Saving Social Security
This is a bit of heartening news. Greg tells us House progressives sent a sternly worded letter to Obama suggesting he use the SOTU to declare support for protecting Social Security.
[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]
The letter, which was sent over by a source, represents the clearest shot across the bow yet from House Dems on Social Security, and suggests that the left is gearing up for a big fight in the event that Obama signals openness to cuts to the program, as some expect him to do.Damn straight. If the Democratic Party doesn't stand for fully protecting a program they fought to enact and to preserve for all these decades, then they stand for nothing. Social Security is the signature accomplishment in the history of the party. The storm of lefty criticism over his real and perceived policy mistakes over the last two years will look like a gentle rain shower compared to the tsunami of discontent that will roar across the land if he caves even a little into the right wing narrative on this issue.
In the letter, Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chairs Raul Grijalva and Keith Ellison, along with 31 other Dems, argue that Obama has a unique opportunity to frame the issue by positioning himself as the keeper of the "promise of Social Security." They ask him to place himself in opposition to "radical" Republicans who are hell-bent on dismantling the program, and request a meeting to discuss how Obama and Dems will handle the issue in the 112th Congress.
[More posts daily at the Detroit News.]
Labels: policy, President Obama, Social Security, Workers Rights
posted by Libby Spencer at 1:30 PM
8 Comments:
It is a hard fact that Social Security is now a terrible deal for workers who get an extremely low to negative rate of return on their "investment." And that's not counting the automatic (yes, automatic) benefit cuts that will hit around 2037.
I don't know where your "source" obtains the facts to support the claim of ""radical" Republicans who are hell-bent on dismantling the program"
The GOP leadership (and most of the GOP) understand the need to keep the system solvent. A few on the right want to eliminate it..a few on the left want to make it even larger. Lets stick to the middle +/- 3 sigma ok?
The SS trustees clearly identify the problems facing the system, both OADI and Medicare.
The first part is relatively easy to fix. A 2% payroll tax increase, or a smaller tax increase and a increase in the retirement age or similar adjustment, and the system can meet its obligations for 75 years.
Medicare is going to be a much harder problem to solve. The future expenditures are very hard to estimate.
Your aside had complete control of the Fed government for 1 year, and majority in Congress for 4 years and have declined to address this issue.
Perhaps your concerns should be addressed to the 'dems?
-tdc
"Your aside had complete control of the Fed government for 1 year"
Seriously? Complete control? And for a whole year! Whether or not the Democrats have been effective and whether or not they might have been effective without monkey wrenches, wooden shoes and filibusters being thrown into the works on a daily basis, I think that trying to blame decades of Congressional corruption and general idiocy is a bit precious.
But projections and extrapolations of current opinions into the future from people who told us Iraq would be over in weeks and not only wouldn't cost anything but would possibly be profitable? How can anyone have any doubt?
But the source for claims that certain Republicans want to dump SS and Medicare and Insurance reform? Surely you jest.
Thank you Fogg. I think that covers it.
Capt Fogg wrote in part "Seriously? Complete control? And for a whole year! Whether or not the Democrats have been effective and whether or not they might have been effective without monkey wrenches, wooden shoes and filibusters being thrown into the works on a daily basis,"
Try again "captain"
The 'dems had a massive majority in the House of representatives. No filibuster in the House of representatives
The 'dems (+ 2 I's that caucused with the 'dem majority) had a FILIBUSTER PROOF majority in the Senate until Scott Brown was elected
The 'dem candidate was elected president.
Pontification does not change the facts.
When you cant get GOP "moderates" (ie Snowe, Collins, etc..) to sign on legislation the problem isn't the GOP
-------
Capt Fogg. "But projections and extrapolations of current opinions into the future from people who told us Iraq would be over in weeks and not only wouldn't cost anything but would possibly be profitable? How can anyone have any doubt?"
The "war" part of Iraq was over in weeks. The "peace" part was bungled to say the least
Since you injected Iraq into a discussion on SS... It is interesting how silent the left/"progressives" have been since President Obama has been elected. First, He doubled down in Afghanistan. Instead of exiting Iraq early, he has essentially followed the Bush timetable, with nary a whimper from the left.
Just a coincidence eh?
----------
Capt Fogg But the source for claims that certain Republicans want to dump SS and Medicare and Insurance reform? Surely you jest
A small minority on the right do want to eliminate SS. Some on your side want to expand it by reducing the early retirement age
I would like to make it optional, but there is no good way to fund the transition. So we're stuck with SS, and need to keep it solvent.
Since I'm one of the lucky ducks still paying into it, I can look forward to paying even more in the near future.(there is no way Congress will solve long term problems with SS only by cutting benefits) Then in 7-10 years when I'm eligible for benefits, I can predict "progressives" claiming I don't "deserve" SS as I have saved money during my working years and don't really "need" it.
-tdc
Social Security is broke. It never was a successful program. It worked for as long as it did because it was collecting more then it was paying out. That is no longer the case.
No one is concerned about a tsunami of liberal outrage. As a group, leftists are noisy and vulgar people, determined to push their agenda on the majority.
I've paid a huge amount of money into that pyramid scheme over the last 42 years. That money, stuck in a savings account paying market interest, would pay me 2.5 times more than what the government is promising me. It is not a good deal for those currently employed. It was a great vote buyer for those who got back everything they paid into it in the first 2 years of their retirement (like my millionaire neighbor). He drew social security for over 30 years before dying at the age of 96.
I agree with TDC. The liberals will soon declare that those of use who lived within our means and put aside money for our retirement should not receive full benefits. That is simply a result of the parasitical nature of liberals in their never ending pursuit of power.
The government takeover of health care, if not repealed, will make social security look like a petty cash account within the next 10 years.
"Pontification does not change the facts."
You took the words right out of my mouth, Beatissimo Padre, but the department of cheap certainties is next door - let me show you the exit.
"As a group, leftists are noisy and vulgar people, determined to push their agenda on the majority."
Well as you don't speak for a majority and that's the stupidest, most self serving and baseless comment I've read in a long time, you'll forgive me for scoffing - and a most refined scoff that is.
I was brought up Republican, have financed Republican campaigns, have been close with Republican governors and congressmen and have seen more perversion, corruption and racketeering than you can imagine. At your age I was retired with 35 million in the bank and a patron of the arts. Don't lecture me on class and breeding if you don't want to be laughed out of your rented Tux.
"the parasitical nature of liberals in their never ending pursuit of power."
And speaking of stupid, perhaps it's time you read more Mao and Marx and Lenin and started attributing your quotes to their true sources. You keep trying to fit that square peg into a round hole - perhaps it's because your extracted it from one, but you can take your idiotic tactical stereotypes, your contempt for the meanings of words and your canned speeches and asinine assertions elsewhere. This isn't a public toilet or a stop-and-sock bar for pretentious and pugnacious nobodies with delusions of significance.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment
<< Home