Today's Social Security News - From the Bush Camp.

This is a lite weight proposal, mostly because Bush knows it's going to be a tough sell.

What has leaked so far - And this is the Bush Proposal (which will be modified for sure by Congress)

1.) No Changes for anyone over 55

2.) 4% of Salary could be contibuted to a private account, up to a Maximum of $1,000 per year.

We'll see what else tonight.

Republicans are scared shitless about this. - It looks like a no win situation for anyone running for re-election. It will cost boat loads of money for sure in the short run. Probably raise taxes and scare most folks over 45.

Bush has not vetoed one spending Bill from Congress yet! - Less Government!

Yeah, that "no veto" thing really bothers me too.
It looks like pure gutlessness, something I would not
have expected from Bush. Of course, it might be
a lack of understanding. Wow, that's pretty scary

JG

[73ss454]

The only thing wrong with the SS system is that the government has access to it via the general fund.
If they would stop taking the money out we wouldn't need a fix.
Just my view of it.

[Dawg54]

I'm a republican but I can't say I feel good about what I have heard so far. I don't think there is such a thing as a permanent fix. It's something that was tweated back in the 80's and will probably have to be every 20 years or so. I don't like higher taxes but I could swallow a slight increase in the SS rate and do away with the 90k max on wages if this would buy us another 20 years. :-/

[Bob_Smith]

This is a lite weight proposal, mostly because Bush knows it's going to be a tough sell.

We wrote to our Senators and Congressman today. Hopefully they will be inundated.

Bush already being booed during the State of Union Speech by Congressmen. * - *When he made the statement that SS would be bankrupt by 2042.

This is even going to be harder for him than I ever imagined!

The statement that "SS will not change at all for those 55 and older" - Begs the question - In what year do you turn 55?

[Eagle43]

Bush already being booed during the State of Union Speech by Congressmen. * - *When he made the statement that SS would be bankrupt by 2042.

This is even going to be harder for him than I ever imagined!

The statement that "SS will not change at all for those 55 and older" - Begs the question - In what year do you turn 55?

Management guru Peter Drucker, economist Milton Friedman, and others whose names I can't remember have flatly stated that retirement age has to be raised. If you think that 77 million boomers are gonna be walking around and taken care of by today's 30-year olds, better re-evaluate.

This is a problem and Bush, to his credit, is trying to do something. The Dems answer is, as always, just raise taxes.

Prediction: Bush will get a bill and he'll get it this year. It might not be what he wants, but he will get a bill.

Y'all keep underestimating GWB.

[BunsGettingFirm]

This is a problem and Bush, to his credit, is trying to do something. *The Dems answer is, as always, just raise taxes. *

Prediction: *Bush will get a bill and he'll get it this year. *It might not be what he wants, but he will get a bill.

Y'all keep underestimating GWB.

Yeah, Bush's trying something all right. He's trying to backdoor his taxes up our asses. His proposal will add to the deficit, and eventually higher deficit will mean higher interest rate and lower economic growth, paid by us 30-somethings. By the time the problem comes to bite us in our wallets, Dubya will have moved on to learning the second half of the alphabets, so it won't be his problem. I do give W his credit though. He's more politically savvy than the Democrats who don't know when to stop striking the taxes match even when they are surrounded by kegs of black powder.

The problem isn't that the Social Security program is "broken". It's that the government is taking money from the S.S. program and counting it toward all the general spending.

This is a problem and Bush, to his credit, is trying to do something. The Dems answer is, as always, just raise taxes.

Well, The GOPs answer is Borrow Money! - What sense does that make?

The Democratic Senate Leader said tonite "That Privatizing Social Security is off the table - It won't happen" - For something that needs bi-partisian Support - this looks pretty clear to me.

