Exclusive: Democrats raise prospect of 'tweaking' Social Security, slam GOP plan

[kpete]

Source: Raw Story

Democrats raise prospect of ‘tweaking’ Social Security

By Sahil Kapur
Tuesday, August 24th, 2010 -- 6:20 am

GOP 'quite frankly lying' about program’s impending insolvency, DNC spokesman says

socialsecurity Democrats raise prospect of tweaking Social SecurityFears about the national debt among Washington insiders have reignited debate about the future of Social Security, and a Democratic spokesman on Monday dismissed calls for privatization but conceded the program may need to be "tweaked" in order to ensure long-term solvency.

"Social Security needs to be tweaked, not torn apart from its very foundations," Democratic National Committee communications director Brad Woodhouse told Raw Story on a conference call late Monday afternoon, in response to a question from this reporter.

Woodhouse tore into Republicans for championing "radical" changes to the program, pointing to the GOP-led Congress's unsuccessful attempt to private it under the Bush administration. While Republican leaders have been vague on specifics, the party’s ranking member on the House budget committee, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), has put forth a plan that would move Social Security into private investment accounts.

For their part, Republican leaders have argued that Social Security and other entitlements need to be significantly reformed. "We also know these programs are unsustainable in their current form," said House Republican leader John Boehner (OH) earlier this month on NBC's "Meet The Press." He added: "There are a lot of options on how you solve these, but I don't want to put the cart before the horse."

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/0824/dnc-social-security-tweaked-torn/

[msongs]

1. hmmm "tweaked" = dems cave in 5..4..3..2..1... nt

[karynnj]

31. tweaking could mean - paying FICA taxes on capital based earnings as well as wages

and/or changing or eliminating the cap.

I have read no estimate of the amount of money that both taxing dividends and capital gains and removing the cap would generate, but when you look at the estimates of not repealing the Bush taxes for the top 2%, you see there is a huge amount of income there - much of which does not incur a FICA tax.

[godai]

36. Agree..raise or eliminate the cap. n/t

[lark]

38. When does the government do anything logical or smart?

The Repugs and DINO's have it as sacrosanct that taxes can't get increased. Poor people can die from no health care coverage, we can lose billions of dollars with charity to Wall St. and banks, but we certainly can't do anything to help the average worker. After all, who pays for congress critters golf trips, certainly not us!

Yes, removing the caps is the logical and sane thing to do, but I'd be absolutely amazed if it happens. Obama certainly won't push for it - big disappointment that he is. I bet there's not one shred of increasing the base and it's all cuts for us.

:nuke:

[ooglymoogly]

93. When push comes to shove; When has this administration not caved to the wishes of "pugs'nDino's"

Dino's being the pugs insurance policy and ace in the hole; That making bad legislation that only enforces the twisted agenda of the pugs; Whose treachery will forever be attributed to the democrats in fiction and in the annals of history;

And when inevitably, crooked legislation destroys some major part of the economy and clearly is exposed as pure fraud to rob the treasury and the public; And because it is passed by (fake) "Democrats"; Treachery that will inevitably and forever be attributed to Democrats; To become fodder for the defeat of Democrats anytime and everywhere, for as long as this "Democracy" survives.

The genius of the shadows is clear and evident; And proof by way of; That pugs have figured out a way to have its cake and eat it.

This all seems far too obvious; The suckers falling for it every time, like Lucy and the football; And to all appearances; Can't even figure out where the punches are coming from.

That indeed, begs the question; Can Democrats really be that stupid? Or is another segment of "Democrats", We'll just call them DLC'ers; "Democrats", even beyond the Dino's; Complicity and complacently on board; Those who cannot afford for their constituents to know their treachery; Knowing exposure, even with the lame excuse of "expediency", would make certain they would unceremoniously be thrown from the gravy train when election rolls around; Having fooled too many people too many times.

Dino's are deadly to our party no mater what ignorant excuses of pragmatism are made, be they Dino's, bluedogs or DLC'ers.

It is better to be the minority and be true to our principles and fight the good fight; For the causes dear to us; Than it is to live a lie under the illusion that Democrats are in charge; Blatantly passing legislation the pugs could never pass under a republican administration; Making it perfectly clear the Dino's colluding with pugs are in charge; It is therefore inevitable, crooked, sometimes treasonous legislation has and will eventually be found out and get pinned on Democrats forever.

