Perry is scary! Even with his flaws Romney is a better choice and that's who I
What I can't understand is how 2 Conservative Republicans say that Government
can't create jobs,and turn right around and argue in a televised debate
that if elected President, that they will create jobs!
"LDS Liberal | 10:57 p.m. Sept. 15, 2011 Farmington, UTWhat I
can't understand is how 2 Conservative Republicans say that Government can't
create jobs,and turn right around and argue in a televised debate that if
elected President, that they will create jobs!"These are the
same people who criticize the President for everything he does, even when he
proposes Republican ideas they used to support.To me, Perry is a
huge PHONY. Taxes are up in Texas with him as governor. He also used 17
billion in federal funds and the jobs he claims he created were....wait for
it........EXPANDING GOVERNMENT with more government jobs.Former
college cheerleader, likes to spend tax payer money, Texas governor...now who
does that sound like...Oh yeah, GW Bush who was for smaller government and
expanded it and signed bills for 6 TRILLION. JUST SAY NO to another
Texas cheerleader governor.
No bad guy in the Social Security picture? Sorry, Mitt, but Congress has been
stealing from SS for 30 years, hence the (accurate) portrayal of the system as a
Ponzi scam, not that I care for Perry. The only difference is, SS was not
originally set up as a Ponzi scheme. It just has become one, because invested
dollars are used to pay some investors, while major funds have been stolen to
finance the exorbitant, extravagant spending of an elite group - Congress.Why don't you call out Congress, Mitt? Because you need them to get
elected.Vote out all incumbents and start over.
Perry is not the man for the job in this case. I dislike him and his policies.
He is an individual who feels that he can say whatever he pleases and refuse to
back down. I do not think that we want someone in office who is unwilling to
ever listen to other people's positions. I want a strong president, and a strong
leader is someone who surrounds themselves with intelligent, experienced, and
wise individuals who they are willing to take advice from. Perry seems to me to
be something of a "bull in a china shop", who believes it is his way
or no way. He also has an amazing ability to distort the facts and the truth. He
has an amazing ability to manipulate situations to suit his needs. That is quite
the talent, and one that American's do not need in the White House. We need
someone who works hard for the people, not one that works the people.
Perry also made a veiled attempt when speaking to students at Liberty University
to question Mitt's christianity. It has become clear that Perry will use any
falsehood, lie, innuendo to attack his opponents. What this shows to me is a
deeply flawed character. I am voting for Mitt because I see in Perry some
serious questions not only on his positions, but also on his character.
Funny how the commenters leap to Romney's defense. Romney has plenty of
baggage, and LDS Liberal is right, he like Perry rips on government then says
they will do this and that when in charge of government. Phonies both.But why is this a local/Utah story? Why assign a DN reporter to report on a
national story that surely has national coverage? Is this paper a Romney
LDS LiberalHere is the difference when liberals say government creates
jobs they are talking about government actually being the ones who create the
jobs, when conservatives say they will create jobs they are talking about
creating the conditions to help the private sector create. This is jobs. This is
through deregulation, not the kind that Ron Paul wants that Dems always claim
Repubs want but rather streamlining. The vast majority of republicans agree that
we need some regulations after all we do not want to get on an unregulated
airplane that might fall out of the sky. However with an average cost of farming
permits running $23000 per permit per year many farmers must get multiple
permits from different agencies for the same thing. Take an egg farmer for
example they must have one permit from the FDA for the eggs and another from DOA
for the chickens that lay the eggs. Just those two are $46000 per year when they
could both be covered by one. Now take this same kind of thing to other
businesses and how does that effect their ability to hire more people? Or if you
hire 50 people you get more regs?
much ado about nothing
Nice that they are tearing each other apart by pointing out each one's big
government stance on things. Give me someone that believes in
personaresponsibilityty, a sustainablforeigngn policy, liberty and freedom
without Big Government and speciaintereststs ruling us....Yep Give me someone
that gets it. Give me a Real Republican patriot like Ron Paul!
Romney will not be good for this country.
Perry has a room temperature IQ. Anyone running for office should realize that
old people vote they don't have anything better to do. No one in their right
mind wants to get rid of Social Security. We need to fix it. It is a question
of how many Social Security recipients will each worker support?This
is a simple explanation of numbers. In the 1950s, 16 workers were supporting one
Social Security recipient. Post WWII, People had lots of kids, but after 1960
the size of families has decreased. People have also been living longer.
Today, it is 3.3. workers to each retiree and in 40 years it will be 2:1.We need to realistically fix it by reducing the time on SS and Medicare
(increase age to 70+), or reduce benefits. It is all about numbers.
