A new Harris poll shows that only 12% of Americans want to cut Social Security. All Republican candidates for President endorse cuts in Social Security.
7 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I have heard people on news programs state blacks voted for mr obama because he's black and not the issues,not entirely true.
I think a question should be posed,why do most republican voters which are largely white oppose cuts in entitlement benefits? Are the issues even considered when they vote for a conservative?
The real problem is that only 12% of the people surveyed understand that the current SS system is flawed and needs to be changed. Based on this, the general population is uneducated in the realities of the system.
The Social Security Program is not inherently flawed. The Title XVI Federal Welfare program that has been attached to and identified as Social Security is a travesty and needs to be dropped or at least re-named so it is not continually called Social Security and used to criticize everything about the program when it has nothing to do with the program. Title XVI come sout fo teh general budget, not out of the Social Security coffers as does Title II disability and retirement, both of which have been paid into by the receipent, unlike Title XVI welfare which is paid for out of tax dollars.. And what does the black racism of 93% of blacks electing Obama have to do with Social Security??
Don't forget a disability system that pays "older" workers for being "old" (and potentially discriminated against because of age) instead of actually incapable of working.
Anonymous: You are correct that Social Security is funded by separate dollars - dedicated FICA and SECA taxes and interest. And, from a cash flow perspective, these dedicated dollars were used to pay benefits. The surplus dollars were supposed to be invested in nonmarketable Treasury securities, bonds which were not available to the public. In fact, these special bonds were intended to pay for Social Security beneficiaries, exclusively. That's why they were not available for public use. Unfortunately, somehow the government decided to use the money internally, without having to go to the public for funds. The Treasury borrowed the surplus principal and interest, paid for current expenses, and lowered the deficits - with real principal and interest that was supposed to be reserved for Social Security beneficiaries. Now, the trust fund is a hollowed artifact, stripped of its value by the Treasury for short-term gains. Don Levit
After reading the book "What is Wrong With Kansas" where conservative Republicans repeatedly vote against, what the author views as, their best (economic interest), it is apparent that "Liberals will never understand." As set-out by other Anns above, there are other factors in play. And a "simple question" when asked my be much more complex to answer.
7 comments:
I have heard people on news programs state blacks voted for mr obama because he's black and not the issues,not entirely true.
I think a question should be posed,why do most republican voters which are largely white
oppose cuts in entitlement benefits? Are the issues even considered when they vote for a conservative?
btw,i'm black.
The real problem is that only 12% of the people surveyed understand that the current SS system is flawed and needs to be changed. Based on this, the general population is uneducated in the realities of the system.
The Social Security Program is not inherently flawed. The Title XVI Federal Welfare program that has been attached to and identified as Social Security is a travesty and needs to be dropped or at least re-named so it is not continually called Social Security and used to criticize everything about the program when it has nothing to do with the program. Title XVI come sout fo teh general budget, not out of the Social Security coffers as does Title II disability and retirement, both of which have been paid into by the receipent, unlike Title XVI welfare which is paid for out of tax dollars.. And what does the black racism of 93% of blacks electing Obama have to do with Social Security??
Don't forget a disability system that pays "older" workers for being "old" (and potentially discriminated against because of age) instead of actually incapable of working.
Define "cutting " Social Security. even the article on the Harris poll doesn't explain what they meant. It's all bogus, as usual.
Anonymous:
You are correct that Social Security is funded by separate dollars - dedicated FICA and SECA taxes and interest.
And, from a cash flow perspective, these dedicated dollars were used to pay benefits. The surplus dollars were supposed to be invested in nonmarketable Treasury securities, bonds which were not available to the public. In fact, these special bonds were intended to pay for Social Security beneficiaries, exclusively. That's why they were not available for public use.
Unfortunately, somehow the government decided to use the money internally, without having to go to the public for funds. The Treasury borrowed the surplus principal and interest, paid for current expenses, and lowered the deficits - with real principal and interest that was supposed to be reserved for Social Security beneficiaries.
Now, the trust fund is a hollowed artifact, stripped of its value by the Treasury for short-term gains.
Don Levit
After reading the book "What is Wrong With Kansas" where conservative Republicans repeatedly vote against, what the author views as, their best (economic interest), it is apparent that "Liberals will never understand."
As set-out by other Anns above, there are other factors in play. And a "simple question" when asked my be much more complex to answer.
Post a Comment