Counterpunch
January 2, 2012
Editor’s note: Ron Paul will not, as suggested below, end Social
Security outright, as many liberals fear. His plan “honors our promise
to our seniors and veterans,” in other words those currently in the
programs could stay in them, but it would allow younger workers to opt out of the Social Security system and its payroll taxes. Ron Paul is the only antiwar candidate who has a (microscopic) chance of winning in 2012. He’s also the only candidate who will make an effort to restore the Bill of Rights and reverse Congress’s decision to allow the president to “indefinitely” imprison American citizens without due process. For these reasons alone, Paul should garner the support of leftists, liberals, and progressives. But he won’t, because liberals are convinced that Paul will try to dismantle the social programs upon which the elderly, the infirm, and the vulnerable depend.
These concerns are not without foundation. Paul opposes government meddling in the market and sees Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security as steps towards socialism. That means, there’s a good chance that these programs will come under fire if Paul is elected. The question is: How should we balance our concerns about Social Security with our opposition to the war(s)? (CONTINUE READING)