February 9, 1998 quote from then-President Bill Clinton:

[i]f you don't do anything [with Social Security], one of two things will happen. Either it will go broke and you won't ever get it, or if we wait too long to fix it, the burden on society ... of taking care of our generation's Social Security obligations will lower your income and lower your ability to take care of your children to a degree that most of us who are parents think would be horribly wrong and unfair to you and unfair to the future prospects of the United States.

[Marshac]

Why do people still talk about the trust fund as if it's really there? It IS debt which will take more debt in order to pay back. How will this somehow fully fund SS until 2042?

[charlie]

I think we should rename the democratic party the
the ostrich party ....... they either have their heads
in the sand or some other unmentionable place.

Cheers,

Charlie

Here's what I heard -

Part A) We're going to get our fiscal house in order. We will cut spending and unnecessary government programs.

Comment: Good.

Part B) A plethora of new (or increased) spending programs

Comment: Bad.

Part C) It's our moral obligation to 'free the world.'

Comment: Bad.

[Dawg54]

I just don't see the 2 sides getting together on this. A minor adjustment might have a chance, but thats about it. I just think emotions and politics will get in the way of any major reform.

[haha]

Why do people still talk about the trust fund as if it's really there? It IS debt which will take more debt in order to pay back. How will this somehow fully fund SS until 2042?

People talk about the trust fund as if it's really there because it is really there. The social security trust fund's US Treasury bonds are as good as anyone else's US Treasury Bonds. As regards taking more debt to pay back, that is what the government does. Its called re-funding, and they rarely if ever retire debt without creating new debt to get the cash to retire old debt.

Why should the social security administration be the only holder of US bonds who isn't supposed to get paid?

Mikey

[Marshac]

People talk about the trust fund as if it's really there because it is really there. The social security trust fund's US Treasury bonds are as good as anyone else's US Treasury Bonds. As regards taking more debt to pay back, that is what the government does. Its called re-funding, and they rarely if ever retire debt without creating new debt to get the cash to retire old debt.

Why should the social security administration be the only holder of US bonds who isn't supposed to get paid?

Mikey

Correct me if i'm wrong, but I thought that the SS treasury bonds were of a "special issue" type which can't be sold on the market. If there are no buyers for this debt other than the government, how else can the government pay off these bonds without taking on more debt? The general fund is already bleeding red, so don't look there for money. Seems to me all that would happen is the "special issue" bonds would go in the Treasury's front door, and regular treasury bonds would go out the back in the form of new debt.

And after re-reading your post, I see you said the same thing. So we agree there.

As an aside, this is totaly unfair to the taxpayers... we get to pay for social security twice.

[BunsGettingFirm]

I think we should rename the democratic party the
the ostrich party ....... they either have their heads
in the sand or some other unmentionable place.

Cheers,

Charlie

I'm sorry, wasn't it Bush, the "fiscal conservative", who signed the Medicare Prescription Bill last year into law?

I think we should rename the democratic party the
the ostrich *party ....... they either have their heads
in the sand or some other unmentionable place. *

Cheers,

Charlie

Oh, I think Social Security needs to be fixed, but not by the GOP and especially Bush! Their idea of fixing it is eliminating it.

Clinton tried to fix Medicare, which is more broken than SS, And you guys fought it every step of the way, with your heads up where the sun don't shine.

[farmerEd]

I'm sorry, wasn't it Bush, the "fiscal conservative", who signed the Medicare Prescription Bill last year into law? *

I do beleive you are right...and he is also the "fiscal conservative" who has presided over the largest defecits in history (never met a spending bill he didn't like) and the largest expansion of the national debt in history to boot...quite an accomplishment in just 5 short years.

At least he is a moral person...he didn't raise your taxes to support all his drunken spending spree...he is going to make someone elses kids foot the bill instead(read poor and middle class kids)...must be one of the good "family values" he learned in his church.

George is convinced our SS is not right.
Be wary of reform if it passes.
In Congress we know that he's in for a fight.
They all have their heads up their asses.

Thanks Charlie

JG