Social Security

[brent41m]

there is and never has been a problem with SS. The problem is our legislators are using its surpluses to pay for the other parts of geverment they over spent on. 50% of our taxes go to defence. No other country in the world spend much over 10% of there taxes. Cut defence spending that is used to fund wars ( that benifiet huge corprate interests ) and we could have free health care and the rest of the world would hate us a whole lot less!!!!!!!!!

[n5ifi]

Democrats started Social Security and claimed participation in the program would be completely voluntary. Democrats then made it a non voluntary program. Democrats said participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual income into the Program. Democrats changed that to 7.65% on the first $90,000.

[jhunted7667]

what I don't understand is if the Dollar is denoted in debt instead of gain , how can you say that something is funded with debt????

[islamiscrap8888]

if it walk ,talks, acts like a ponzi scheme, it is a ponzi scheme. SS and medicare are ponzi schemes. a ponzi scheme is when somebody takes money out spends some for himself and takes money again from somebody else to pay the original person ,and repeat.

[helltrackrider]

Spread the wealth...

Hang yourself Nader...Social Security is illegal. It cannot be justified by the Constitution, you know...the LAW.

Of course, FDR controlled Jusctices appointed during the Progressive era and controlled by threats of court packing (5 or the 9) will say it is legal based on their personal ideology, not based on the LAW.

America is doomed...has been since Lincoln and especially since Wilson and FDR's tyrannical tenures.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Please, point out which section of the Constitution says an idea like Social Security is legal. I'm not calling you out, I just legitimately want to know.

I'd also like to know what your opinion is of when the Constitution made slave ownership legal, or that women had no place in politics, particularly no right to vote.

Where exactly do you draw the line?

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

I never said it was legal.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

illegal* Sorry.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

The question to be asked....Which section of the Constitution authorizes Social Security --- the transfering of one individuals property to another group of individuals within the US --- also, the forcing of an individual into an retirement insurance policy.

Why shouldnt the individual be able to keep the 6.25% of their labor and invest it as they please or spend it as they please?

Fact is, Social Security is not Constitutional, unless you are a Progressive - then it is.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

So by your logic, taxes are illegal.

- Also, no one forces the elderly to retire. They can continue to work if they so choose. They just start collecting on their investment once they hit that age. Who told you that you're forced into retirement?

Fact is, the Constitution says nothing about Social Security or anything like it. If it did, then I certainly don't know what section it is in, and by the absence of any citations or quotes on your part, I doubt you know either.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

"the Constitution says nothing about Social Security or anything like it"

You said it...not me.

As the Constitution says NOTHING ABOUT IT, it is thus illegal for the Federal Government to provide.

Taxation is a power granted to the Federal Government, albiet todays form (16th Amendment) was nothing at all like the founders agreed upon. Progressive taxation promotoes class warfare and Democracy...not a good combo.

[Joehtosis]

I already commented on your logic about all things not in the constitution being illegal. If you really will stand by that assumption, then I'll just have to stand by my assumption that you're a bigoted xenophobe who has a paranoia of the moon. If you don't know why I say that, then you really haven't been paying attention and need to re-read the conversation.

If you think your view on this is right, fine, I just hope you realize a lot of ladies like to vote and won't appreciate your point.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

If it's not your point of view than why are you telling Nader to hang himself?

It's a good point that it needs an Amendment and I'm sorry that my earlier posts didn't address this because it was flagged as spam and I couldn't read it, but later, do me and others a favor, clarify that you're for the Amendments and not for federal programs that have no Amendment. There are some who believe the Constitution itself is perfect, and I confused you for them. I apologize for that.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

The Constitution is not by anymeans perfect...it leaves too much to be interpreted by our Government for the benefit of solely the government itself...

Property Rights have been completely abolished due to wording and interpretation within the Constitution.

Hell, you cant even carry a gun anymore or smoke a blunt without the government telling you that you are commiting a crime...try selling lemonade on the side of the road, see how fast the Govt somes looking for sales tax.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

I'll say that I think that carrying a gun should definitely be limited to keep violent crime down a notch, but I agree with your point.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Guns promote violent crimes as much as pencils promote mispelling words.

