Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, March 29, 2011
Politics Santorum Blames Warren Court, Planned Parenthood, Birth Control, Oral Sex for Non-Existent Social Security "Crisis"
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:00 AM
Rick in full froth:
The former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential candidate was asked about Social Security during an interview on WESZ-AM radio in Laconia on Tuesday 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.
If only there were a large country, maybe adjacent to ours, that was home to a lot of people who wanted to come to the United States to live and work. And if the people in this hypothetically adjacentish country tended to have large families, and tended to be religious, social conservatives would no doubt to create a path to citizenship for folks from this hypothetical country. Because America needs more people, right? (For the record: there is no Social Security "crisis.")
1
In theory, those undocumented workers contribute around 25b a year to the trust fund under false ID's that will never claim benefits. Wait, that is reality, not theory.
2
"Every sperm is sacred,
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate."
Blame the Pythons.
Every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted,
God gets quite irate."
Blame the Pythons.
3
Ah, Rick. Still evacuating -- I mean, spouting -- your shit -- I mean, your excellent fact-based social theories -- even though you're no longer a player on the national stage. Wow. What some radio stations will do to fill airtime!
6
So even though unemployment is high, Sen. Frothy Mix thinks the problem is there aren't enough workers?
*facepalm*
*facepalm*
7
Oh, but wait. He's a conservative Christian and whatever they spout must be true. If they say it, it must be so. No need for facts or rational thought. And they never make a mistake or lie. Rest easy America!
9
But what if the people in this hypothetical nearby country had brown skin? Oooooh, now there's a dilemma for Rick.
10
Maybe he's talking about all those women who had abortions so they could become welfare moms and not work. Wait, that doesn't make sense either.
11
There is absolutely no economic problem that conservatives can't blame on poor people and their allegedly flawed values.
12
@8 It is a basic Republican talking point that Medicare costs are unsustainable. We can deal with that either by finding ways to cut costs or services, make things more efficient, privatize (which brings with it its own set of problems), or question the original supposition.
My point was that if it is Santorum's position that we need an ever-increasing population in order to keep the funding and workforce to keep the Medicare propped up, this is for all intents and purposes solving the problem using a pyramid scheme.
I am not sure I grasp your point, though. Wouldn't K-12 education be the opposite of that? Since teachers are older than students, and take from the system before they are able to give back, the pyramid is turned upside-down, and even the most short-term thinking mind should be able to grasp that adding children ADDS cost and having fewer subtracts. (unless, I guess, they lacked a K-12 education)
My point was that if it is Santorum's position that we need an ever-increasing population in order to keep the funding and workforce to keep the Medicare propped up, this is for all intents and purposes solving the problem using a pyramid scheme.
I am not sure I grasp your point, though. Wouldn't K-12 education be the opposite of that? Since teachers are older than students, and take from the system before they are able to give back, the pyramid is turned upside-down, and even the most short-term thinking mind should be able to grasp that adding children ADDS cost and having fewer subtracts. (unless, I guess, they lacked a K-12 education)
13
I suspect that Senator Santorum does not actually want the elderly to collect Social Security and live in Medicaid funded nursing homes. He wants them to be selflessly cared for in the homes of their adult daughters. I can see why some men would vote for this, but don't see why women would support the Repub agenda.
14
Ah, darn. I see Canada doesn't qualify as an adjacentish country (well, not with the other conditions attached).
::breathes a huge sigh of relief::
::breathes a huge sigh of relief::
15
@14 I know, I thought the same thing at first! "Nooo, no, leave our dope smoking donut eating chilled out countrymen alooone!"
17
Sure, Oh-Frothy-One, it has nothing at all with an extremely low cap, or any cap at all, on earnings collected towards social security.
18
@12
Inter-generational social contacts are a form of pyramid scheme, in that in one way or another, new "suckers" must continually be found to place a bet on the future of the scheme. You educate kids now so that in the future they will be around to make society better, pay taxes and educate a later generation. You pay for retiree benefits now, gambling that a future generation will pay for yours.
Privatized retirement schemes are no different, really. You bet your stocks will be worth something when you retire on the hope that future generations will work hard and innovate, and make the economy grow. If they drop the ball, you're broke in your old age.
That's what a family is, and that's what a society is. To reject inter-generational contracts is to reject the social order itself from the micro to the macro levels. Republicans are brutal savages.
