-39 votes

Rand messes up again.

You know, I don't like the pile on Rand Paul that's been going on, but this on the other hand is criticism that I think everyone can agree with.

I found it here....

"Supposed Libertarian Rand Paul is advocating increasing the age of eligibility to receive SS benefits "...., BUT.... " said nothing about letting the younger generation opt out of SS – which many of us would love to do, even to the extent of agreeing to forgo all future benefits in return for not having to 'contribute' any more from here on out."

Opting out was one of Ron Paul's best ideas ever. It resonated with Republicans, Independents, Democrats, young, old, etc. And why? Because it's so obvious, common sensically, pro-freedom.

So, who advised Rand Paul against doing this? This is an EXTREME disappointment. Rand Paul will see zero dollars in contributes from me until he addresses this.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Opting out might sound good

Opting out might sound good on paper, but in the real world I think it would be a disaster. 50% of the people who opted out would end up penniless and too old to work. Then the government would have to steal your tax money to feed them, and give them a place to live, so they would be leeching of the public. At least in the present system they have to contribute to help pay the expense.
Also, keep in mind that the social security trust fund had an enormous surplus until the thieves in Washington stole it all and spent it on wars and welfare.If they would have left it in there to earn interest social security would be in good shape right now.

Why was this post

Why was this post resurrected?

I didn't go to the link, just

I didn't go to the link, just a general comment here. Maybe Rand has separated this into two separate problems to solve. First, extend the age for collecting. Then after that is done allow people to opt out since now they are expected to pay more & collect less. Paying more over time & collecting less when you retire sure is a bonus argument towards being able to opt out.



I think he knows a little more about what he is doing than you.

░░░░░░███████ ]▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄
▂▄▅█████████▅▄▃▂ ☻/
Il███████████████████]. /▌
◥⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙▲⊙◤.. / \

this thread

is from 11/01/12
and the article was published
October 3, 2010

Actually you can already opt

Actually you can already opt out of Social Security so what are you waiting for? Is Social Security voluntary or mandatory? I opted out 7 years ago.

the only way to opt out

is if you work for a religious organization that itself does not contribute to SS. Then you can also opt out of SS and medicare. IRS rules...

How did you manage that?

Honest question here.

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

Form 4361 worked for me.

I joined the Universal Life Church about 30 years ago to get a ministerial certificate, then filed IRS Form 4361, "Application for exemption From Self-Employment Tax for Use by Ministers, Members of Religious Orders and Christian Science Practitioners." Once approved, it let me out of Social Security payments on self-employment income. It won't help if you're working for wages, but if you're self employed (like me, for the last 19 years), it works fine. And saving gold coins makes me feel a lot more secure than saving paper promises from a bankrupt gang of thieves and murderers, you bet.

Recommended reading: The Most Dangerous Superstition by Larken Rose

Two Points

1. Rand is in favor of allowing people to opt out of SS, as he has said a number of times over the years. Google is your friend.

2. You have to understand that allowing people to "opt out" (aka stop paying SS taxes) will result in a huge loss in revenue for the federal government: hundreds of billions of dollars per year. And that means there must be offsetting spending cuts, either to SS or to other programs. Is Rand in favor of letting people opt out? Yes, but only if there are major spending cuts at the same time. And that's simply beyond the scope of what's he proposing right now.

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

I don't understand why you would start your thread

with "Rand messes up again." Just address the policy advice in the title. Sure, we should be able to opt out. Freedom is good. I don't blame Rand Paul for not figuring out the correct policy positions for all circumstances and putting them out there. I'm sure, if addressed, he would say opting out is a good idea. If he didn't, well he would be espousing an anti-liberty position, but you haven't even given him a chance.

Tu ne cede malis.

Candidates for Liberty Webpage:

2016 Liberty Candidate Thread:

Actually...opting out is rather extreme

It may make intuitive sense to you, but that position is way extreme and probably comes off as non-sensical to the average person. The reason being that SS requires the money coming in from the new generation to pay the retirement of the last generation, especially since congress has been spending money in SS. So...if you say "let young people opt out" you are basically saying let the system fail.

Here you go


Also, I think you forgot the yellow font.