We must fight the Dino illusion that democrats are the same as pugs. What is true is that Dino's are the same as pugs and will do their bidding, because they are indeed the same as pugs.

[Lasher]

39. That would be a good move in the right direction.

But I would very much like the see the general fund first repay that $2 trillion it borrowed from the Social Security trust fund.

[karynnj]

75. Me too - and in a way, they will

At this point, leaving SS in the general fund and having it pay out more than it pays in would gradually use the $2 trillion. The treasury does not have $2 trillion to simply hand over to SS. The problem was that put it in the general budget in the 1980s. This actually allowed the Regan tax cuts to have less impact than they would have on revenues. In essence, we traded a progressive tax (the income tax) for a more regressive one - and Greenspan, who now says the "money is gone" had to know exactly this would happen.

[Lasher]

92. Social Security is not in the general fund, they've just been reporting deficits that way.

If nothing whatever is done, the general fund should redeem the trust fund bonds as it has been planned for the last four decades. That's the law. You're right, overall federal taxes were lower before Saint Ronnie assumed the presidency than they were at the end of his two terms. Rich people paid less, poor people paid more.

The wealthy have gotten a tax holiday for 40 years and now it's time to redeem all that regressive tax money with progressive income tax dollars from the general fund. The trust fund money is all there, and it is just as real as the last paycheck that was deposited in your checking account.

But that's what the catfood commission is all about. By hook or crook they will enact measures to ensure that not one of the trust fund's bonds are ever redeemed. In addition to other possible 'reforms' such as raising the retirement age to 70, they will surely raise the taxable earnings cap - but not eliminate it, so that regressive tax money keeps rolling in and progressive tax dollars do not.

That's how the trust fund will be stolen, and it will take place this December right before our very eyes. With more payroll tax money always coming in than going out, there will be no need to redeem any of the trust fund's bonds, ever. Democratic politicians in particular will congratulate themselves for having achieved a great victory for the middle class, having 'saved' our most cherished social program that would have been just fine without their 'reforms' for the next twenty seven fucking years at least.

Fools will buy into this charade, taking satisfaction in knowing that the family up the street that makes 20 thousand dollars a year more than they do won't get out of payroll taxes again this December. And the most affluent one percent will take satisfaction in knowing their plan worked, and they will remain above all this tax foolishness, while the unwashed masses will continue to pay their way.

[karynnj]

94. I know that SS is not in the general fund - my writing was just sloppy

I should have said that the SS fund and the general fund were combined when they spoke of the deficit - which made the deficits look smaller - or in the late Clinton years - like surpluses.

You wrote it beautifully. It really really angers me that they piously spoke of making sure there would be adequate money for "when the baby boom retired" by raising the amount that we all paid for the last few decades, but it was totally dishonest. I heard a Greenspan interview a few years ago where he spoke of the "impossibility" of repaying those bonds with current tax dollars. Given that he was one of the people who set all this up, it was infuriating to hear him say that.

I also agree that the Democrats will "try to do the right fiscally prudent thing" - which will end with their being blamed for either cuts or increased taxes.

[Lasher]

96. Thanks.

It's a shame more people don't understand this issue as well as you do.

[burnsei sensei]

81. This is the only "tweaking"

that is necessary.
The government needs to give back what it has taken from Social Security.
Social Security owes the irresponsible, childish government NOTHING!

[joe black]

41. Then why don't they say it.

Instead they feel they have to talk in code.

[HillbillyBob]

57. Not to be cynical..but I ll believe it when I see it

I got a bridge in the Sahara for sale....

[karynnj]

73. Both ideas have been among those mentioned

They both make more sense than raising the age again, especially when companies will likely not hire 65 plus year olds - if they lose their jobs.

[JerseygirlCT]

89. I would guess this, too

and also guess there's plenty to be had that way. And it's fair.

[24601]

100. It's a defined benefit plan - if you pay increased FICA taxes, surly

it will be accompanied by increased benefits? No? Why am I not surprised, and don't call me Shirley.

[WI_DEM]

84. always a pessimist

[Warpy]

2. If they pull any of these stunts, they'll be thrown out of office

and they will richly deserve it.