If anything, the idea of open carry promotes social safety by deterring violent crime.

If the government would play its proper role in "promoting the Welfare" by the passing of Laws which support and allow for self defense (other than constraining it); maybe the US would have similar violent crime rates to Switzerland and a similarly smaller police force per capita...

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

I really hope you're talking about things like pistols and not automatic rifles.

It can deter it if people have a right to self defense, but wouldn't it be better for the people to have other non-lethal forms of self defense? (e.g. tasers and mace)

Sure it can deter it but it's only a mental deterrent.. If that falls, than people die.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

As for your stab at Progressive taxation; I think you should try to realize a few things;

1. Almost every developed nation uses this program and is financially successful, except for us.

2. You could hardly say we have a progressive tax rate with the cut-backs we give to the very few billionaire's in this country. Look at how financially successful we are. You could say causation is not evidence or whatever, but I personally find it pretty convincing.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Every Country relys on the the strength of the Dollar to maintain "financial success"...seeing the current economic climate, i think it is pretty easy to say that hardly any Country is financially successful...

Taxation plays a huge role financial success...Excessive taxation would vastly limit Savings and Production as the money would be taken out of the economy to be used for overhead cost (government)...no savings and no production = bad economy --- See America for example.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

3. If you honestly think that's class war-fare, I want you to get the fuck out of the little bubble you live in and go to Wilmington, Delaware. Look at the division between rich and poor. Then look across the street and tell me what you see. If you don't see huge corporate offices directly across the block from the slums, than you're wearing a blind-fold. Go down there and tell those people who can barely survive that they're conducting class warfare. I dare you. Tell them that.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

You seriously need to educate yourself...stop relying on Obama to educate you.

Class warfare has been used in every society to seize power by "promising" entitlements (see Healthcare, minimum wage, higher taxes on the producers for examples).

All in all...the people being hurt the most are the people voting in the inept Congressmen promising vast entitlements...inflation is the largest tax in US history, this hurts the poor/middle class...brought about by excess spending.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

I'm educated by Obama. Right.

That's funny considering I didn't vote for the guy and that I believed myself to have thought he was just another hypocrite, bailing out the banks who give us nothing in return, while giving us a half-assed medicare bill which barely changes anything and keeps us in the same shit-hole of a system we had years ago, just to shut us up.

But no, I'm educated by Obama. Thank you for letting me know that.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Here's the funny thing about your statement... You say the government is using class warfare, right? Here's something you didn't bring up; against who? Rich people? Class-warfare, against rich people. Last time I checked, there aren't hobos running for office in the white house. ( Then again, there was Basil Marceux..) Why would they commit class-warfare against themselves and the people who sponsor them? Do tell.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Class warfare has been used in the past and now to seize a majority...if someone can define "the Rich" as being +250K per year; they just singled out say 90% of America against 10% of America...So, these 90% are inherently going to support raising taxes on the 10% because it is not their wealth...

But, what they do not understand is basic economics --- neither does our government --- Savings and Production make an economy progress and stable. Neither happen with excess taxes

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

To me, that sounds fucking stupid. I don't know about you, but I don't go around kicking myself and the people who pay me in the nuts. So even if you are right, that it is class-warfare, good. Fucking fantastic. Knock the rich down a peg. I'm so sorry that they can't afford their luxury jets while there are families who are eating from garbage pails.

Play the class-warfare story for someone who gives a shit and cares about the oh so difficult struggle of the well to do.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

I will say though, that there are a few things you've said that I agree with. The people voting on those who don't pull through with their promises are the ones being hurt, and that no savings and production equal a bad economy. I agree that taxation plays a huge role in financial success, but these low taxes on the rich don't help when the businesses use those low taxes to hire people over seas.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Dont forget that America operated under a tax structure that had NO Federal Income, Property or Capital gains taxes for well over 100+ years...encompassed with a stable monetary policy that didnt allow for credit unless warranted by savings and a lax government on regulation and control; this was the single most production economy the World had ever seen with the cost of all goods/services from EVERY sector decreasing; which means the Dollar increased in value --- and wages rose.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Well, it seems that what the argument boils down to is, can we count on people to regulate themselves and not destroy themselves inevitably... I just can't be that optimistic because I look at what happened with the banks and I realize without regulation of any kind, our country can turn into a plutocracy. This wouldn't happen in a normal free market of course, eventually the people would support other companies which have a social conscience.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

