The Wall Street Journal says that policy debates about Social Security have shifted from cutting benefits to raising benefits. Looking back, it’s hard to understand we’ve spent so many years listening to talking heads telling us we have to cut benefits. That’s never been what people wanted.
I remember years ago reading this imagined exchange between a Republican member of Congress and a Democratic member:
Republican: All you do is tax and spend.
Democrat: And elect and elect
5 comments:
The fact that Republicans have no viable alternative to Social Security and simply don't care if poor older Americans starve or die due to lack of healthcare is becoming obvious to everyone.
Amazing that the GOP which depends heavily on older voters constantly speaks aloud the possibility of cutting Social Security and/or Medicare.
I don't think your conversation captures reality given the GOP still holds the Senate and White House.
Republican: You just tax and spend
Democrat: And you just borrow and spend.
Republican: And we just win baby!
The politicians cannot spend responsibly.
Someday the music will stop on Social Security (and many other government programs) and millions of people who build their lives around these programs will not have chairs to sit in.
People want higher benefits, more benefits but they don't want to pay for them. It's okay if you raise someone else's taxes.
Maybe people have been talking about cutting benefits because some day there won't be enough money to pay 100% of what is due. Either need to cut them or raise taxes or some combination of both.
Raising benefits to a minimum level of over $1000 is folly and just turning this from a retirement program to a welfare one and one that won't enjoy much support from the average taxpayer in the future.
"I worked and made $50,000 a year for most of my life and my benefit is $1800." "Oh, I goofed off or didn't pay taxes most of my life and I just get a bit less than you!"
1:49 nailed it!
Post a Comment