Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Rick Santorum...Pres. candidate?


  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 bitrush

bitrush
  • VibeTribe
  • 273 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:02 PM

CONCORD, N.H. — In his latest trip to New Hampshire, Republican Rick Santorum says the Social Security system would be in much better shape if there were fewer abortions.

The former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential candidate was asked about Social Security during an interview on WEZS-AM radio in Laconia this morning.

He says the system has design flaws, but the reason it is in big trouble is that there aren’t enough workers to support retirees. He blamed that on what he called the nation’s abortion culture. He says that culture, coupled with policies that do not support families, deny America what it needs — more people.

Santorum has been a frequent visitor to New Hampshire, which holds the earliest presidential primary.

#2 Julius

Julius
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,598 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:03 PM

By that logic, a much better solution would be to grant more visas to highly qualified immigrants.

Bet he doesn't agree with that!

#3 staggerlee024

staggerlee024
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,503 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:09 PM

By that logic, a much better solution would be to grant more visas to highly qualified immigrants.



The young Latino population is one of the main reasons that we are in such better shape than our European counterparts.

#4 Arglebargle

Arglebargle
  • VibeTribe
  • 1,378 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:12 PM

There aren't enough jobs for the people who want them now.

#5 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:14 PM

By that logic

What the heck does logic have to do with it?

This is Rick Santorum!

#6 Jwheelz

Jwheelz
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,818 posts
  • LocationNutmeg State

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:18 PM

I am aghast at what to even say about that... Santorum and the rest should run, it's nice for the rest of the country to see the bizarre behavior and beliefs of these folks... the only problem is sometimes it legitimizes it too much...

#7 Julius

Julius
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,598 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:21 PM

Yeah let's count on an army of unwanted fetuses to provide for our retirees. Great idea! Better build some more prisons while you're at it, Rick!

#8 vic

vic
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,913 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:22 PM

he would be the WORST candidate EVER...racist, radical christian, absolute dirtbag...he'd never win...i hope

#9 Jwheelz

Jwheelz
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,818 posts
  • LocationNutmeg State

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:25 PM

strangely enough, Social Security would be in better shape if all the existing people who don't have to pay Social Security tax on a lot of their income because of that income cap on earnings subject to Social Security tax... and that could be accomplished without eliminating rights that have been guaranteed by the United States Supreme Court and federal law...

#10 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 08:33 PM

Social Security is in decent shape. A few tweaks needed

What I would do is:
Raise the cap where you pay SS to somewhere around $200K, but only on the half that individuals pay (so as to "not hurt business")
Lower the retirement age about 5 years (helping iwth unemployment)

"problem" "solved"

#11 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,766 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 09:22 PM

I personally hope Santorum, Palin, Bachmann, Gingrich, Bolton, Cain, Trump, and many other narcissistic wingnuts join the GOP race :cheesy:

#12 seany

seany
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,766 posts

Posted 29 March 2011 - 09:29 PM

Social Security is in decent shape. A few tweaks needed

What I would do is:
Raise the cap where you pay SS to somewhere around $200K, but only on the half that individuals pay (so as to "not hurt business")
Lower the retirement age about 5 years (helping iwth unemployment)

"problem" "solved"


I don't see how lowering the retirement age by 5 yrs helps at all. It's a delicate balancing act, for sure, but many need those last years to help sure up their 401k/IRA investments for the long run. Then you're adding another 5 years (probably more, because people who retire younger tend to live longer) to SS payouts (and, presumably Medicaid). And, realistically, taking one older person out of the workplace does not equate 1:1 with hiring a younger person - it's probably more like 3 old to 1 young, so you're not increasing the net revenue into SS.

#13 PennsylvaniaPete

PennsylvaniaPete
  • VibeTribe
  • 469 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 01:35 AM

he would be the WORST candidate EVER...racist, radical christian, absolute dirtbag...he'd never win...i hope


All the potential Republican candidates seem terrible But I agree, Santorum is about as bad as they come.

#14 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,335 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 02:45 AM

http://www.spreadingsantorum.com/

DEFINITION: SANTORUM
Pronunciation: san-TOR-um
Function: noun
Etymology: Savage Love - 05/29/03
1. The frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex.
2. Senator Rick Santorum

#15 insolent cur

insolent cur

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 298 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 05:53 AM

omg! :lmao:

#16 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 02:20 PM

I don't see how lowering the retirement age by 5 yrs helps at all. It's a delicate balancing act, for sure, but many need those last years to help sure up their 401k/IRA investments for the long run. Then you're adding another 5 years (probably more, because people who retire younger tend to live longer) to SS payouts (and, presumably Medicaid). And, realistically, taking one older person out of the workplace does not equate 1:1 with hiring a younger person - it's probably more like 3 old to 1 young, so you're not increasing the net revenue into SS.

Right now you retire between 62 and 67. At 67 you can get 'full benefits', at 62 I think it's 70%.
So add a between 57 and 62 range.
I agree it's a balancing act, but that's what we should be discussing, not raising the retirement age

#17 PennsylvaniaPete

PennsylvaniaPete
  • VibeTribe
  • 469 posts

Posted 30 March 2011 - 02:21 PM

Would not all these kids from an increased birthrate need to be educated at tax payer expense at least a decade plus before they paid one cent in SS tax? I guess with the education cutbacks, the answer is "no."