That is.. Until said corporation develops a monopoly and it's up to the government to try regulating and controlling their power for the good of the people, but you are right the government should not involve themselves in certain policies, such as bailing out a failing business. My problem lies in getting out of that boom and bust system and finding just the right amount of government regulation to where people can find some sort of safety, such as, social security.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

You can say entitlements ruin the economy all you want but I, personally, believe that people do in fact have the entitlement to an education, to food, and to a safe retirement. I believe there is an entitlement to living your life.

You don't have to agree with that, but I just don't believe things like Social Security should be that much of a problem.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Social Security and Medicare / Medicaid have over 40 Trillion in unfunded liabilities ... meaning, our Government (the taxpayers that is) is on the hook for this amount at present time.

Social Security is a ponzi scheme and cannot work without depleting itself or depleting the country (as it has been doing)...you forget, the funds that go to Social Security are taken out of the real economy where wealth and capital are generated ... this makes the US as whole less wealthy.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

.... So savings make the country wealthy... But savings from social security make the country less wealthy... Almost everyone would have a retirement plan for old age with or without social security... Does that ruin the economy?

I get your point that social security detracts from investments which could be made in business, but there are people who save their money in a place where it can't be touched at all. You're saying that ruins the economy?

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

In a free market, savings can be stored at home (no fee), stored in a bank (fee) or loaned to a bank with a promise of return over a time frame (principal + % back) .. if the latter is chosen, these savings are used as credit to loan to businesses for start up, expansion or capital investment..as the business grows, so does employment, so does it income..to a point where loans are not necessary and freed up for another business..do this on a large scale, you have late 1800's USA

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

As for social security having unfunded liabilities... Is that not the fault of government officials who took money out of a system which was meant to be untouched in a safe reserve, and not the fault of the system itself which is being used in the wrong way?

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Regardless...the money in "safe reserve" removes wealth generation from the actual economy and if left stagnant in the Governments locker, it itself will lose value over time due to infaltion.

Self savings for retirement and voluntary charity are the only plausible means of retirement in a true, vibrant and wealth creating economy.

Fact - Government destroys wealth...see this Century for a great example.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Over time...Socail Security funds taken from the economy will reduce R&D, employment and manufacturing cost to a point where, like now, the majority of these companies are driven over seas due to the cost to fund Social Security...once these jobs are all overseas, then there are NO wealth producing jobs here and everyone will be working in the service sector --- wages will continue to fall in relation to cost of living, then Social Security is doomed.

[stickitupyourasteric]

@helltrackrider  WAGES HOME COSTS VEHICLE COSTS MUST BE REDUCED H CARE COSTS R A JOKE

[helltrackrider]

@stickitupyourasteric

You say things "must be reduced"...whose job is it to reduce these things?...the governments?...The reason these items cost as much as tehy do is directly because of the government and its monetary policy accompanied with excessive legislation.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Whereas, on the other hand, people could keep their 6.25% of their pay and invest this into manufacturing / production corporations in America and these firms will have MORE money for additional plants, facilities, R&D, employment, etc...

see where this is going?...one dollar into a government trust fund is wasted and stolen from the real economy and ultimately is worth less, whereas one dollar into the real economy can be invested to create more wealth than what it represents.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

It is when government officials go off their rocker and use that money to fund their policies, but they should be the ones to pay for that mistake, not the rest of us. If Social Security is illegal, then they should begin working on an Amendment for it. It is a program which can in and of itself work, it's not a huge cut from people's paychecks, and it gives us something to safely fall back on, but I don't believe people should be told to hang themselves for believing this.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

What should be legal, in order to get America on the right track again, is Property Rights...these are illegal right now.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

As for wages falling etc. because of government.. Are you choosing to ignore that large corporations in this age have the capability to hire cheap labor over-seas or from illegal immigrants? Surely that has SOME effect on the wages of American workers? Yes, America did once operate very well in a time with little regulation but that was in a time when regulation wasn't needed to keep lead out of our products or jobs being shipped out to foreign nations.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Jobs are shipped over seas due to regulation and taxation...any further regulation will drive the entire business, not only jobs, out of America and make America even worse off as we would be importing more goods / services and exporting or producing essentially nothing.