*'Perry likely can beat Romney, but he can't win' - By Kathleen Parker,
Washington Post - Published by DSnews - 08/30/2011 'WASHINGTON Rick
Perry's rapid lead over previous Republican front-runner Mitt Romney was
predictable. But it is not a good sign for Republicans hoping to reclaim the
White House and further highlights the crucial battle within GOP circles: Who is
the godliest of us all?' Romney hasn't been in office for years and
makes jokes about his 'unemployment' while firms give him, literally, millions
then dispear. Texas, burns. If this is the best the
Republican party has to offer in the way of leadership...? My
support goes to Obama. At least he is TRYING to help the
country... and not putting his party, before his country.
majmajorOne other thing to look at is the age set when SS was set up. The
reason the age was set at 65 was that the average life expectancy was 64 if you
lived longer than expected you got it with the exception of disability. The
simplest fix would be to set the age back to one year after the average life
expectancy for anyone younger than 50 today. This grandfathers those close in
and restores the original plan. It was never intended to be a way to support
people for 20-30 years. The second step would be to actually put a lock on the
lock box. Make it a crime for congress to take money from SS for ANY other
reason. This has been going on for far too long. They say we have plenty of
funds in the lock box just don't open it. Why? Because if we did open it we
would see that it has nothing but IOU's from a government that is $14 Trillion
in debt. Does anyone really think they can ever put that money back in?
"...Perry has an amazing ability to manipulate situations to suit his
needs...".Perry is a Politician. As a Politician, it is in his
DNA to manipulate situations to suit his needs."...It has
become clear that Perry will use any falsehood, lie, innuendo to attack his
opponents. What this shows to me is a deeply flawed character...".The Re-Publican Party has used these same tactics to "attack"
the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party returns the favor whenever they can.
Falsehoods, lies and innuendo are just some of calling cards Politicians use to
"make a contrast" between them and their opponent."...The vast majority of republicans agree that we need some
regulations...".The "vast majority of Re-Publicans"
are on record saying the problem with our country is over-regulation.
Re-Publicans ring that "over-regulation is a 'jobs killer' bell", on a
daily basis.How do you "un-ring" that over-regulation
bell, without sounding hypocritical?Unless, of course, the whole
over-regulation thing was just another way to "manipulate a stituation to
suit" the needs of the Re-Publican Party.
"Perry attacks Romney, Romney returns in kind."Yes, and I
hope they "knock each other off," politically speaking.The
most significant thing about the Republican candidates is that they ALL will say
and do anything at all to "buy" the votes, which includes making
outlandish statements against the left or right, actually accusing even those of
their "own" party of wrong-headed thinking. To hear them
say what they don't like in each other has to make one wonder about the
"Republican platform" (whatever the heck that is) that any of them can
actually agree on.
But can either one organize a community like our current President. Now THAT is
an important quality to have.
WHAT NOW?Yes the vast majority of republicans say we need SOME regulation
this is not at odds with saying we are over regulated. Some regulation is needed
like airline safety and making banks treat people fare. However over regulation
causes problems like saying you must give more home loans to minorities. This
causes things like giving loans to people who can not afford them just to stay
inline with the regulations. This causes problems like banks giving loans to
people with proof of income. Then because this leads to a housing bubble more
regulations are created to try to stop the problem caused by the first
regulation without removing the first regulation. And when that causes another
problem it will be yet another regulation to clean that mess. This is how we got
to 23,ooo pages of regulations that if a company misses one line in that 23,000
pages they are breaking the law. Why would anyone want to do buisness in this
GOP= a tribe of cannibals. No one is offering any real solutions.
They're all just trying to eat each other up and make the others look bad.
Instead of showing why they deserve our vote, by offering SPECIFIC plans,
they're just telling us why we SHOULDN'T vote for the other republican.Pathetic and ultimately, unsuccessful in my book. Obama is going to win in
Face facts, folks. Using the Social Security web site/calculator: if you are
currently 27, married, making $30,000/year, expect 1% raises/year, and plan to
retire at 67:You will have paid into SS (assuming current rate and
average salary of $40,000/year) an average of $2,560/year, which totals $102,400
for the 40 years.At retirement age of 67 (using the current
rate/calculator) you will be eligible to receive $3,240/month, or $38,400/year.
In less than 3 years you will have received more than you contributed to SS over
your lifetime. If you include the contributions of your employer(s) it would
take just over 5 years to go through what you both contributed. So, if you live
beyond 72.3 years, you will then be paid using someone else's money, or free
loading.Draw your own conclusions, but IMO, that is why SS needs to
be overhauled. Since LBJ allowed the SS Trust Fund to be used for General
disbursements the government has not been investing contributions; they have
been spending it.