The only "tweaking" it needs is to get it out of the general fund and put back into place as an independent, pay as you go old age insurance program. Once it's on that footing, the earnings cap can rise and fall as demand does. There is absolutely no reason to raise the age, lower the benefits, or raise the percentage taken in OASDI premiums from workers.

Conservatives are the problem no matter which party they are in. Their narrow, punitive, and ultimately destructive thinking can never be part of any solution because they are incapable of thinking things through to the level of unintended consequences. Raising the age will simply raise the number of unemployed people who are disqualified from working because of their age. Lowering the benefits will reduce demand for goods and services in a consumer economy that is already on its last legs.

I never thought we'd have to fight our own party on this one. I am ashamed of the lot of them.

[cowman]

17. I really don't have a dog in this fight

because I have PERS but you are right, if the Dems start fucking with SS they will be thrown out of office and rightly so.

[Yupster]

20. Two fixes will solve the problem

1. Raise the cap.

2. Bring all workers into the system.

Those two changes would bring enormous amounts of extra funding to the porogram, and their just plain fair anyway.

[cowman]

44. Agreed

[dotymed]

78. Honestly,

SS benefits need to doubled (at least) and the eligibility age lowered. Look at "socialist" Europe. Get f'ing real. The "wealthiest country in the world" can not afford to take care of it's citizens as well as other countries? We also deserve Universal health care. Tax the wealthy and put people, not profits and bombs, first..

[ctwayne]

90. Social Security Should Be Tweaked

The retirement age should be lowered, the benefits substantially increased. This would enable millions of young people to take desperately needed jobs. The cost of the "tweak" should be financed by substantial cuts in the war (defense) budget and substantial increases in taxes on the wealthy. I would not go back to the Eisenhower 91% tax rate, but only to the Kennedy 70% tax rate. The truly rich would still have their mansions, yachts, and mistresses. The rest of us would be much better off.

[kenfrequed]

28. The only tweaking I can think of would be...

To eliminate the caps on taxable income and make the damned modern day robber barrons pay for the people whose pensions they looted.

[riverdale]

59. Pension?

What, did you time travel here from 1950?

[kenfrequed]

68. Heh..

Well some people had them raided as recently as the last few years, but your joke is well taken and sadly too close to the truth.

[karynnj]

32. Add in potentially applying the FICA taxes to capital based income (ie dividends and capital gains)

and it is even easier.

[lark]

40. With capital gains/dividends taxed

we could still leave the government ee out of SS and still come out OK.

Dreams!

[liberalmike27]

35. I agree

From what I've heard, what we currently collect, and what is owed from the general fund, SS is solvent until 2037. So any Democratic tweaking should NOT take place until then, as it'll be just another collect a bunch of money from SS, and spend it on wars and tax cuts for people who get paid a few hundred thousand a year.

We need to pay back what they owe, which is approaching 3 Trillion first, before any tax takes place, then if we need to collect more, we simply raise the cap as necessary. And that Lock-box is sounding pretty good right about now. No more spending SS money on wars or tax cuts or anything else besides what it is designed to be spent on, SS insurance.

[florida08]

3. here's a tweak

raise the cap..make paper bandits pay into it.

[NorthCarolina]

4. K&R. Time to do some "tweaking" of the Democratic Party. eom

[Autumn]

5. Well that's scary,

Not sure I trust our current crop of Democrats to tweak anything.

[Dragonfli]

6. Tweek translates from politicalese to English as "cutting retirement for seniors"

Disgusting, they pull this crap and I will never vote for any of them ever again.

[mike r]

7. Tweaking themselves out of the White House

Damn weasels.

[zenj8]

8. The start of another capitulation by Dems

to the Republicans. Why isn't their starting point in the debate "hell no" we won't touch social security? Their tweaks will hurt seniors, obviously. Notice they don't mention raising the cap, the least objectionable "tweak" for people who have paid into SS their entire working lives. The Dems seem to be throwing their ability to be reelected out the window. Are they idiots?

[laughingliberal]

83. "Are they idiots?"

No, I'd imagine they're richly rewarded for their service to the masters.

[denverbill]

9. Fine. Eliminate the cap on payroll taxes. Problem solved.

But that won't be the DLC solution. The solution will be to increase taxes on regular folks and cut benefits.

