Will Ron Paul destroy Social Security?

Answer 1

The interest on a Ten trillion dollar national debt will easily out size the debt to retired seniors that have already been cut billions of dollars as far back as Reagan, who then gave the money to the folks holding the national debt.

For all these years the FICA tax has meant that the working poor paid a higher tax rate than the super rich. (though always left out of the calculations when talking about it)

Supposedly now both taking care of people and taking care of the interest on the debt cannot be done without raising taxes on the super rich, so guess which of these debts is going to get repudiated.

If they just RICO'd the Bush era fraud they could pay off the national debt, RICO the rest and we could have our country back.

Paul is a Libertarian and while he would support the end of the police state (a very good thing) he would do nothing about the abuse of power by corporations, and would dump Social Security as fast as anything else that helps actual people.

Answer 2

Social security would have done just fine if the government had not borrowed from it and tacked on services it was not designed to handle .

Imagine towing a yacht with a Honda accord from the house on the hill down to the ocean .
It might be a rough unsafe trip but you would probably make it .

Now try get back with worn out brakes a transmission on its last legs and a shot suspension .

We are on the return trip with social security and it needs help .

Answer 3

Social security is already a lost cause. You can have more not working than those who are working. if they had left it alone and left it entirely for those who had earned a retirement benefit it would have been OK.

But keep in mind Ron paul don't have the authority to blow his nose.

Answer 4

First of all, he has zero chance of getting elected, so the question is moot. Sounds like everyone here thinks Social Security should be abolished. I think it needs to be reformed and gradually transitioned to a financially sound pension system, but that will take a long time and involve unpopular choices in the short term. The vast majority of people in this country do not save enough for retirement and many people become disabled involuntarily before they are ready to retire. If we can spend 2.5 trillion dollars on the Iraq war over the next decade, we ought to be able to fix social security.

Answer 5

No, as much as I don't like Ron Paul and his supporters, he won't destroy it. Once it "goes broke" whoever is in charge at the time will just raise the taxes of the people working at the time.

And I'd like to issue a hearty thank-you to all of you Liberals in your 20's and 30's who think taxes aren't high enough! Because of you I know my social security check will be there when I need it. (An please don't wise up and turn Conservative in MY hour of need).

Answer 6

Ron Paul is the best hope this country has for survival..we are about to go down the tubes.....Wake up people and read the real news!!!

Answer 7

no Social Security is unsustainable, Ron Paul is the only one telling the American people the truth about it.

Answer 8

Social Security is a failed system. It worked in the infancy, because you have 15 workers for every 1 retiree. Now we have 2 workers for every 5 retirees. For some reason that does not add up to me. PRIVATIZATION IS THE ONLY WAY TO GO!!!!!!

Answer 9

No. First, that's under Congressional authority. Second, he'll never get elected.

Answer 10

No. He will not be elected to any office where he can affect Social Security.
I personally think Social Security should be phased out. It is a socialist Ponzy scheme that is doomed to failure, no matter what is done to prop it up.