So, BushCo's BIG plan to transform SS has been a big ..... dud. Is it time to chalk this up as a huge 2nd term loss, or shall we continue to watch the policy drift.
You yourself will be calling for Social Security reform soon enough... just be patient... his vindication will be the collapse of the entire system in the near future!
I never said there isn't a problem. I did say previously that BushCo attempted a shove-it-down-your-throat strategy to push through their initiative for private accounts. Not only has the strategy utterly failed, the proposal is crap - and doesn't even address SS's problems. So, BushCo is getting exactly what it deserved.
READING IS FUNDAMENTAL REVOLT! The social security private accounts plan was always labeled/described as VOLUNTARY! You no doubt confuse it with the Democrat Plan: Which is nothing at all, but they frequently have something to shove down your throat!
Gosh, you know I think some of these righty moonweasels-- wait wait, moonsquirrels -- actually hope social security will fail just so they can be right!
Nevermind, it was a rhetorical question. You pretend to oppose personal accounts on a fiscal basis, when in actuality you'd oppose them on any grounds.
But was the goal of the administration ever progress? Or was it... a) tax cuts for the rich b) make sure friends get good jobs c) simmer some divisive issues that will keep energizing the republican base and help future elections. Tax cuts, Halliburton, and gay marriage/abortion. Mission Accomplished.
We already have voluntary retirement accounts in this country that don't sap the Social Security funds. I fully support them. In fact, I make contributions to one myself.
Perhaps you could take a little time and actually read the proposal? Its sole purpose is to stop the current pillaging of SS surpluses.
I don't mind discussing this with you so long as you don't put words in my mouth. I opposed the BushCo plan for the following reasons: 1. BushCo attempted to shove the idea down the throats of the dems. For things like SS, new plans only work under a bi-partisan umbrella. Look it up, because its true. 2. Private accounts do not address the underlying long-term problem of financial solubility for SS. 3. Most accounts I've seen say that private accounts will cost $1 trillion to set up. And, there will not be long-term savings offsetting those set up costs. 4. I'm not an expert on this, so I just assume that BushCo is out to screw the American public for corporate benefit. After all, BushCo flat-out lied when they said that SS was going to go bankrupt. So, what I am for? I don't know. Right now, I have grave doubts that BushCo can craft any sort of bipartisan compromise. After all, they've been clearly deficit spending that politcal capital. Okay, here's a try: 1. Raise the cap on income for taxing SS 2. Means-test benefits 3. Raise the retirement age by 1-2 years 4. Reduce the CPI calculation for future benefits
Much larger. really? Why don't you run the numbers for us? How big an impact would the Demint proposal have on the federal decifit?
Fine, do all that. Not the route I would suggest, but the Demint plan isn't at odds with any of those proposals.
In a nutshell, you fund private accounts with the bonds that the SS surplus now holds and any future surpluses purchase additional bonds that go into private accounts. It guarantees current workers a 3% return rather than the negative return we'll get if we do nothing.
Those Republicans just cannot stand a surplus. The size of private accounts the surplus could fund is tiny, really not worth dicking with as the majority of Americans, who understandibly do not want this band of thieves 'fixing' soc serc, realize. These radical fixes simply are not popular. Soc serc is popular. Besides, I thought the surplus wasn't real; just "some IOUs in filing cabinet somewhere".
The proposal turns those IOUs into something tangible, or in your parlance "backed by the full faith of the US government". Why does that bother you?
Actually, IOUs, bonds, notes, CDs and other debt obligations are already tangible. They don't have to have a magic wand waved over them to become so. Something intangible would be like 'goodwill'. FYI. I am not bothered by that, I think it is a good thing.