Social Security Admin. Altered Communications Strategy to Undermine Public Confidence

[Genx87]

It makes me wonder who is really at the helm. Anybody who read the trustee report can see it is unsustainable. Unless you think we can come up with 20 trillion a year to fund SS + Medicare in 2080.

Something I doubt we can do without taxing people 90% of their income.

Eliminate the income cap on FICA taxes. The system will then be "sustainable" for 75 years. Actually it may be sustainable for longer than 75 years but that's as far as the SS administration projects.

Everyone, including the Republicans, realize Bush's SS destruction plan is dead. Live with it.

Wrong it wont make is sustainable. I think raising it is required but it isnt the magic fix. The Trsutee report gives several options. One of them is raising the payroll tax to 16.7% now. Something that just wont happen under Bush's term. I think the problem with raising the payroll taxes is it is just another bandaid. Then in 30 years when we are back here again they will say raise it to 22.3%. The system just isnt solvent without the demographics we have had the past 60 years.

It's underhanded for SSA to take sides in this debate. SSA should execute its responsibilities, not define them. That is the job for the Congress. They can post their number projections and let the general public decide for itself if it's sustainable or in crisis.

They did and you should go read it. I didnt see them taking sides at all.

SS reform comes from Congress, not SSA. Instead of whining about unsustainability, why doesn't SSA invest in bonds with higher returns? If it's going to need the money 20 years from now, why is it not buying 20 year loans with higher interest instead of 6 year loans with lower interest

because they are required by law to purchase special T-bills i believe. SSA is not whining but presenting the facts. Just because you dont like what they have to say doesnt mean they are whining.

 

[Engineer]

Support for Bush's SS plan falls.

 

[Genx87]

I would be interested in knowing who they polled for that. I doubt 75% of the people in an age bracket between 18-45 even know or care about AARP.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Support for Bush's SS plan falls.

Don't worry, the "war room" discussion going on right now with various business leaders and key GOP members will rectify that with a new round of propaganda.

 

[Genx87]

Don't worry, the "war room" discussion going on right now with various business leaders and key GOP members will rectify that with a new round of propaganda.

Which propoganda is that? SS is unsustainable in its current form?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Engineer
Support for Bush's SS plan falls.

Don't worry, the "war room" discussion going on right now with various business leaders and key GOP members will rectify that with a new round of propaganda.

I don't mind the private accounts portion if they were truely 100% private with no government skimming. However, I feel that this does nothing for the "so called impending crisis" facing SS over the next 30 to 50 years. If anything, it accelerates it without some sort of cutbacks, tax increases (which will be spent as soon as collected *sigh*), or both. A no win situation IMO. The government is going to spend additional taxes collected...period.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I would be interested in knowing who they polled for that. I doubt 75% of the people in an age bracket between 18-45 even know or care about AARP.

Why wouldn't they? It's AAA for old folks. Only now it seems they're "liberal". I think even some Republicans are saying "WTF?"

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Don't worry, the "war room" discussion going on right now with various business leaders and key GOP members will rectify that with a new round of propaganda.

Which propoganda is that? SS is unsustainable in its current form?

That upon which this thread was based.

 

[Genx87]

Which brings us back to the beginning of the thread.

 

[jpeyton]

Good News Guys

The people of America aren't falling for Bush's BS tactics this time.

:thumbsup:

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good News Guys

The people of America aren't falling for Bush's BS tactics this time.

:thumbsup:

yet in a link posted earlier, 75% of Americans still think SS is in need of reform. Looks like the dems "there is no problem" is not selling either.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good News Guys

The people of America aren't falling for Bush's BS tactics this time.

:thumbsup:

yet in a link posted earlier, 75% of Americans still think SS is in need of reform. Looks like the dems "there is no problem" is not selling either.

75% over the next 10 years. Dems didn't say that there was not a problem. They are saying that it is not a crisis. Is it? I don't know and really don't care. I would like a real private account and could care less if I receive any other benefit from SS.

Moving the money offline from the mainstream budget, as you may have suggested (I think) would be a great step along with private accounts (real), partial cap removal, etc.

Does it need to happen now? Private accounts: NO. Moving the money to the side: YES. CAP removal: Not sure.

 

[conehead433]

"75% over the next 10 years. Dems didn't say that there was not a problem. They are saying that it is not a crisis. Is it? I don't know and really don't care. I would like a real private account and could care less if I receive any other benefit from SS."

Are you aware the government is going to skim anything over a certain percentage you make in your private account? That's the plan. Wouldn't it be only slightly fairer if you kept what you made just like the government emploees in their private accounts. You're just one more person who's bought this BS.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: conehead433
"75% over the next 10 years. Dems didn't say that there was not a problem. They are saying that it is not a crisis. Is it? I don't know and really don't care. I would like a real private account and could care less if I receive any other benefit from SS."

Are you aware the government is going to skim anything over a certain percentage you make in your private account? That's the plan. Wouldn't it be only slightly fairer if you kept what you made just like the government emploees in their private accounts. You're just one more person who's bought this BS.

Actually no such skimming has been put forward in any plan so far. It is amazing what one false op-ed will do.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: conehead433
"75% over the next 10 years. Dems didn't say that there was not a problem. They are saying that it is not a crisis. Is it? I don't know and really don't care. I would like a real private account and could care less if I receive any other benefit from SS."

Are you aware the government is going to skim anything over a certain percentage you make in your private account? That's the plan. Wouldn't it be only slightly fairer if you kept what you made just like the government emploees in their private accounts. You're just one more person who's bought this BS.

Yes, that's why I place "REAL" in front of the private account label. I hate the skimming idea. It's nothing more than a profit maker for the government. Also, I'm not for capping the amount to $1000 or $1300 per year. It should be up to me since its MY money. Bush wants an ownership society, but then says the goverment gets it's hands on the money after a certain limit. I don't like it at all.

P.S. I've made the point about the "REAL" private account many times. I do think, however, even those private accounts with skimmed earnings might be better than letting the government spend the money instead (via borrowing).

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Good News Guys

The people of America aren't falling for Bush's BS tactics this time.

:thumbsup:

yet in a link posted earlier, 75% of Americans still think SS is in need of reform. Looks like the dems "there is no problem" is not selling either.

75% over the next 10 years. Dems didn't say that there was not a problem. They are saying that it is not a crisis. Is it? I don't know and really don't care. I would like a real private account and could care less if I receive any other benefit from SS.

Moving the money offline from the mainstream budget, as you may have suggested (I think) would be a great step along with private accounts (real), partial cap removal, etc.

Does it need to happen now? Private accounts: NO. Moving the money to the side: YES. CAP removal: Not sure.

Yes, but the longer we wait to fix the problem, the bigger the crisis is going to be in the future. I dont support any higher taxes for SS unless supluses are moved out of the hands of congress.

Private accounts should exist for those that want them, but they should not be mandatory.