tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-63535302771376344.post8573215930504037306..comments2023-06-25T06:07:14.706-05:00Comments on O-L-I [Opinionated Layman's Input]: Less Ponzi than PragmaticTim Laitinenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07659772910035894952noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-63535302771376344.post-34652683579126877472011-09-23T09:13:37.863-05:002011-09-23T09:13:37.863-05:00Lol... "Genuine, honest dialogue in Washingto...Lol... "Genuine, honest dialogue in Washington..."??? !! You're living & working right now in DC, so I'm assuming you know how funny that sounds!<br /><br />I'm frustrated that Perry, who really does have the ear of the country right now, prefers rubbing salt in the wound rather than offering constructive input. It makes me wonder if he has any original ideas in his brain, or if he really is just a GOP Talking Head, more style than substance. <br /><br />Thanks for the feedback!Tim Laitinenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07659772910035894952noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-63535302771376344.post-8125529648065150592011-09-23T08:48:25.400-05:002011-09-23T08:48:25.400-05:00Excellent post, Tim. I think you make a lot of fan...Excellent post, Tim. I think you make a lot of fantastic points. When I defend Gov. Perry's right to say SS is a Ponzi Scheme, I do so only because there are elements of it that warrant the comparison. However, I do not think scrapping SS is a good idea. I just want to see a genuine, honest dialogue in Washington about how to fix it...not just what to call it. I think the current Perry/Romney spat has been anything but productive - as Herman Cain astutely pointed out last night. We need answers, not name-calling. <br /><br />On a side note, I think people are misconstruing what Perry is saying when he says SS has been a failure from the start. He didn't say it's never helped anybody, he said it's been a failure from the start. Assuming he means that it's been on an unsustainable course since it started, he's correct. It's like someone who opens a restaurant that fails after a year in business. Most likely it was a failure from the start due to a faulty business model, poor service, bad location, etc. That doesn't mean the restaurant didn't make some customers happy in the year they were in business. It simply means that the business model was doomed to failure from the beginning. I can definitely see how Perry would make that assertion, even though we may disagree that something lasting 100 years - based on current expiration dates projecting SS to end in the 2030s - is hardly a failure.J.C. Derrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16644260446858427111noreply@blogger.com