Exclusive: ‘Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit,’ Sanders tells Raw

[Joanne98]

Read part one of this interview, available here

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) slammed the "hypocrisy" of deficit hawks seeking to cut Social Security, arguing in a recent interview with Raw Story that the program is fully solvent for several decades and that diminishing its scope would drastically damage Democratic prospects.

"Social Security has nothing to do with the deficit. That’s a totally bogus issue," Sanders said. "To talk about Social Security within the context of deficit reduction is total nonsense, because it has not contributed one nickel to the deficit."

While Social Security payouts did exceed revenues for the first time last year, the Social Security Trust Fund presently enjoys a surplus of $2.6 trillion and is expected to remain solvent in its current form until 2037, according to its trustees report.

But critics nevertheless argue that because money is so tight, it may be necessary to cut future benefits in order to pay down America's enormous national debt. One method gaining traction in the beltway is incrementally increasing the retirement age according to average life span, which is supported by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Democratic leaders such as Reps. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) and Jim Clyburn (D-SC).

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=125579

[bananas]

1. k&r nt

[old mark]

2. K&R- Bernie for President!!!!!nt

[DirkGently]

3. Well - said, Bernie. This IS the current Big Lie. The President seems disinclined to point this out.

[cate94]

4. K & R

[yodermon]

5. But when the Trust Fund Bonds are redeemed, where will the revenue come from?

Same place from where any other redeemed bonds $$ comes from: Taxes + Borrowing.

"cutting benefits" would make the trust fund dollars go further when they're redeemed. Is that the thinking here?

[jtuck004]

7. No. The thinking, though that is a generous term for it, is to destroy

any program the Democrats (and communists, socialists) proposed and implemented since 1930, including public schools and social programs. The only good social welfare is that paid to a corporation, in their eyes - everything else has to go. It has nothing to do with "fixing" anything.

Starting in the 70's it has been a series of attacks, mostly successful, by the wealthy and the conservatives on banking laws and now social programs, schools, etc. And they seem to be getting some of their best help from Democratic administrations. We get rid of the regs, they take advantage of it when they get in power.

If they really wanted to fix it they could stop capping the taxes paid in at $106,000 and collect them from people making, say, $500,000 a year. That plus the likely deaths that will occur would likely keep it solvent in perpetuity.

This quote is from another link I saw here today

...
"Stephen Moore (senior fellow at the Cato Institute, contributing editor of National Review and president of the Free Enterprise Fund) wrote, "Social Security is the soft underbelly of the welfare state. If you can jab your spear through that, you can undermine the whole welfare state."
...
Here...

No fix. Destruction.

[avaistheone1]

6. k&r for Bernie

[cascadiance]

8. The ONLY way to fix social security is to REMOVE the F'ING CAP!!!

And STOP it being a regressive tax on us. Then perhaps it would be solvent, and could even keep the rate decrease to help people get more money that the payroll tax holiday is providing, but not have to put it in funding jeopardy! So then instead of the general fund funding it, which the Republicans bitch about at the same time they're pushing for this action, we can have it still separate so that fixing the budget deficit can be done in other ways. Like taking away the Reagan tax cuts for the rich b$trd$!