Hopefully you'll re-visit this thread and read the book. It's a quick read.

Actually, it exposes the fact

Actually, it exposes the fact it is a ponsi-scheme that was sold to the public as a personal retirement account.

We all share this eternally evolving present moment- The past and future only exist as inconsequential mental fabrications.

Sooner it fails the better

I have no problem with that at all.

who gives a shit, we got

who gives a shit, we got people like aaron shwartz and mike hastings and hundreds of other peoplr who get killed by the government for exposing whats actually going on. Quit bashing rand and vote for the mother effer im tired of this bullshit. Im 24 years old and ill be damned if this small shit fucks everything up again!! your wasting time with this small petty bullshit and im tired of it. You should look for other ways to get attention man

This is a tax increase

By raising the retirement age, you raise how long you need to pay in, on top of cutting benefits. The latter is a screw job but the former is a tax increase.

"No opt out?" is a fair question. What's this guy's problem, anyway? Raising revenue? Cutting payout? Stealing from retirees to pay for pet projects?

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

When did Rand Paul Ever

say he was a libertarian? you can't put someone into a group (in your own mind) then rip on him when he doesn't comply fully with that group's agenda

That wasn't the issue.

The issue was allowing people to opt out of social security.

So, are you now saying the constitutional conservative Republicans support social security and would never support allowing people to opt out?

Is that what you are saying? Really?

Rand Paul

said he endorses letting people "opt out" of Social Security during his speech at the RNC and in many more speeches. Just because he didn't mention it during one pubic appearance doesn't mean he doesn't support it. Nice try

Saying and doing are two quite different things.

Saying something is worthless. All that matters is what you DO.

So, you answer now, what has Rand Paul DONE about it, hot shot?

He has proposed or co-sponsored NO BILLS with opt out in them.

That means he's done NOTHING except yak about it, no different than any other politician.

And just because someone is a member of a party

or political affiliation doesn't mean they support everything that group supports or they may support it but they aren't pushing the issue at a particular time for different reasons. In this case Rand does support "opt out" of SS so this thread is bogus

I'd say this is "piling on"

A simple search on the internet pulls up articles and video of Rand Paul supporting the ability to opt out of social security. This is a video made by Democrats to attack Republicans as being evil and extreme--so, of course, it includes a couple clips of Rand Paul talking about the ability to opt out of S.S:


I would say it amounts to "piling on" when the issue the author attacks Sen. Paul on is something that he actually agrees with and speaks about---what some of us really dislike is Sen Paul's tactics--he certainly believes in transitions and being ever so practical when understanding where the american people are, politically. Ron Paul talks about transitions too, come to think of it.

(you don't capitalize the "L" in libertarian when you are talking about philosophy)

2 years old

October 3, 2010

Exercise Your Rights. If You Don't Use Them, You Will Lose Them.
My News Twitter http://twitter.com/sharpsteve
My YouTube http://www.youtube.com/user/sharpsteve2003

His mistake was not

His mistake was not mentioning something Ron Paul mentioned? Did he say he was opposed to the idea, or he just didn't mention it?


He didn't PROPOSE or was not a PROPONENT of this clearly pro-liberty idea.

Why would he engage on SS reform WITHOUT proposing an opt out?

How can you be pro-liberty without doing so?

When asked about the Fed, is

When asked about the Fed, is it also a mistake if he doesn't mention it should be abolished tomorrow? I don't understand why people think that if he doesn't answer every single question the exact same way that his dad does then he is a traitor/mistake/neocon.

Rand saw what his father did, and saw how far it got us/him. It is obvious to me that he is taking another route to achieve a different end (read: actually winning the Presidency).

Anyone who doesn't think Rand Paul would be the most Liberty-pushing President of the past 100 years is delusional.

What are you talking about?

I'm talking about social security, not the Fed.

Just an example to show why

Just an example to show why your premise is flawed.


"ending the fed" means completely changing the nations monetary system.

opting out of ss allows a minority of people who choose, to lose what they paid in, but not get charged the ss tax anymore.

There are ORDERS OF MAGNITUDES of differences between the two.

They are incomparable.