4 votes

Gary Johnson Wants to Raise the retirement age to 72



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Fine by me...

...I favor any and all reductions in welfare spending.

"Alas! I believe in the virtue of birds. And it only takes a feather for me to die laughing."

.

Ron Paul 2012. By write-in.

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Social security was doing

Social security was doing fine and had a huge balance in the trust fund until the lawmakers in Washington stole all the money out of the trust fund to spend on wars and welfare. Now that the thieves in Washington have stolen all the money out of the trust fund social security will go bust unless they raise the retirement age or increase the tax. Don't blame Gary Johnson because he has the integrity to speak the truth. I am nearing retirement age so I am more angry with the situation than most. The people we should blame are the people that stole the money out of the trust fund and I would not be surprised if they burn in hell for their evil deeds.

I have been counting down the years until I may no longer have

to work away my life. I have been working for a total of 35 years. Please let me be at peace and really get to feel what it is like to not
be ruled by time. I will be very happy to do volunteer work to help out the community, etc. Lucky for me I have a plan B: I married a man 9 years younger than me. He will be working while I am doing the volunteering. Of course, if my savings and 401k go bust then I will continue on as a slave. I will continue to do whatever my God asks of me. :)

~Your perception becomes your reality~

What's the average lifespan in this

country? 75? Gee, I work all my life to have 3 years of retirment. Lookin forward to it.

“When a well-packaged web of lies has been sold gradually to the masses over generations, the truth will seem utterly preposterous and its speaker a raving lunatic.” – Dresden James

Interesting tax perspectives. I don't get.

A 23%flat tax would penalize people who want to spend their savings which has already been taxed.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Exactly how would it have "already been taxed"?

It was my understanding (perhaps erroneous) that the FairTax (or the 23% flat tax that everyone refers to it as, instead of by its name) would replace all federal taxes outside of the national sales tax. It is also my understanding (also, perhaps erroneous) that the lack of corporate taxes and other production-based taxes would lower the before-tax price of all goods anyway?

Explain to me, please. Thanks. :)

Lets just start with income tax.

Anything already earned,invested or saved has already been taxed.

"A vote for the lesser of two evils is a vote to keep things the same", Buckminster Fuller..
A choice for liberty is always a choice for liberty.

Everyone might need to research the FairTax a little more.

And start calling it the FairTax instead of just "23% national sales tax". Or, if you still insist on calling it outside of its actual name, then at least call it the "23% national sales tax plus prebate plus replacement of all federal taxes".

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_an...

Income tax is replaced by the FairTax.

Do you get it? What the poster means is that, say you have

accumulated $100,000 in savings, and this money came from salary, you have already then paid an income tax on that money.

Now if tomorrow the income tax vanishes and a 23% sales tax starts up, when you spend that $100,000 you will be taxed on it again at 23%. Unlike someone who accumulates $100,000 through salary after the institution of this tax, and didn't have to pay income tax on it - you DID - and now you will both be subject to a consumption tax of 23%.

And the answer to that is..

...why in tarnation are you putting 100k in a savings acct; Money market or gold coin at least.

Fairtax would exempt you from paying income tax going forward or business tax if you have a company.

For my example, I needed a liquid place to put an already EARNED

$100.000. If you like Money Market, Gold whatever FINE. I just needed to show that INCOME TAX was already paid on it.

Fairtax tax would NOT prevent you from being taxed on this money twice, once when you earned (already paid) and again when you spent it.

Its really not that complicated.

You're not exempted from consumption tax now

regardless if you pay income tax currently. I'm sure we will be getting a lot of hooing and hawing from those under the proverity line saying they shouldn't have to pay consumption tax either.

I would imagine there will be(consumption) tax exempt bank accounts w/debit or insured tax exempt credit cards to prevent double-dipping. We already have those options for federaly funded projects in the private sector.

Very true

This is a problem anytime a major government program needs change.

The Social Security pyramid scheme is just one example of the integenerational warfare government creats.

The best solution is to never start government programs in the first place, but now that we have them we have we have to live with the occaisional unfairness of changing/eliminating them.

LOL!

Gary Johnson is a THIRD-PARTY candidate. What difference does it make if he wants to raise the retirement age to 72 or 92? He's not going to ever be president!!! So, why worry about it or care what he wants to raise the retirement age to. Third party votes are nothing more than protest votes. Third party candidates could run on a platform to colonize the moon and people would still vote for them.

People almost voted for

People almost voted for colonizing the moon on a main party ticket...

“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

You gotta ask yourself why there is so much opposition

to actually allow people to manage their own SS. Private accounts are talked about but never advanced. Now they are all pushing for 72 year retirement age.

That would essentially turn this into an almost birth to death tax. They'd pay into it for all of their working lives and never get to see any of it come back.

I don't know about the rest of you but I value my elders lives and they deserve better candidates.

