Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So do you and every registered voter. We decide who to vote for based upon that agenda and the information we have either researched or that has been presented to us. How does that defend your candidate? Vote for Senator McCain because the Unions have an agenda appears to be a weak defense. If they continue to hammer their message and this is yours, which is more effective - the issue or the Union's agenda which is to further there version of the issue? Where's your version?
Not sure who I'm voting for. But let's get to the issue at hand, the ad.....
he supports private accounts. Did you even go to the link?
Here's my other reply you conveniently overlooked. I'm curious to hear your answer.
What raiding has McCain done on social security?
So anyone who has plenty of money doesn't care about it correct? Then we should eliminate social security because I'm guessing ALL the folks in congress have plenty of money.
he supports private accounts. Did you even go to the link?
Here's my other reply you conveniently overlooked. I'm curious to hear your answer.
What raiding has McCain done on social security?
So anyone who has plenty of money doesn't care about it correct? Then we should eliminate social security because I'm guessing ALL the folks in congress have plenty of money.
Your Link Option to invest 20% of payroll taxes in private accounts
McCain will present today his first comprehensive plan for apportioning the spoils of the nation’s current prosperity, calling for. a program to shore up Social Security through the establishment of individual retirement accounts. McCain also specifically allocates money to help Medicare, which like Social Security faces a financial shortfall as the population ages. He calls for workers to have the option of investing at least 20% of their Social Security payroll taxes in private accounts.
Source: New York Times, p. A21 Jan 11, 2000
Yep, I reviewed your link but in light of the Senator's recent stand on Privatizing Social Security I thought you would prefer I didn't.
Q: In 2000, you campaigned for president on a plan to use a part of payroll taxes to create Social Security private accounts. Now your Web site talks about accounts as "supplements" to Social Security. Why the change?
A: Actually, I'm totally in favor of personal savings accounts and I think they are an important opportunity for young workers. I campaigned in support of President Bush's proposal and I campaigned with him, and I did town hall meetings with him.
In October 2007, in a presidential primary debate, he said, "We need personal savings accounts." In 2004 and 2005, he repeatedly praised privatization and campaigned with the President for the President's privatization plan.
Today, the closest McCain will come to articulating a position is this: "I would like for young workers — younger workers, only — to have an opportunity to take a few of their tax dollars, few of theirs, and maybe put it into an account with their name on it."
Is that close enough to privatization to freak out seniors? Quite possibly. Especially if they realize that all the money youngsters put into personal savings accounts would ordinarily be going to them." Source
I wish they would privatize it for crying out loud. the government can't run FEMA, so why the hell do so many people want to hire them for health care and financial advisers?
I wish they would privatize it for crying out loud. the government can't run FEMA, so why the hell do so many people want to hire them for health care and financial advisers?
Senator McCain should just go ahead and say it point blank, why he continues to parse the wording while the definition is the same is just silly.
Your Link Option to invest 20% of payroll taxes in private accounts
McCain will present today his first comprehensive plan for apportioning the spoils of the nation’s current prosperity, calling for. a program to shore up Social Security through the establishment of individual retirement accounts. McCain also specifically allocates money to help Medicare, which like Social Security faces a financial shortfall as the population ages. He calls for workers to have the option of investing at least 20% of their Social Security payroll taxes in private accounts.
Source: New York Times, p. A21 Jan 11, 2000
Yep, I reviewed your link but in light of the Senator's recent stand on Privatizing Social Security I thought you would prefer I didn't.
Q: In 2000, you campaigned for president on a plan to use a part of payroll taxes to create Social Security private accounts. Now your Web site talks about accounts as "supplements" to Social Security. Why the change?
A: Actually, I'm totally in favor of personal savings accounts and I think they are an important opportunity for young workers. I campaigned in support of President Bush's proposal and I campaigned with him, and I did town hall meetings with him.
In October 2007, in a presidential primary debate, he said, "We need personal savings accounts." In 2004 and 2005, he repeatedly praised privatization and campaigned with the President for the President's privatization plan.