[BigD_95]

10. If Dems vote to raise the age of SS

it will be the last time I ever vote for a Dem again. This will be the last straw.

I dont say that easy. I been disappointed with Obama just like everyone but I havent called him out. ( maybe because Im a sucker cause I meant him and shook his hand )

but it took a long time to swallow the Health Care reform without a public option. But if we have a Dem President and the age of SS goes up at all I will be seriously pissed. Not after watching that one video clip from the Young Turks about how were not getting the truth on SS. That the money has always been there but the goverment has been stealing from it. Remember Gore and the " Lock Box" ? Everyone made fun of him but it was true.

[flamingdem]

52. Has this been added to the "tweak" concept?

I think they want that to be a repuke thing, Boehner was saying this for example (raise to 70).

[CLANG]

77. +2,000,000,000,000

[w4rma]

11. DLC Democrats need to be tweaked right out of office. (nt)

[defendandprotect]

65. +1000% .... by whatever name they're calling themselves ... "New Dems"????

[glitch]

12. Deadbeats -- anything to keep from paying back what they've borrowed from workers.

:thumbsdown:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/035468.html

[SlingBlade]

13. Perpetual War, Union Bashing, Corporatism and now the

final battle, Social Security and the continued assault of the FDR New Deal.

Where O' where has my party gone ?


:wtf:

[SlingBlade]

14. Typical Situation ....

Everybody's happy everybody's free

Keep the big door open, everyone'll come around

Why're you different, why are you that way

If you don't get in line we'll lock you away

Dave Matthews Band

[MichiganVote]

15. Social Security needs to be LEFT ALONE. Dealbreaker Dem's. Beware.

[laughingliberal]

87. Nothing to fear. Their new jobs are all lined up working for those they represent. nt

[lib2DaBone]

16. NO TWEAKING... NO CAVING to the right...

DEMS stand up and do your job... the starting talking point and frame the debate..."Keep your stinking hands out of Social Security"

[philly_bob]

18. A lot of prejudging of what Dems will do on SS in this thread.

And the judges' crystal balls show a Dem sell-out. Please save anger for AFTER we find out what Dems will do.

Otherwise, it's pre-election FUD -- Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt.

[BeFree]

21. Eh?

You trying to be reasonable?

Well, how about this.... SS is a Dem program and the pukes have always hated it.

bush tried to put the revenue in the NYSE. And the Dems stopped him.

Now, the Dems want everyone to pay their fair share, which means the millionaires would pay as much percentage wise as a minimum age earner.

And the pukes are going nuts! Again.

[DrDan]

24. it's too late afterward - need to let these guys know NOW

[dflprincess]

45. After we find out

which will probably after they do it given Pelosi's promise to let the lame ducks give the Catfood Commission's recs an up or down vote, will be too late.

[defendandprotect]

66. Wait until it's too late . . . . ?? Like with health care deform??

[chimpymustgo]

79. Oh here we go again. Eleven dimension chess. Past experience can tell us a LOT.

[philly_bob]

95. Oppose stupid tweaks, oppose Catfood Commission --

but I think Dems are smart enough to not embrace "the third rail of American politics" by ruining Social Security. Maybe I'm naive. We'll see.

No-one will be more angry than I will be if they do.

I'm just saying hold off until we find out what the Dems will do. Especially before an election. Republicans will gladly campaign on Obama's going to ruin social security.

[Fearless]

19. "Socialism!!1!"

:banghead:


We're doomed.

[lib2DaBone]

22. Drop one less Drone...Hire a few less Blackwater thugs...

Peter Peterson is a Hedge Fund Hyena... asset stippper.. Goldman Sachs Social Security Killer.

Peter Peterson in charge of Social Security "Review" sends my fear meter to the moon. I dont neeed to know what the DEMS intents are... I KNOW what Peterson's intentions are.

[fascisthunter]

23. touch social security and you will ook as bad as the GOP

sorry... accepting the worser of two evils will not cut it for people anymore... and man o man are the democratic insiders completely oblivious to how voters feel about the direction of this party. You guys seriously fucked up, and I mean the DLC itself crowding Obama's Admin. I blame him too...

* They will fuck up SS, just watch.

[emilyg]

48. If they screw with SS - I'm

gone.

