14.3 trillion." We take no position on whether Social Security should be cut, but it's wrong to say it's not contributing to the deficit.
Social Security benefits paid were more than payroll taxes in 2010, leading to a cash deficit of $49 billion. For 2011, the Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees project a $46 billion deficit. And those figures don't include the billions more the government will have to borrow to cover that reduction in payroll taxes that was in last year's deal to extend the Bush tax cuts"

[SweetChildofMine]

"The misinformation we are constantly bombarded with – that Social Security is going bankrupt – is wrong. The truth is that even if nothing were done to change the financing of Social Security, the program would pay 100 percent of the same benefits it is currently paying for the next 25 years. No senior is, nor will be losing a dime of his or her benefits. Even after 2036, if nothing is done Social Security will pay 77 percent of promised benefits. That is a 23 percent problem that can and will be resolved. Social Security is not broken, not broke, and certainly not bankrupt.

Some folks in Washington, D.C. have proposed radical ideas to reduce Social Security benefits or take money out of Social Security and gamble it on Wall Street. They argue that we should convert Social Security to a system of private accounts in which individuals could invest. This kind of talk is irresponsible, divisive, dishonest and frightening to our seniors (and future generations)."- Representative Mike Thompson representative from California's 1st District.

http://www.ncpssm.org/news/archive/2010 ... es_report/


"Social Security’s surplus is not disappearing. While it is true that revenue income received by the Trust Funds has declined during the recession, the program’s financial health is still sound. In fact, as we stated earlier, the surplus held by the Trust Funds is still growing, and is projected by the Social Security actuaries to reach a peak in 2020 of $3.1 trillion."

f'ing simple google search of common knowledge not rocket science.


I suppose you didnt read this either.

[mikepegg44]

"The misinformation we are constantly bombarded with – that Social Security is going bankrupt – is wrong. The truth is that even if nothing were done to change the financing of Social Security, the program would pay 100 percent of the same benefits it is currently paying for the next 25 years. No senior is, nor will be losing a dime of his or her benefits. Even after 2036, if nothing is done Social Security will pay 77 percent of promised benefits. That is a 23 percent problem that can and will be resolved. Social Security is not broken, not broke, and certainly not bankrupt.

Some folks in Washington, D.C. have proposed radical ideas to reduce Social Security benefits or take money out of Social Security and gamble it on Wall Street. They argue that we should convert Social Security to a system of private accounts in which individuals could invest. This kind of talk is irresponsible, divisive, dishonest and frightening to our seniors (and future generations)."- Representative Mike Thompson representative from California's 1st District.

http://www.ncpssm.org/news/archive/2010 ... es_report/


"Social Security’s surplus is not disappearing. While it is true that revenue income received by the Trust Funds has declined during the recession, the program’s financial health is still sound. In fact, as we stated earlier, the surplus held by the Trust Funds is still growing, and is projected by the Social Security actuaries to reach a peak in 2020 of $3.1 trillion."

f'ing simple google search of common knowledge not rocket science.


I suppose you didnt read this either.

Look. The SOCIAL SECURITY WEBSITE SAYS THIS
The last 5 Trustees Reports have indicated that Social Security's Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) Trust Funds would become exhausted between 2036 and 2041 under the intermediate set of economic and demographic assumptions provided in each report. If no legislative change is enacted, [b]scheduled tax revenues will be sufficient to pay only about three fourths of the scheduled benefits after trust fund exhaustion.[/b] Many policymakers have developed proposals and options to address this long-range solvency problem.
We have prepared memoranda for many of these proposals and options. Each memorandum provides an actuarial analysis showing the estimated effect on the financial status of the OASDI program.


but I will take your word for it. It is perfect and we shouldn't change a thing. I am so lucky that the government is taking my money and saving it for me because I cannot be responsible enough to save my for my retirement. Thank you, Uncle Sam...may I have another?
its fine...it was never and will never be depleted, not even close (see 1982)...

[inmytree]

hilarious, sad, and true

http://www.tomwoods.com/blog/26-things- ... ly-saying/

the condescending tone of the author is a bit off-putting...

sadly, many (not all) Paul supporters share the same condescending tone...