Is This How You Attract Republican Voters?
From the
Huffington Post:
Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum called Friday for immediate cuts to Social Security benefits ...
"We can't wait 10 years," even though "everybody wants to," Santorum told a crowd while campaigning in New Hampshire and looking to set himself apart from his Republican rivals four days before the New Hampshire primary. ...
He argued that he is being courageous and honest by telling Americans they can't afford to wait to rein in Social Security's growing costs.
Unfortunately Santorum is not the only Republican Presidential hopeful that wants to eliminate Social Security. Have a look at whatever every potential Republican nominee has said about Social Security:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.strengthensocialsecurity.org/gop2012
Anyone who is honest will tell you SSA is going broke. So, if it's going broke, I guess we just let go broke eh? I mean why change anything to keep it solvent? Keep your head buried in the sand. Nothing to see here.
ReplyDeleteExcellent points, anonymous.
ReplyDeleteThose who espouse simply tinkering with the system are not facing the facts: there is no store of wealth in the trust fund.
If it doesn't work on a pay-as-you-go basis, it just doesn't work!
Don Levit
Let's finally give Don his due, honestly. THere are no trust funds--just iou's stored in the Treasury, that mean nothing. The money that they represent has been spent. To pay benefits in excess of annual FICA tax revenues involves raising taxes, or borrowing more money, or printing more money, or some combination. Indeed, most politicians want you to just move along, nothing here that they want you to see.
ReplyDeleteThe program has enormous societal value for the elderly, the disabled and the orphaned. In the 1980's it was also going broke before some "tweaks" ( including raising the retirement age) made it solvent 30 to 40 years into the future. Now we have to simply " tweak" it again by some combination of raising contributions or reducing benefits. If this could be done in the spirit of comprmise next year post election then it would be solvent again until 2075 or so.
ReplyDeleteSome people just want to ride the gravy train until the biscuit wheels fall off.. that time is fast approaching. Instead of rep'ing claimant's I often wonder what I will do for work..maybe I need a VE to tell me what transferable skills I have..
ReplyDeleteThe disability trust fund is already broke...thanks, in no small measure, to dishonest claimants, lawyers, and doctors.
ReplyDeleteHey, has anyone thought of raising the income level subject to the Social Security tax? Perhaps by doing something like that we could tax all earnings but at a lower rate? More money coming into the fund yet a lower tax rate for those making under $110,000. Oh, wait, that can never work!! We'd inconvenience "job creators."
ReplyDeleteYeah, it's "going broke" so let's cut benefits. Business expenses are rising, so let's cut wages and benefits. Any discussion on anything other than reducing what goes to the working man is unacceptable because it reduces shareholder value or profit or involves taxes. Faced with decisions over funding, it's always off the table to propose having those with more pay more. Instead the reaction is to take away from those with less. Great. Just great.
ReplyDeleteThe comment about increasing contributions is notable, because obama has chosen to reduce fica taxes for the past year thus making things worse. The other issue is making those with more pay more--this, along with reducing fica contributions, changes the whole program from an earned benefit to an needs-based assistance program, changing its whole nature and making it easier to implement abritrary changes, including cuts to benefits, in the future.
ReplyDeleteMaybe some future SSA changes,
ReplyDeleteBUT
there is a lot of (federal) govermental cost saving that should come first, ... then look at children's SSI, the rest of SSI, and then RSI/WIB/DIB that people have paid in for future benefits,
plus do a lot of redeterminations for people alread collecting.
"Is This How You Attract Republican Voters?"
ReplyDeleteYes. Republicans seem to hate the poor,and people of color. I'll acknowledge some republicans are of color like mr cain but even those few must know the truth about their party. I'll mention santorum comments about blacks(welfare,and referring to mr obama)as evidence. BTW,i am black,vote democrat because of the obvious bias in that party.
I suggest that we offer a 3 month window for the rich to get out of the program. Anyone opting out must show proof of financial responsibility (perhaps private retirement insurance or an significant defined benefit pension plan) and sign a lifetime pledge to never apply for any sort of public assistance program. If they do go broke, let them starve in the streets, which is no different than how they want us to treat the poor now. While we're at it, lets let them get out of Medicare as well with similar restrictions. It will unfortunately exacerbate the future shortfall but it would be worth it to stop having to listen to the lies that the system is on the verge of imminent financial collapse. This is just absolute nonsense.
ReplyDeleteWhy can't politicians (and the vast majority of Americans) understand the word "compromise"? I would agree it's not fair to solely increase taxes on the rich or only reduce benefits to poor beneficiaries as a solution to the funding problem. It is much more fair and sound to do a combination of MINOR adjustments that would affect everyone -- for example, raise the retirement age to 68, raise the income cap to something like $200,000, increase the payroll tax to maybe 6.7%, and slightly reduce promised benefits to future beneficiaries. Of course, an actuary would need to determine the exact figures that would be feasible.
ReplyDelete@ anon 11:45...where do I sign?
ReplyDeleteBy the way, I'm not a republican and I'm not "rich." But I'll agree to never use the system if you agree to never tax me.