[defendandprotect]

67. PLEASE ... if you "go" anywhere, go with a liberal/progressive bloc... not alone!!

Liberals/progressives should stick together and MOVE together as a voting bloc --

and decide together what to do about infiltration of Dem Party by right wing corporates.

[lib2DaBone]

25. Pete Peterson to back investment in CHINA.. not USA

In case anyone has a doubt. Mr. Peterson wants our Social Security money so he can buy more land in CHINA.

Too bad he doesn't care about the USA. Too bad Mr. Obama fed us to the wolves.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/blackstone-to-back-investment-in-china-real-estate-2010-08-23


Blackstone to back investment in China real estate

HONG KONG (MarketWatch) -- U.S. private equity group Blackstone Group /quotes/comstock/13*!bx/quotes/nls/bx (BX 10.52, -0.05, -0.47%) will back a plan by Hong Kong luxury property developer Great Eagle Holdings /quotes/comstock/22h!e:41 (HK:41 20.90, +0.45, +2.20%) to build more than 1,000 new homes and 400 hotel rooms in the coastal city of Dalian. The investment project, which will mark Blackstone's first significant entrance into China's booming real estate market, is expected to be completed in stages, the Financial Times reported without saying where it got the information. Great Eagles said at its last results announcement that it would invite joint venture partners to participate in the Dalian project and that development was scheduled to begin this year. Blackstone has previously made a number of investments in Chinese companies, the report said.

[IScreamSundays]

26. They already know what they are going to do.

Now they are posturing for the public's consumption. Both sides are together on this deal. Traitors; all of them.

[Enthusiast]

27. President Obama can veto

any threat to social security.

[freebrew]

34. Will He???

I'm thinking of his track record so far.... and I don't like the direction.

[lark]

43. He is a big part of the threat to social security

He's the one who named Alan Simpson (cut social security now) as co-chair of the commission. His intent was there for all to see from day 1 and brother that's not helping us one bit. As usual, he protects the rich and sells out every one else.

[defendandprotect]

69. Right ... setting Social Security/Medicare up for cuts while denying it -- !!!

Well -- look at all Obama has gotten away with so far --

Putting Wall Street in full charge of our economy -- !!!

Eloping into the White House with DLC/Rahm Emmanuel -- !!!

Destroying our best chance yet for universal health care in America -- !!!

And, now setting up a right wing panel to attack Social Security + Medicare!!


Not to mention the various other betrayals -- of homosexuals, women, etal --

The pile of crap is growing!!

[Enthusiast]

106. My point is this:

If President Obama is planing on protecting social security, as he said he would, then we will be fine. He can veto any threat. That is a big 'if'.

If social security is damaged in any way it will be entirely President Obama's fault. I don't mean it will be partially the Republican's fault, it will be ENTIRELY Obama's fault. I want this understood. Because he could always resort to a veto to protect it. The ball is in his court.

[xxqqqzme]

29. A huge protest against 'tweaking'

Social Security will have to be organized. Letters, emails and phone calls ain't gonna get the job done. There will have to be massive numbers of boots on the ground.

[and-justice-for-all]

30. Pukes want nothing more than to tear down all social services

and have a bare bones Government that has only one task, the military.

[mnhtnbb]

37. Anything that puts money in pukes pockets will be an acceptable government service

not just the military.

[lark]

42. Nope, they also want welfare for the rich

We give huge amounts of money to big oil and not one complaint from the Repugs. They are all for charity, just not for people that actually need it.

[defendandprotect]

70. Why does Obama put them in charge of our economy, health care, Social Security?

[and-justice-for-all]

97. Part of that Bipartisan bullshit...nt

[defendandprotect]

99. Well, we know it's BS ... and they know it's BS . . . why are we letting them get away with it???

Did we elect Obama so he could put Repugs in charge of everything???

[DirkGently]

33. "They wanted this, but we only gave them that" will NOT DO.

I'm taking the Dems at their word, but I don't like this gently upward ramping talk of "tweaking" and the focus on how we won't allow "privatization," as though that was something the Republicans even have the power to demand.

Be smart, guys. Touch one hair on SS's little head, and the boomers will BURY you.

[vanbean]

46. The stupid Teabags will vote to eliminate SS without even knowing it. If we

lose big in the coming election we are screwed. Big Time. I hope this will be made a big campaign issue. Since the corporations are people now. LET THEM PAY FICA TAXES!