They're just trying to turn it into a tax so they can continue to siphon off the proceeds to fund more wars and things they want to pursue.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Because

The government or closer to the reality. The crooked politicians steal the money to help pay for their other programs. Then they say SS is going to be broke in such and such yr.

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

On the other hand...

Since the government is bankrupt and has already recklessly spent the retirees' money, any refusal to realistically treat SS as the entitlement it has become means everyone has to bear the burden for the Ponzi Scheme, through overtaxation and inflation.

There is no pleasant outcome for SS under a bankrupt government that is $15 trillion in debt. The program must be privatized and phased out as soon as possible.

Raising the retirement age is a move in the direction of phasing it out.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

It's the wrong move as usual.

Do you really think they're doing so because they're trying to fix the problem? I'm sure you have examples as to why we should trust they're doing it for the good of the nation.

I'm all for opting out of the system. They could, if they really wanted to fix it instead of prolong it, opening up talk on opting out. They'll mention that but never go into specifics.

I refuse to give them money to waste anymore. I'm opting out on my own terms. I'll bring my income to below poverty and my lifestyle along with it by downsizing on all fronts. Any money I do make will go into my own savings and investments and they can kiss my ass.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Or you could do the right thing and explain/end the scam

Is it the place for the Gov to cover the scams of one demographic and force another to pay?

Once upon a time you treated/raised your family/friends well and had kids so they would take care of you when you were 92.

Not 'depend' on a Ponzi scheme.

================================
Fight the Ron Paul blackout on the Daily Paul (now 'P AU L'), put his removed poster back as your avatar:
http://www.mediafire.com/?9ir62bp8nshv83m

I agree with you, Kevin

If phasing it out included refunding the money already paid in by those who haven't collected anything out of it yet. And funds should also be refunded to family members of those who've paid in, but die before they reach the "official" retirement age. Otherwise, raising the retirement age is just a way to steal money from people who don't live long enough to retire. I realize it seems unrealistic under present circumstances, but RP had it right...cut spending in more appropriate places like foreign aid, military spending, corporate bailouts, cutting the beauracracy, etc. so that citizens who've paid into SS can get at least some of their money back.

This is hardly a new idea.

This idea has been floated around for years.
I actually like Rons plan of phasing out SS totally.
The constitution doesn't mention retirement.

Social Security should be eliminated.

But if we must continue to put up with it, ratcheting down the damage it causes is a logical position.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

Ok, I get it...

Gary Johnson is not Ron Paul, but he will be on the ballot. Of the three, is the only one candidate who has not been handpicked by the CFR, Trilateral Commission, or the Bilderburg group. It is not about winning. Like the Joker said, "It's about sending a message."

"72 Lets Say"

Quit now Gary to save yourself any further embarrassment. You do not have the knowledge base so flying by the seat of your pants is just making you look like an idiot on national TV and losing you votes.

November 6th 2012 I voted for Dr.Ron Paul
"We must remember, elections are short-term efforts. Revolutions are long-term projects." ~ Ron Paul

Here we go again

Throw Gary under the bus because he wants to save SS for the elderly. Take ONE comment when pushed on Fake News "Suppose we say 72" and make Gary look like a Nazi. I have news for all of you nay sayers, the government has already raised the age requirements for my generation and I have no problem with it. Gary is talking about trying to SAVE Social Security and he talked (on this very video) about many ways to save it including opting out for the younger people just like Dr Paul has done in the past. The President does NOT have the power to control SS, only Congress does and IF the President DID have the power would you rather have NWO Romney or NWO Obama making the decision? They would both cut the elderly off at the knees to save money for war. These posts demeaning Gary Johnson remind me of the neocon posts and ads about Ron Paul ending Social Security and Ron Paul being a racist because of his newsletter. I believe in free speech but this crap is really getting to me. IF you are going to try to discredit someone, show EVERYTHING about them including their voting record and where they stand on foreign policy etc. This gotcha garbage has to stop because if you influence someone based on a hypothetical comment then WE ALL HAVE TO SUFFER!

Same here...it's bloody ridiculous.

We're having a brushfire war over a candidate who aligns 95% with Ron Paul.

We have a little gang of people here who will attack Johnson for any deviation from Ron Paul's platform, and will even downvote Ron Paul HIMSELF if you quote him saying something positive about Johnson.

If you factually point out Gary Johnson's *actual positions* based on his recent public statements, those will also be attacked, denied, or downvoted.

It's a shame, because the Libertarian Party could really use the support of Ron Paul activists now that the Republican race has been decided.

SUPPORT OUR FOUNDERS' AMERICA
Support the Constitution of the United States

absolutely agree....I have

absolutely agree....I have been following the SS issue for years and GJ is telling us the truth - Now that RP is not in the race, my husband and I (both over 50)will be voting for GJ

bye bye any votes

from anyone over 40. looks like he's limiting his campaign to those that turnout the least. I see a big 0.8% popular vote coming for the Gov.

https://twitter.com/#!/Agonzo1