Behold the wonder of the American political system in action. Mr. Perry and Mr.
Romney both believe they are the better candidate for the presidency, and
they're both making their case to the American people. I wouldn't have it any
Floridian,Have you ever been taught about something called interest?
It's kind of a big deal. Especially when you're talking about 36 years.
Kyle,Your point? The SS Trust Fund does not collect interest, since
it does not exist -- it is just a stack of IOUs.
a poster opined: "Perry is scary! Even with his flaws Romney is a better
choice and that's who I will support."It would be more useful
if you would share why you are afraid of Perry's leadership.
LValfre | 8:22 a.m. Sept. 16, 2011 CHICAGO, ILRomney will not be
good for this country.WHY? be specific. vague generalities,
name calling and anything except specifics is of no use unless you are already
in the camp of one of the candidates.
You can bet Obama is licking his chops over the possibility that Perry will be
the nominee. Just being governor of Texas gives Perry more baggage than the DFW
airport. Add to that his "room temperature IQ" (love that quote from
an earlier post) and the near-crazy comments he makes in his book, and you have
the perfect formula for returning Obama to office. If the GOP race comes down to
Perry and someone else, Republicans would be wise to choose the other person.
@greenman108,First of all, your grammar and punctuation is
atrocious.Secondly, I don't think he's good for this country for a
number of reasons. One is his strong religious affiliations. He's already
pre-signed an oath against gay marriage. He's not even in office yet and he's
letting his religion get in the way of his politics. I need someone more stable
than that. Someone that leads the country, not someone that lets his church
lead him which subsequently leads the country.Third, I'm not in any
candidacy camp. I have this same issue with pretty much all of the republican
candidates right now. Kinda like Hunstman and Cain so far although it doesn't
look like they're going anywhere.Romney is strong in business and I
think this country needs that. However, his extreme conservatism (not
financially but social/politically) and deep religious conviction is a true turn
off for me.
Floridian is right. So we have choices. 1. Let employers and Employees
put half that amount into simple 3% interest bearing accounts that would cut the
amount in half that the person would receive from ss security but then force
them to use these other accounts as they see fit. This returns SS to the safety
net is was supposed to be and allows funding for those currently using it.
Over the long run things would be better for the worker and the government would
have less liabilities.2. Leave SS the way it is but raise the
retirement age. Those 50+ no benefits till 67. Those 40-50 no benefits till
70. Those 30-40 no benefits till 72. those under 30 no benefits till 75. 3. Leave SS inputs the same but lower the amount people can with draw
in retirement the 38,000 a year figure would have to be reduced to 25,000 a
year.4. Increase the input. Lift the $100,000 ceiling on paying
into the fund. and increase the inputs by 1% by worker and employer and keep it
where it stands. Problem is Politicians play politics and wont do
A look at the picture says Perry wants to shovel Romney. He extends his arm too
far into Romney's pedestal. Gestures speak volumes. Perry looks exaperated and
cannot find words to rebut Romney.
KC Mormon | 9:50 a.m. Sept. 16, 2011 Edgerton, KS "majmajor,
One other thing to look at is the age set when SS was set up. The reason the age
was set at 65 was that the average life expectancy was 64 if you lived longer
than expected you got it with the exception of disability." Agree. Set it to near life expendancy would be appropriate.Social
Security is a "pay as you go" system. There is no savings account of
cash. Any additional money goes into a bunch of IOUs to assist in paying down
the yearly debt. The "payroll tax deduction" is really a 2% reduction
of the 13%, (6.25% you pay, and 6.25% your employer pays. Which mean we really
pay both.) If the Administration really cared about SS, this Tax
would be untouchable. I don't mind a tax reduction, but it is stupid to further
raid SS. The only ways we can get the budget under control is to spend less in
SS, Medicare or Defense, or more taxes. None of those ideas will get any
votes.We need some elected officials with some courage and doesn't
want to be re-elected.
I just don't understand why you are calling people who paid social security for
40 years "free loaders" for taking out beyond what they paid in. It's
not their fault the government didn't invest the money they paid. Sounds like
you have something against anyone over 73 taking social security.If
your point is social security is not run well then you are correct but don't
call people on social security free loaders.
Pagan writes:"At least he is TRYING to help the countryThe only thing that Obama is trying to do is kill this economy, he is the
worst President in the history of this country, so please Pagan, quit with the