Immigrant and over seas labor cost reflect the over payment of American workers...

America is fucked regardless...Congress can try to legislate its way out of this mess, it will only make it worse.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

So what you're saying is, because of regulation and things like social security, people need to be payed more, therefore, businesses invest in overseas labor because it's cheaper?

I can understand that, but it still doesn't give reason enough to me for what they do. It still sounds simply like selfish investment to make a larger profit. Smaller businesses survive with American labor, why can't they?

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Smaller business's survive becasue they feed the consumer, which is overwhelmingly funded by Credit (without proper savings)...

In order for an economy to thrive and wealth (for all classes) to be created, production and manufacturing have to occur...with high taxation and socialist policies, production and manufacturing are driven away towards a profit...

All vibrant and wealthy economies, like it or not, are based solely on profit motivation.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Read Crises and Leviathan by Robert Higgs, or any book / article from Mises dot org, for great explinations of how Government has, factualy backed with data, driven production overseas by excess and unecessary regulation and infringement upon private contracts...

Ron Paul, Peter Schiff, Thomas Woods...there are MANY great and informative books that are backed with facts; not government indoctrination spewed repetitively over and over until everyone thinks it true...

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

You've made many good points and I thank you for tolerating my incessant questions lol.

I'd like to bring up, 1. What's your suggestion for people who've already contributed to social security and are now trying to get what they've paid for, and 2. I in no way listen to what politicians say, which I believe you've assumed. I listen to people like the Young Turks. Might I suggest bringing this argument up with them, to see where it leads? Thank you for the suggested reading.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

1) hard question as the money is not there, our government has over the years taken the money to fund illegal wars amongst other things and left in the place a Treasury Bond (I.O.U.) ... so, when you pay in now...it pays off people now and you are promised the money when you turn 65 or whatever age it is then...unfortunately, we have been stealing for so long that something has to happen now...

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

possibly a percentage system where the younger get a lower percent of the promised social security payout and the older get a higher percent, while noone gets a 100% except for those recieving it presently...cut the Social Security tax out immediately and reduce government spending overseas to make up for the coming years of social security shortcomings...none of this will happen as Americans are accustomed to their style of living and would rather place a burden on our posterity.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

I can assure you one thing, should we keep Social Security and Medicare the way they are..they will deplete Americas wealth, what is left, and will over many more years of government trying to find more ingenius ways of collecting taxes to cover these programs (which will fall directly on corporations as the people will not accept the burden) drive essentially all of the production and manufacturing jobs out of our economy..wait for this to happen if you think it is bad now.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

I think what's more unfortunate is that the people fighting for change in social security now aren't suggesting anything that even vaguely resembles what you're talking about here. What you say sounds reasonable. What they say sounds like just take my fucking money already and be done with it.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

The only person you will hear talk about Social Security are people outside of the mainstream, what the Turks and all other mainline news organizations will call "Fringe tea partiers" or something along those lines...when, in reality, all they are proposing is to allow for the Individual rights to be restored and to respect private property...If some people want to have a government nest egg, go for it...just dont use my labor to fund it without my permission.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

All the other politicians who dont speak of the looming Social Security and Medicare crises are 1) ignorant to the facts (even supported by the Congressional Budget Office) or 2) dont want to run away potential seniors and lower wage earners from voting for them...