Inter-generational social contacts are a form of pyramid scheme, in that in one way or another, new "suckers" must continually be found to place a bet on the future of the scheme. You educate kids now so that in the future they will be around to make society better, pay taxes and educate a later generation. You pay for retiree benefits now, gambling that a future generation will pay for yours.
Privatized retirement schemes are no different, really. You bet your stocks will be worth something when you retire on the hope that future generations will work hard and innovate, and make the economy grow. If they drop the ball, you're broke in your old age.
That's what a family is, and that's what a society is. To reject inter-generational contracts is to reject the social order itself from the micro to the macro levels. Republicans are brutal savages.
19
Oh Lord, the days I PRAY for more overpopulation... because there simply AREN'T enough young people to support the old people... (in a positive-interest economy where old people are no longer PRODUCTIVE, and therefore expelled from society, yes still need healthcare) ...If ONLY *EVERYONE* had 3-7 children a piece, our problems would be SOLVED!
No matter that more than 50% of Earth's population is now living in cities, requiring greater resources than before. No matter than greater population increases climate change precursors, espESCIAlly when there isn't sufficient MASS TRANSIT to get them all to work and they have to fucking drive all the mufferforking time.
God, Santorum is an grandstanding liar.
No matter that more than 50% of Earth's population is now living in cities, requiring greater resources than before. No matter than greater population increases climate change precursors, espESCIAlly when there isn't sufficient MASS TRANSIT to get them all to work and they have to fucking drive all the mufferforking time.
God, Santorum is an grandstanding liar.
20
Dan, you sound like Matthew Yglesias here. You must be some sort of neo-liberal sellout.
Well done!
Well done!
21
18: Inter-generational contracts are only analogous to pyramid schemes when they require each generation to be larger than the last. Requiring the mere existence of a following generation is not the same thing.
24
Dan, I think you forgot one major "if" in your conclusion. If only those people in that theoretical country adjacent to ours were of the same ethnic and religious background. America needs more people... as long as they are the right kind of people. The Republican Party, nothing if not consistent.
25
Social Security is funded by a bunch of IOUs that are worth something only to the extent you believe the government will have surpluses with which to repay them. If liberals like Dan want us to take science seriously, they should take accounting seriously too.
26
@25 I'm also a bit skeptical about the financial model on which Social Security is based, but if you're going to state a dissenting opinion, you ought to at least go to the trouble of citing ONE article that counters Dan's (it probably wouldn't be difficult, if you know the right kinds of blogs to pull from).
More importantly, though, if your comments are backing up the article above, you leave a lot of dots unconnected: are you saying that we should follow Santorum's advice and encourage more and more children to add to an already underfunded system to prop it up until... A major change can be made to the accounting? We cut the system entirely, after having our children pay for our benefits, and leave them out to dry when their time comes?
More importantly, though, if your comments are backing up the article above, you leave a lot of dots unconnected: are you saying that we should follow Santorum's advice and encourage more and more children to add to an already underfunded system to prop it up until... A major change can be made to the accounting? We cut the system entirely, after having our children pay for our benefits, and leave them out to dry when their time comes?
27
25: Nobody is arguing that there aren't design flaws in the social security system. What people are arguing is that a "flaw" is not a "crisis," and that the solution to those flaws is not to force the continued exponential growth of a population that is already dangerously large. Nor is the solution to toss out social security and expect people to work until they're dead.
The Republican solutions to social security's faults would require ten more Earths and a magical cure for old age. It sounds to me like they can use a bit more of that science that you so snidely deride us liberals for "taking seriously."
The Republican solutions to social security's faults would require ten more Earths and a magical cure for old age. It sounds to me like they can use a bit more of that science that you so snidely deride us liberals for "taking seriously."
28
@JoeM, naw he'd love the hypothetical brown-skinned tax-paying people, just like he loves his hypothetical gay son. Right?
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
SL Letter of the Day: Outside the Gay Bar by Dan Savage
-
Lunchtime Quickie: Cyclist vs Car by Kelly O
-
SL Letter of the Day: Infantile-ism by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Lying Liars by Dan Savage
-
What Did an ESPN Blogger call the Asian American Baller Lin? by Charles Mudede
-
Walmart Tries to Pay Workers in Walmart Vouchers by Paul Constant
-
Why I'm Suing Attorney James Egan by Pete Holmes
-
Pharmacy Can Refuse Women Emergency Contraceptives, Judge Rules by Cienna Madrid
-
What Do You Think of Microsoft Office for the iPad? by Paul Constant
-
Have You Gayed Your Dead Mormon Today? by Anthony Hecht
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (28) RSS