Hats off to Perry for his strong stand

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • wrz Tucson, AZ
    Sept. 22, 2011 1:57 p.m.

    Re: ljeppson

    I think that's what I said... i.e., that bonds held by the SS fund are special (you said 'special issue.') and that they are not trade-able on any exchange. I see very little difference in what you posted and what I posted. I think we are on the same page. And I'm going from memory from my many years of examining and auditing federal funds and programs.

    "So my response to you is: so what?"

    And so my response to your 'so what?' is, so what?

  • ljeppson Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 1:27 p.m.

    Re: wrz Here's what SS has to say about its investments:

    By law, income to the trust funds must be invested, on a daily basis, in securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal government. All securities held by the trust funds are "special issues" of the United States Treasury. Such securities are available only to the trust funds.
    In the past, the trust funds have held marketable Treasury securities, which are available to the general public. Unlike marketable securities, special issues can be redeemed at any time at face value. Marketable securities are subject to the forces of the open market and may suffer a loss, or enjoy a gain, if sold before maturity. Investment in special issues gives the trust funds the same flexibility as holding cash.

    So my response to you is: so what?

  • wrz Tucson, AZ
    Sept. 22, 2011 12:41 p.m.


    "Would that be U S Treasury bills and bonds? Treasury has no difficulty selling these globally - they are considered the safest investment possible in the current climate."

    Good points, jeppson. Only one correction, the bonds held by the fund are special bonds at very low interest rates... and not trade-able on any exchange.

    "What in your view should the trust fund hold instead? Enron stock? Real estate? Mortgage backed securities? Bundles of twenty dollar bills with our respective names on them?"

    More excellent points. Perhaps the fund should hold the Suzie B. Anthony's and/or those new dollar coins the government is pushing. Then, on retirement you take your wheelbarrow to the treasury and load up.

    I can't believe the stupidity of many Americans... and even Rick Perry who calls SS a Ponzi scheme. Anyone who seemingly doesn't have the brains to understand how the SS fund works, and indeed how government finances work, should not be president of the United States.

  • micawber Centerville, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:48 a.m.

    I erred in my comment when I said Mr. Skokos had a talk radio show. He claims, rather to be a political activist. I apologize for my error, but my point remains.

  • Blue Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:29 a.m.

    Mr. Skokos is a CEO of the most heavily subsidized industry in the world (oil), and he scolds about government welfare?

    These guys constantly demand (and sadly, get) massive government handouts left and right, and yet are belligerent when it comes to being asked to clean up the messes they make on public lands.

    But let someone suggest that taking care of children, the elderly and the disabled is an appropriate use of tax dollars, they start foaming at the mouth.


  • Pagan Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:18 a.m.

    'Texas Gov. Rick Perry is being criticized for his comments during the Republican debate, calling Social Security a "Ponzi scheme." - Article

    Perry may have legitimate concerns with social security.

    Resorting to the common Republican tactic of outrage soundbites is not only offensive, but misleading.

    Want to see other examples?

    * 'Dr. Laura's N-Word Rant: Radio Host Apologizes For Offensive Language' - Danny Shea - Huffington Post - 08/12/10

    'Dr. Laura Schlessinger has apologized after a shocking rant on her radio show this week during which she said the n-word 11 times over the course of five minutes.'

    *'Gays greatest threat to America, Buttars says' - By Aaron Falk - DSnews - 02/19/09

    *'GOP state legislator: Homosexuality worse than terrorism' - By David Ferguson - Talking Points Memo - 09/10/11

    *'Trump on Obama's Birth Certificate: 'Maybe It Says He's a Muslim' - Fox Nation - 03/30/11

  • Roland Kayser Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:18 a.m.

    This editorial is utter nonsense. Even if we did absolutely nothing, the worst case scenario is that future retirees would see their projected benefits cut by around 20%. Future benefits are currently projected to be higher than current benefits, so that would leave future retirees about as well off as current ones.

    Social Security currently consumes 5% of GDP. In 2035 that will rise to 6%, where it is projected to stay. 1% of GDP is not an unsolvable crisis.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:09 a.m.

    Perry strong morally?

    What happened when he supported in-state tuition to illegals? Where did his moral principles go then?

    Perry is just more of the same old tired politician. He'll do and say anything that will get him elected. Right now, he's trying to appear more conservatier than Romney, Bachmann, etc. So he's gone to the extreme to call SS a Ponzi scheme.

    This will win major votes with radical repubs. But it surely won't win votes from mainstream America.

  • grandpaJ LAYTON, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 8:00 a.m.

    Perry is right on. It is a ponzi scheme.
    FDR was this nations greatest and most horrific enabler by getting people "hooked on government" thinking they never had to do anything for themselves because the good old government would be there to tax people to death so they could stay on the "dole". The old enabler has opened up the doors on people like our current President, who by the way is the worst President in the history of the United States. FDR should be ashamed at the type of country he turned us in to.

  • one vote Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 7:34 a.m.

    He locked it up with his outrageous tea party comments. The more radical the better!

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 6:51 a.m.

    I'll take Social Security over a mandatory plan where the money is invested with Wall Street. Social Security isn't so bad. Perhaps a few tweaks, but it works. I guess it is easy for the head of an oil company to take shots at a system that so many non-rich Americans needs and like, especially as their life savings have been wiped out by Wall Street and the banks. These guys are just tone deaf and out of touch, and then they use the tea party as a tool to destroy the middle class. Devious, right?

  • RanchHand Huntsville, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 6:51 a.m.

    Don't remove your hat in Texas; your brains will broil.

  • ljeppson Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 12:21 a.m.

    "...leaving us nothing but IOUs from the Treasury Department." Would that be U S Treasury bills and bonds? Treasury has no difficulty selling these globally - they are considered the safest investment possible in the current climate. What in your view should the trust fund hold instead? Enron stock? Real estate? Mortgage backed securities? Bundles of twenty dollar bills with our respective names on them? Get real.

  • Salsero Provo, UT
    Sept. 22, 2011 12:13 a.m.

    There is a difference between the Rick Perry who speaks extemporaneously and the Rick Perry who reads a speech written by one of his speechwriters. When he speaks off-the-cuff, he says things that get him in trouble. Although he's the good ol' boy, his remarks only appeal to the extreme fringe of the Republican Party and alienates establishment Republicans (not to mention moderates and independents). However, when he reads his speech written by others, one wonders if he understands the words.

    For a fellow who flunked out of college and joined the Air Force, his only saving grace has been his charisma and appeal to evangelicals in their wish to establish Dominion over the world. Their belief is that they are the only people with the right to control the world and usher in a new order based upon their religious beliefs.

    Those who do not share in those beliefs, we are told, are not to share in this new order and will, ultimately, be cast out as unbelievers and apostates. It's a weird place to be considering the vigor with which Dominionists demonstrate their zeal.