I havent found one Tea Partier that stands on principle rather than pandering anti-democrat rhetoric just to get votes...this is why i will vote Libertarian, they will stand on principle -- not popular demand.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

the young turks havent the slightest idea of what made America great and how to reverse course of where we are headed now...everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but, facts are not opinionted...the facts point towards what you can read on the Mises website and with Ron Paul and Peter Schiff...government intervention has been tried numerous times in the past century and it always lead to one thing...a worse collapse.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Right, but I've never heard any one bring the argument to them in the way you've presented it, it makes sense. I don't know them personally, but I don't believe them to be close-minded.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Im not going to go out and say they are closed minded...sorry if it came about that way, they just havent taken the time to see the whole spectrum --- if they dont want to take the time to do it, so be it. but, the facts are plain as day...our government cannot be sustained at this pace; even cutting all military and pentagon spending, our entitlement programs and interest owed to China/Japan eat away the entire IRS tax revenue

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Not saying that you said they're close-minded, what I am saying is that I don't think they are, and that if they were confronted with an argument like this, they'd be given a new horizon to look upon and become that much more credible in an honest attempt at informing their viewers.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

The Turks cant be credible for one reason; they will never give the private sector / free market its credibility and will always seek to explain how a lack of regulation over the free market causes issues...They are Progressives, they may be decent on Foreign Policy, but Social Policy they prefer collectivism as opposed to individualism.

You cant have a forest without a lot of trees...they fail to see that if every tree has no leaves, the entire forest has no leaves.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Peter Schiff was on TV in 2005 and 2006 warning everyone about the housing collapse, of course he was called a loon by every "top economist"...then it happened...he has been saying for years "everyone better buy gold"...he was called a loon, now look at the price of gold (which represents the decrease in value of the dollar)....now he is warning about a Tresuary Bond crisis and hyperinflation...and again, noone is listening.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

If you are for social programs and support Obama...thats all fine, that is your belief...but if anything else, read into and educate yourself on the Federal Reserve...Money is the blood of every economy and our money today is created out of thin air by selling IOU's to China and Japan (only to be paid back with interest)...if our government doesnt take in enough taxes, it creates money ... this is inflation which ultimately leads to higher prices of all goods and services.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Then...the Progressive era arose in America and along with this came entitlements, expansive controls/regulation of the market place and an "elastic" money supply (meaning Credit without savings) ... this Century has seen the cost of all goods increasing, the value of the Dollar decreasing and the averag wages decreasing when compared to the average cost increase of other goods and services...This is due to government, not the free market as people like to say.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

One last thing; let me correct myself, when I said financial success, I meant social success. Even though most other countries are financially in the shit-hole with us, at least they can take care of there sick and elderly, and their veterans and heroes, while we leave them to die and let their houses burn down.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Voluntary charity in America always provided for more help for those in need, more effeciently and not through the immoral theft of property to redistribute it...Unfortunately, in todays America people have became consumers rather than producers and thus the financial gap has grown and the ability for charitable measures has all but diminished in the name of taxation and government.

With more wealth be in the private sector, rather than government, charity would not be an issue

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

People expect the government to play the safety net role -- look at wall street , banks and the car companies even they expected bailouts..and of course received these bailouts at the cost of the producers and tax payers in soceity...where as, these funds could have been utilized in R&D, employment, capital investment to help and promote production in this company or this money could have been saved to allow for additional credit into the market, but...it was ate up by govenrment.

[Joehtosis]

@helltrackrider

Your question on which section authorizes it, is ridiculous. By that logic, if you say that everything outside of the constitution is illegal, and everything within, legal, then I'd imagine you'd like to throw away all of the amendments as well? White men are the only people allowed to vote? Women have no say in our government? Going to the moon is a fucking crime?

The Constitution is not a mandate from God. It's a piece of fucking legislation.

[helltrackrider]

@Joehtosis

Everything outside the Constitution is illegal...

Similar to your boss telling you to cut his grass or your fired --- but cutting his grass is not in your job description.

[SendinK9]

I voted for Nader, I knew he wouldn't get in but it made me feel good personally that I voted for someone who I feel uses logic and facts, something Washington knows nothing about these days.

[helltrackrider]

@SendinK9

Ron Paul uses logic and facts...Nader is ignorant to the Constitution, the LAW.

[indiana4jones]

oustanding speach.

[awarenessis]

If Obama had a pit bull that killed your mother, he would say "One down and 4 billion 999 million 999 thousand and 999 to go!"

[Scoforever]

Ralph Nader. Tell me what you believe the top-marginal tax-rate should be.

[cousin1e]

OK-everyone go outside and get some fresh air. Use a sunblock and wear a hat.

Might want to bring along some dog biscuits.

