An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Some Republicans Press Privatizing Social Security Again
13 Responses to “Some Republicans Press Privatizing Social Security Again”
You would think the massive shrinkage in 401Ks would have taught them something. But ideologues never learn.
Yeah well, it is the House and we saw how Obama ripped them to shreds in their own home. The House is an insane asylum.
But can we really budget for padding the walls? It's a big place…
Oh yes, by all means, Republicans. Run on privatizing Social Security and eliminating Medicare. Good call.
Jim, you're assuming that the GOP supporters of privatizing Social Security care that seniors would lose all their money. They don't. They're not pushing to privatize Social Security because it will benefit seniors.
As the comments show, when it comes to saving Social Security the Democrats are the party of no ideas and adopt the common GOP strategy of merely being critical. Past that they continue to mischaracterize the concept of privatizing Social Security.
The suggested plan is OPTIONAL. That means no one will force you into it and if you like the current plan you keep it. People 55 or over today would continue to be in the current plan.
The plan won't apply to current recipients and Kathy's suggestion that seniors will lose all their money is flat out dishonest. Even if you want to be in the plan the most that you can put in is a third of your SS tax, so it would be impossible to lose all your money.
I have not seen the specifics of Ryan/Nunes plan on where people could put their money but traditionally it has been a very conservative mix of acceptable stocks and bonds, most likely a conservatively balanced mutual fund.. The suggestion that people will somehow just bet all their money on Enron is foolish and misleading.
From what I have seen the Medicare plan is more problematic and from what I have seen of it looks like a non-starter.
And what are the management fees on those conservative mutual funds going to be? Is it optional for everyone or just a certain age group like one of the previously proposed plans? How many ads will run from the financial sector trying to persuade people of how good an idea it is to give them part of your SS funds?
Oh, Mr. Goat. “Saving Social Security.” Oh please. You seem to think that “optional” part makes everything OK. So in what way would it “save” Social Security if a substantial number of near-retirement-age citizens had sunk everything into Madoff? What's your plan for those who foolishly “opt” into some risky investments that lose everything? Let them starve? Or, in reality, wouldn't we wind up covering such bad choices through welfare, food stamps and Medicaid? No, sir, it is not the Dems who have no ideas. It is the incessant unbridled greed of the GOP elite wanting to get their mitts on billions more taxpayer dollars.
As for actually SAVING Social Security, you know it's just a matter of priorities. We have spent many times over the funds needed to keep it afloat for a century, on tax cuts, corporate welfare and needless and pointless wars.
Those of us who honor our pact with our elders (my mom is on SS and Medicare, as was my dad before his death) and those of us who think older Americans should be able to retire with dignity and quality of life despite not being among the lofty uber-class; we will be glad to vote you and your ilk into the dustbin of history.
How many ads will run from the financial sector trying to persuade people of how good an idea it is to give them part of your SS funds?
Jim – They wouldn't have to advertise to me, I'd put my money in a privatized plan tomorrow if I could. I don't see where management fees would be a reason not to participate.
GreenDreams, I don't think you even read my post as it already addressed your concerns.
If there are Democratic ideas out there then let's hear them.
If there are Democratic ideas out there then let's hear them.
Prioritize. Fully fund Social Security, stop robbing the trust fund for GOP giveaways. Return to Reagan-era tax rates, end corporate welfare, scale back the military and stop trying to be policeman to the whole world. We CAN afford social programs. We just have to decide what's important to us.
You have decided, and as I said, I support 100% the GOP going after Social Security all guns a-blazing. Totally go for it.
Prioritize. Fully fund Social Security, stop robbing the trust fund for GOP giveaways. Return to Reagan-era tax rates, end corporate welfare, scale back the military and stop trying to be policeman to the whole world. We CAN afford social programs. We just have to decide what's important to us.
OK, the Democratic Party is in charge. Show me their bill to do those things.
And to be clear the GOP has been inept and wasteful for several years. My support for privatization has nothing to do with the GOP, I just think it's a good idea if done right.
Oh, come on!!
Remember last summer–”Keep your government off my Medicare!”–?
Republicans aren't going to do anything on this.
Fully fund Social Security, stop robbing the trust fund for GOP giveaways. Return to Reagan-era tax rates, end corporate welfare, scale back the military and stop trying to be policeman to the whole world. We CAN afford social programs. We just have to decide what's important to us.
May I presume you disapprove of looting the trust fund for Democratic giveaways too?
Regarding tax rates, you will certainly get your wish. Top tax rates were 90%+ for 30 years as we struggled to pay down the debt from WWII. We finally finished in the 70s and tax rates came down. Thanks to the wars, new entitlement programs, and pork-laden stimulus packages of the past few years, they are guaranteed to head north again.
As for not being the world's policemen, I'm all for it in theory. We'll just sit quietly by and watch genocides in Darfur or Bosnia or wherever, then?