Today, the closest McCain will come to articulating a position is this: "I would like for young workers — younger workers, only — to have an opportunity to take a few of their tax dollars, few of theirs, and maybe put it into an account with their name on it."
Is that close enough to privatization to freak out seniors? Quite possibly. Especially if they realize that all the money youngsters put into personal savings accounts would ordinarily be going to them." Source
I agree he certainly needs to clarify his position. He has changed his tune on issues just like the other candidates. We definitely need private accounts, hopefully he'll get on board. I'll certainly conceed that point. I believe a lot of businesses agree with privatizing it, that's all the more reason to do it.
Now how about the raiding social security that you claimed?
And the claim about wealth?
I agree he certainly needs to clarify his position. He has changed his tune on issues just like the other candidates. We definitely need private accounts, hopefully he'll get on board. I'll certainly conceed that point. I believe a lot of businesses agree with privatizing it, that's all the more reason to do it.
Now how about the raiding social security that you claimed?
And the claim about wealth?
"Now how about the raiding social security that you claimed?" - Please provide the Quote.
"And the claim about wealth?" - Please clarify.
You inferred, "So anyone who has plenty of money doesn't care about it correct? Then we should eliminate social security because I'm guessing ALL the folks in congress have plenty of money." - from this statement, that - Congress should eliminate Social Security because they can afford to live in their senior years without it.
How does this address the legitimate concerns which are, Social Security was not set up as a fund to borrow money from, How can we address the future viability of Social Security if we underfund it by enacting privatization, and Will private accounts provide for the future needs of new retirees, as well as, How can we have the best of both worlds, i.e. is it possible to return the money and fully fund Social Security and have private savings accounts without "raising the payroll deductions (taxes)", as Senator McCain has suggested.
The Obamas are very comfortable financially. And isn't most of McCain's wealth his wife's? And the Pope wears $700 red Italian leather shoes and did even before he became the pope. Anyway, who cares?
"Now how about the raiding social security that you claimed?" - Please provide the Quote.
"And the claim about wealth?" - Please clarify.
You inferred, "So anyone who has plenty of money doesn't care about it correct? Then we should eliminate social security because I'm guessing ALL the folks in congress have plenty of money." - from this statement, that - Congress should eliminate Social Security because they can afford to live in their senior years without it.
How does this address the legitimate concerns which are, Social Security was not set up as a fund to borrow money from, How can we address the future viability of Social Security if we underfund it by enacting privatization, and Will private accounts provide for the future needs of new retirees, as well as, How can we have the best of both worlds, i.e. is it possible to return the money and fully fund Social Security and have private savings accounts without "raising the payroll deductions (taxes)", as Senator McCain has suggested.
directly from your post...
" Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Looks like the Unions are saying -
Senator McCain will continue to raid Social Security and he doesn't care about yours because he has plenty of money -
that's the implication and correlation I see the ad making. "
You said he doesn't care about social security because he has money. Many people are rich including democrats. So is it because of money or because he's a republican?
The Obamas are very comfortable financially. And isn't most of McCain's wealth his wife's? And the Pope wears $700 red Italian leather shoes and did even before he became the pope. Anyway, who cares?
Everyone who pays taxes into Social Security should care what a candidate's stance is regarding the future of the fund.
" Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Looks like the Unions are saying -
Senator McCain will continue to raid Social Security and he doesn't care about yours because he has plenty of money -
that's the implication and correlation I see the ad making. "
You said he doesn't care about social security because he has money. Many people are rich including democrats. So is it because of money or because he's a republican?
No I didn't, I said that is the implication and correlation I see the ad making. It doesn't matter who else is wealthy and the ad is successful because it doesn't draw or lead one to that conclusion. It specifically points out Senator McCain's wealth and puts the onus on him, and therefore his policies as the Chief Executive. I don't care which political party decides to stay out of the cookie jar, so long as they decide.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