[cousin1e]

Let me put it another way.

If Nader's pit bull bit you, he would help you get medical care, and probably tell you to watch where you stepped. If Ron Paul's pit bull bit you, he would say, "I told you kids to stay out of my yard!"

[cousin1e]

Ron Paul's views don't have any cohesive principle. It's just "you can't tell us what to do, no way, no how!" His use of the constitution may have been feasible

200 years ago, but we cannot maintain a

fair social/economic structure without some careful regulation. That is a basic difference between Nader and Paul. And to me, it is a huge difference. If I want to hear discussion on an issue these days, one of the things I do is scan for a Nader opinion/study. He burns the midnight oil.

[lflr4lnco]

if his use of the constitution is 200 years unfeasable, maybe someone should have AMENDED the constitution instead of letting it rot the point where congress can just trample all over it with laws like the PATRIOT Act

[cousin1e]

Super-wonk! Pure message. No junk.

Watch: An Unreasonable Man or Close Up. 2 films on Nader available on Amazon.

[Clyaton]

Behind Ron Paul, he's one of the most honest politicians we have. Even if one doesn't respect his views, he/she is ignorant if they don't respect this man.

[lflr4lnco]

behind ron paul? hes ahead of paul. Ron Paul, despite being a hero of mine, has people to appease. That's why you don't see him talking about the federal reserve on debates.

[Clyaton]

Not true at all, I shouldn't have to tell you why.

[themansays2]

Cover your mouth with your hand

2. Make a wish

3.Close your hand (fist)

4. Hold your hand at heart for 5 seconds

5. Send this to 3 more videos

6. Tomorrow will be the best day ever

it actually worked

Money- you will find a wad of $200 in cash

Love- Your crush or lover will kiss you or ask you out

[tonyac42]

I love that routine

[HarveyRex23]

It seems to me that Nader gets on the right side of the tracks on every issue. And yet, this guy can't get into political office. Nader is so good for this country and it's economy.

[kaktos12]

and all of u in three hundred spartans sparta

[kaktos12]

okay now for all of u on three hundred spartans...spartaaaaaaaaa

[Cakerolled]

HEIL HITLER

[Atombombmother]

He should just say that they're using social security taxes to pay for tax breaks for the rich. Social security is a regressive tax, therefore, the government doesn't mind collecting it.

[djmarotta]

Nader says, "If the Treasury isn't good for it...its all over."

It's all over.

[lee1949us1]

If he could get on sat.night live and other show like that then he would get a lot of exposure.

NADER/GONZALEZ 08

[80jvc88]

"Justice. That's the real American dream."

I wish I were enrolled in a course with Nader as the professor. I, pen in hand, front row, center would have the privilege of hearing him speak three days/week, every semester, for four years . . .

Nader. That'd be a real American education.

[netster007z]

@80jvc88 Well who decides what is just and what is unjust? I believe it is unjust for someone to steal or assault. However I do not believe it is unjust for a private citizen to choose to do something dangerous that affects only him, like not wearing a seatbelt for example. Is coercion just? Is it just to take someone's money by force and put it into a financially insolvent "trust fund" whose own administrators even acknowledge will not be able to pay all its liabilites after 2043?

[1776freedomfighter]

Dennis Kucinich said the same thing.

In 6 months or less there will be no social secutity, medicare, medicaid, workman's comp, welfare etc. The government is broke - they will not have money to pay for these programs.

[Tianshou88]

"Is it clear...what I'm saying?" He actually asks if people are understanding him. No double-speak here just real, clear answers from a well educated, experienced, and extremely intelligent man.

[DrZarkloff]

I love it! The real American dream is justice.

[davis032]

today i got my sample ballot and its my first time voteting NADER/GONZALEZ 08

[Rosetteismyname]

FIRST COMMENT!!! GO NADER!!!! THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE NOT WILLING TO VOTE FOR NADER OUT OF "FEAR" ... I say "If Nader had a vote for every time I heard that from someone, then Nader would win"

[Konoakapen]

Agreed. Or, at the very least, he would get more exposure, and that would lead to more support, which would lead to greater exposure. It's an upward spiral, if the media would just let him get started.