Just my luck. Just as soon as I am ready to retire they are "tweaking" SS. They want to privatize it so they can steal it, the fuckers!

[katandmoon]

47. Obama named SS haters Erskine and Bowles to head DRC. Any other questions?

[Kermitt Gribble]

49. tweaked?

you know it will never be 'tweaked' in our favor.

[Better Believe It]

50. So the national Democratic Party now supports cuts in Social Security, that's what "treaking" means.

Brad Woodhouse speaks on behalf of the Democratic Party National Committee.

If he doesn't speak on behalf of the Democratic Party, fire him .... now.

[texastoast]

51. TWEAK THIS DEMS: Eliminate the cap and it's all fixed, cheaply, responsibly, and

it will make the pukes look stoopid for not thinking about their fiscal responsibility to the taxpayers.

MENTION that privatization is a good thing and we will take you down, Dems, because you will be no better than the pukes on the issue.

[lib2DaBone]

56. They could have opened Medicare to all with a public Option...

BUT THEY DID NOT.

Folks... the fix is in.

[texastoast]

58. Oh, I'm seeing some round heels here on this thread.

The words public option were not in the vernacular until about two years ago. That is not enough time for the American psyche to get used to the idea. The Dems never intended a public option to pass now.

However, the words Social Security and privatization were well introduced by Bush. We've got something to work with.

Unless we are supreme giver uppers.

[craigmatic]

53. I don't believe them. they need to leave it alone. The repubs will just say they're going to take it

away.

[cognoscere]

54. Paul Ryan is a Republican. Republican = Lying Piece of Shit

One of his more blatant half truths is that U.S. corporations have the highest tax rate in the world. Let's face it, any percentage of zero is zero, so when the corporations reduce their income to zero with every creative accounting write off they can find, even a hundred percent rate would allow them to pay...NOTHING.

[Vinca]

55. I hope not like they "tweaked" health care.

[bvar22]

60. But these tweaks will be "only a tiny sliver" of the "comprehensive package."

And we "can't let the Perfect be the enemy of the Good."
This Comprehensive Package is a "Historic" "Step in the right direction."
"We'll be able to Fix it Later."
We just didn't have the votes,
and its ALL Joe Lieberman's fault.

Besides, I never campaigned on Saving Social Security.

[trekbiker]

61. eliminating the cap wont "solve" the problem...

it will only make it worse. Why?? because our damned incompetent govt already blew the 2.5 trillion SS reserve on useless wars and military buildups and wallstreet bailouts, taxcuts for the wealthy, etc. They took that money, wasted it and replaced it with IOU's they will never repay. Drawing the SS trust fund down to zero in year 2037 or whatever means the govt would actually have to come up with the 2.5 trillion to pay out to retirees and just the thought of what it will take to repay that 2.5 trillion scares the hell out of them. Much easier to increase the retirement age or reduce benefits and keep the 2.5 trillion of worthless paper in the trust fund FOREVER. Increasing the cap will only give them trillions more to blow on the same and 10, 20 years from now we will be in the same fix only it will be 6 or 10 trillion of worthless IOU's in the SS reserve that the govt cannot and really has no intention of "repaying". It's basically the largest swindle in the history of the world.

The only way to "fix" SS is to get it out of the general fund, quit masking the real budget deficits with SS taxes, drastically cut the military budget, get out of Iraq, Afghanistan, eliminate the cap, tax the rich, etc.. that will never EVER happen with our current corporate owned govt

[defendandprotect]

71. Agree with this part of your post . . .

The only way to "fix" SS is to get it out of the general fund, quit masking the real budget deficits with SS taxes, drastically cut the military budget, get out of Iraq, Afghanistan, eliminate the cap, tax the rich, etc.. that will never EVER happen with our current corporate owned govt

and stop creating a slush fund for elites!!

[dflprincess]

98. Social Security is not the problem and isn't adding to the deficit

the "Deficit Reduction" Commission shouldn't be looking at it at all.

[BeFree]

101. I wonder

I really don't have a clue... just a thought.

Is the money that is owed to SS via the IOUs counted as part of the deficit?

If so, then what they are talking about is finding a way to NOT pay that debt?

