---Interview with a Conservative, Part III---
What is your plan to fix Social Security?The retirement age has to be raised. Probably starting with people who today are 55 or under. Maybe even 50 and under. The reality is that Social Security had 17 workers for each retiree in the past. Now it is down to 3 on the way to 2. Think about that for a moment. Each worker today is paying for ½ of the retirement benefits of retiree. I would also be for allowing younger workers to opt out with some or all of their contributions. Social security is a ponzi scheme that would make Madoff blush.
How do you propose improving our public school system? Do you support no child left behind?
Get the federal government out of education. All we hear about education is how we have lost ground over the last 30 years. Guess what happened a little more than 30 years ago…the federal department of education. End it now. I don’t support no child left behind. I do support local control of the schools. I would consider abolishing all public sector unions as well. They have been a disaster for the school system.
How would you change the tax code?
Flat tax or fair tax. One or the other and eliminate the income tax.
If you could have accomplished only ONE thing as a legislator, what will it have been?
Reverse the growth of government.
Since you ran on a Republican platform, who are some of your favorite historical DEMOCRATIC politicians, and who are some of your least-favored REPUBLICAN politicians?
Kennedy understood the need to lower taxes and have a strong national defense. I liked that.
Least favorite republicans…The two senators from Maine, Snow and Collins, John McCain, Arlen Specter….see my pattern? [grin]
What is your opinion of our current child support system?
I honestly don’t know enough about it to comment.
Your campaign web site said that "profits are not obscene." Does this statement apply to top banking executives, Wall Street brokers, lawyers, politicians and so forth who oversaw our current economic situation?
Profits are not obscene. Period. Are you asking about compensation? Some of that may be obscene, but I don’t believe it is the government’s role to decide what it should be.
Are you saying that profits are NEVER obscene? If that’s the case, then do you support a credit card company’s ability to charge incredibly high interest rates?
I am saying it is never the government’s role to declare profits obscene…and as a general rule, I have not seen any profits that I believe are obscene. I am ok with limited usury laws…but, let’s take pay day loans as an example. They are horrible, and many want to outlaw them. But, suppose I need to fix my car to get to work and I need $200 to do that. A bank, charging 10% annually would earn $20 a year on that loan. Assuming it is paid off in a week, they would earn 38 cents. No bank is going to do the paper work to loan you $200 for a 38 cent return. So, by banning such things, yes, you keep people from falling into the trap of continually rolling over the loan, but you also eliminate the ability for responsible people to get out of a jam. Your good intentions may even cost them their job. Liberals often don’t think through the consequences of their decisions.
Are there any Congressional perks that you'd like to abolish?
Pensions after 5 years, many of their personal expenses, some of their trips etc. I have not studied the perks of the office, but I suspect they’d make me blush.
Your campaign web site said "We are at a point in this country where approximately 60% of the people receive more in benefits than they pay in taxes." Theoretically, this 60% would include the military, Social Security recipients, Welfare recipients, Medicare and Medicaid recipients, Federal law enforcement (FBI, TSA, and all of the other acronym agencies), and federal employees. What would you consider a reasonable percentage of people as net beneficiaries, and how would you achieve this percentage?
My understanding of that statistic is that it is not government employees, but of course includes all those who receive direct payments such as welfare, ssi, etc. I think this number should be probably less than 10% after taking out the SSI. (But, of course, based on my comments above, you also know I would raise the retirement age for SSI, so that percentage would go down as well)
Your campaign web site said "In the year since President Obama has taken office, we no longer have the respect and prestige of many nations across the world." How is this different from the respect and prestige we lost due to Bush's "cowboy diplomacy?"
I believe they like us more, but respect us less. Of course, neither can be proven, but it appears to me Obama is more inclined to want to be liked than respected. I am also sick of hearing him apologize for the US. We are the most giving society in the world. Obama clearly does not believe America is exceptional. When asked this question directly, he answered it that he believes in our exeptionalism in the way a Brit believes in the UK’s exceptionalism etc. That is like a child saying my dad is the greatest…it is somewhat meaningless. America is exceptional, but that exeptionalism has been eroded over the last 100 years.
“…We are the most giving society in the world…” What is your position on foreign aid?
I’m ok with limited foreign aid. I get a bit pissed off though when I hear other countries saying we are not doing our share. As you say, we are the most giving in the world. No other place has the level of private charity the US does.
For clarification, I quoted you in my last follow-up question. Since you are ok with limited foreign aid, do you believe that our current level of foreign aid is acceptable? If you believe it should be cut, where would you cut foreign aid, to what extent, and why would you make these cuts? Also, some say that, considering our current economic state, any foreign aid is unreasonable. (How can we donate money to other countries when we can’t even pay our own bills??) Your thoughts?
I haven’t studied what the current rate of foreign aid is, so I can’t say yes it is the exact right amount. I am saying I am not philosophically against all foreign aid as some are…or to follow up with your second point…in current conditions…I am still ok with foreign aid. In fact, I would go as far as to say I think foreign aid is better spent money than much of our welfare spending. In the US, everyone has opportunity…go to Haiti or Honduras and you’ll realize that is not the case in much of the world. I am very much for personal humanitarian assistance as well. I even took a humanitarian mission trip to Honduras in 2007
One last question… what question did you expect me to ask that I haven’t asked, and what is the answer to that question.
Not so much a question…but, I think liberals assume conservatives don’t care. That is simply not the case. Conservatives believe that many if not most of the government programs designed to help do far more harm in the long-term. One of my favorite books is by a former welfare queen and crack addict Star Parker who wrote a book called “Uncle Sam’s Plantation” where she described how being in the system was not a hand up, but instead, it was enslaving.
You appear to not be a total liberal…just a partial! [grin]
Yes, I will acknowledge that I am a partial liberal. For what it’s worth though, several of the questions I ask are strictly from a Devil’s Advocate standpoint. I also want you to know that you have given me a lot of food for thought. I firmly believe that honest, open discussion and debate are good things. I feel that people who are unwilling to have their beliefs challenged are not firm in their beliefs. The best people are the ones who are willing to logically defend their point of view, AND open to change.
I enjoyed it as well.
3 comments:
Thought provoking interview!!!
I see I have some research to do on some of the topics y'all covered. I did like the Tax question and the drinking age question as those are two subjects near and dear to my heart!
My favorite part was discussing "legislating from the bench," and pointing out that laws on gambling, prostitution and drugs restricted liberties.
I agree that the concept of payday loans are not obscene...but what is obscene is that payday and 'title loan' places charge 99.98% APR.
If you're financially stable with a decent credit rating, a small amount like $200 can easily be put on a credit card, or the bank will allow an overdraft of that amount.
The only people willing to pay the ridiculous interest on payday and title loans are people already in financial trouble with poor credit ratings who have no other choice.
Oh, and speaking as a Brit with many European family members and friends, I can state categorically that President Obama is almost universally more liked AND respected than President Bush by people outside the US.
Post a Comment