May 13, 2005
-- by Dave Johnson
From the Republican Party 2000 Platform:
Over a five year period, as surpluses continue to grow, we will return half a trillion dollars to the taxpayers who really own it, without touching the Social Security surplus. That’s what we mean by our Lock-Box: The Social Security surplus is off-limits, off budget, and will not be touched. We will not stop there, for we are also determined to protect Medicare and to pay down the national debt. Reducing that debt is both a sound policy goal and a moral imperative. Our families and most states are required to balance their budgets; it is reasonable to assume the federal government should do the same. Therefore, we reaffirm our support for a constitutional amendment to require a balanced budget.Skip forward to 2005, Bush: Social Security Trust Fund "just IOUs",
Using a government filing cabinet as a prop, President Bush yesterday played to fears that the Social Security Trust Fund is little more than a stack of worthless IOUs.T.H.E.Y. J.U.S.T. L.I.E! They say what they need to say at the time to get enough people to let them do what they want, and then they move on with their own agenda. It is just cover stories, sell jobs, smokescreens. See the forest: What they SAY has nothing to do with what they DO.
[. . .] "There is no trust fund, just IOUs that I saw firsthand, that future generations will pay," Bush said after inspecting the storage site. "Imagine — the retirement security for future generations is sitting in a filing cabinet."
TrackBack URL for this entry:
And they keep getting away with lying, to say nothing about starting illegal and immoral wars!
Posted by: Helga Fremlin at May 13, 2005 2:00 PM
At least since Reagan, the republican party has been the party of continuous deception. Without continuous deception they could not exist. Simple as that really. What's the big surprise?
Posted by: richard at May 13, 2005 8:02 PM
All over the blogs this morning I keep reading relatively speaking, progressive people putting faith in the GOP moderates. They seem to believe that there is a civil war brewing in the Party.
Man, I have a sinking feeling that the so-called civil war has been fought and BushCo won. There are no moderates riding to our rescue. We rescue ourselves or we fall.
But there is this child like faith, by very bright people, in the Arlen Specter's and Olympia Snow's of the world. Dream world....
Posted by: jon st at May 14, 2005 4:44 AM
While Wexler is proposing tax increases that would clash with Bush's pledge not to expand the existing payroll tax, his legislation was heralded by the White House in part because Democrats had refused to offer an alternative to Bush's plan.
Bush Sock Puppets of the World Unite! Bush can still destroy Social Security with Democratic assistance!
Posted by: GaryBoatwright at May 14, 2005 8:11 AM
Social Security used to be by volunteer - what's wrong with going back to that? Aside from the fact that less money will be going into the SS fund for those born in '49 and before if people choose to opt out of SS. As I understand it the government is already borrowing money from other countries to pay what's owed now on SS & what's owed the Federal Reserve Bank.
Posted by: Sheila at May 16, 2005 4:24 AM
You have been misinformed. Social Security was never voluntary. It was set up because MOST of America's seniors were in poverty, and it raised them out of poverty.
As for who is borrowing what, you have it exactly backwards. The government is taking money FROM Social Security - which runs a huge surplus - and using it to give tax cuts to rich people.
Posted by: Dave Johnson at May 16, 2005 7:43 AM
You're screaming about lying, but where's the lie in all of that? Are you really asserting that the trust fund is not just a filing cabinet full of IOUs?
Where's your plan for reform, or do you REALLY believe that "there is no crisis" and thus we must do nothing?
Posted by: Will Franklin at June 16, 2005 11:36 AM
Franklin must be brainwashed or otherwise he'd realize that there was never a SS crisis until Bush made one. In fact when Clinton left office we had over a $5 Trillion surplus but now we have over a $7 Trillion debt. Where'd that $12 Trillion go? Well lets see...Tax cuts to the rich while the middleclass gets nothing...Illegal war in Iraq that was on Bush's agenda even before 9/11 happened...Tax cuts to his Oil and Energy buddies although alot of that was chopped down with the new Energy bill thanks to the Democrat Senate...and oh yeah most of it to Cheney's old friend Halliburton who got Billion dollar contracts without even having to do a pricing bid on them unlike every other govt contract that are required to be bid on by multiple companies to get the best price and service.
So you see Will, the SS crisis was Bush's own fault for spending the surplus and putting the nation deep into debt while making all his Corporate Interest buddies rich and selling out the environment while also allowing Major corporations to not be sued for anything over $250K if they do something very bad such as pollute our country or lie about sideeffects of medication. All the while he made it harder for the average joe to wipe out his debt by making the Federal govt the collection agency for Credit Card companies with the new Bankruptcy laws that Bush passed.
Now you may want to dispute the Iraq war since everything else I have said is indisputable but let me ask you this. Since when does the US brush aside the UN advice to avoid war when diplomatic relations could achieve the same outcome? Also since when does the US decide to declare war by itself and foot almost the entire bill just so we could liberate a country from a dictator? As far in history as I can see something like that has never been done and the only reason I can see for why Bush pushed so hard to declare war even against the UN's approval which technically made the war illegal is that Bush knew he would profit from it by giving the govt contracts to his friends which he did and he also knew it would be a distraction from the key issues that the US should be concerned about, such as the Environment and the Economy.
Open you eyes! See the forest as they say around here!
Bush and Cheney have only two agendas to push. The first and foremost is Big Business. The second is the Conservative Right Wing agenda which I believe is only to make themselves look righteous so they can try to get away with more and force the churches to vote for them even though I have yet to see any so called "Moral values" come from the Bush Administration and most of the Republican party except some of the moderates who actually seem to care what happens to the public people and aren't so far up Bush's butt that they can see that Bush is lying to this nation to further his agenda.
In fact the only real crisis that needs to solved and is one that Bush does not even believe or want to hear about is the Global Warming crisis.
Social Security isn't going to do you Jack if the world is falling apart in 20 years which it probably will if the US continues to believe the lies perpetrated by the Bush Administration and his lackeys!
Posted by: Scott Garthwaite at June 28, 2005 9:02 AM
Franklin needs to get with the program! There was no 5 trillion dollar surplus at the end of the Clinton Administration. That figure is a TEN year projection! That's how the budjet works. Those who say that SS is too expensive to privatize don't know what they're talking about. There may be a $2 trillion transition "cost," but it really isn't a cost because that figure is $2 trillion dollars of money going back into the private sector, which in turn creates tax revenue. For those of you nay-sayers, which is better: "spending" $2 trillion now for transitional costs, or spending TWELVE TRILLION DOLLARS later in the future for an unfunded liability? Aparently some you people on the left are brain dead! Under the current system, I would personally see a net loss of approximately 5% of my contributions, becuase I max out SS every year. However, if I had a personal account just invested in government bonds, which don't go down, it would make approximately 3%, which is much better than -5%! Those who say the market is risky also don't know what they're talking about. The stock market has a 100 yr average of approximately 7% growth year-to-year. We would not be short term investing for Social Security. All you have to do is have a diversidied portfolio that adapts to your age in terms of risk, which will cushion you from market fluctuation as you near retirement. Another point is that the proposed accounts are VOLUNTARY! If you lefties want the old system you can have it!
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)