[dflprincess]

103. But it is still not Social Secutiy that is causing the deficit

SS has its own source of funding. Even if that money has been stolen for something else, it is not Social Security that's the problem, its the blank check the Pentagon has been given that is causing problem.

Basically, they are looking for a way to default - though that term will never be used - we'll be told they are "saving" Social Security.

[BeFree]

104. I know

SS fund has been stolen from. It should have trillions of dollars in cash.

The government took that cash and spent it, leaving SS with an IOU.

So, I wonder, are those IOU's to SS counted as part of the debt/deficit?

[dflprincess]

105. Now that I understand what you're saying

(sorry) I have to say I don't know.

Good question. All sorts of tricks get used to hide just how big the deficit is (like Bush not adding the war into it).

[suston96]

62. What is "unsustainable" Mr. Boehner is this economy with no jobs......

""We also know these programs are unsustainable in their current form," said House Republican leader John Boehner (OH).

Mr. Boehner.....Mr. Boehner.....join the Democrats in creating new jobs and the Social Security "problem" will go away.

You do know where the money for Social Security and Medicare comes from, eh? Mr. Boehner?....Mr. Boehner?.....I asked you a question.

It's jobs....jobs.....jobs! Get it, Mr. Boehner.....?

[JDPriestly]

74. + 1000%

[pezDispenser]

63. Here are the 'tweaks' I'll be happy with

Pay back the money owed to the fund and make it illegal to borrow from the fund. Problem solved.

[defendandprotect]

64. Keep watching this -- and stay in touch with WH and reps . . . . . !!

[Alcibiades]

72. Increase benefits for current retirees and those who retire soon

In the next five years or so. Cut benefits for everyone who retires later, and raise the age.

Not my preferred solution, but it would be politically expedient.

[Frisbee]

76. Raise retirement to 70 and cut payouts by 10%...

That will be the Obama administrations starting position.

[trekbiker]

80. the whole SS runs out of money in 2037 is a damn lie...

It's actually out of "real" money right now. The problem our elected Liars are hiding from us (or, I suspect, many of the dumb-asses dont really understand) is that for the first time since Reagan jacked up the SS taxes Social Security is having to pay out more in benefits than it is taking in in tax receipts and its about to get a lot worse. Theoretically this should not be a problem since we have 2.5 trillion saved up in the SS trust fund. Right? Well, not really. What we have is 2.5 trillion of IOU's. Bond notes that the govt now has to find additional money to pay off in order to make up for the SS payout shortfall. In order to do that the govt needs to raise taxes or borrow more from the Chinese or whoever or cut programs like the military, etc. OR... reduce the SS payouts by extending retirement age, ie.. "tweaking". This isnt going to happen in the year 2037 when the trust fund theoretically runs out of money, it has to happen right now because the govt has to pay out real money to SS recipients. All was fine as long as tax receipts exceeded payouts, in fact, it was better than fine because our elected fools could spend the surplus each year on any damn fool war or tax cut for the wealthy they wanted. That annual surplus is now gone and they are desperately trying to figure out what to do about it and how to sell their "solution" to the gullible american public. Are they going to default on all or part of the 2.5 trillion of bonds in the SS trust fund? No. But there is no "real" money in that fund to pay out to retired/dissabled folks which has to happen right now, not way out there in the year 2037. They have to find it somewhere and the easiest target is the middle class in the form of reduced benefits (tweaking). I'm sure Obama understands this but he is guilty of "framing" the problem just like the rest of them in order to fool us middle class folks who have been SWINDLED.

[MannyGoldstein]

88. +1

Them's the facts.

[MannyGoldstein]

82. Did Bush form the catfood commission?

What kind of fringe-right nut would create a commitee to attack Social Security, when it's currently in good shape?

I'm sure glad that Obama is pledging to save us from this commission!

[lurky]

85. Opening your negotiation with "tweaking" it.

They have already surrendered before the battle has even begun. This reminds me of the healthcare debate.

Now the argument will be over how much to fuck with Social Security, not whether it's necessary.

[laughingliberal]

86. "They have already surrendered before the battle has even begun."

Standard. Operating. Practice.

We're screwed.

[Better Believe It]

102. They will also be "tweaking" Medicare and Medicaid.

[Bluebear]

91. Tweak out the DLC. nt

[smalll]

107. Aw... Social Security is "just a symbol!" /nt