With no crisis in SS, why trade guaranteed benefit for roll of the dice?

[papau]

Bush hopes SS guar. benefit+SS per. accts.inv earnings will exceed cur SS, but there is, of course, no guarantee of that.

Krugman - in the first of 2 weeks worth of columns on the Social Security attempted distruction by Bush - also note the long in the future cutback to 80% of current benefit point of 2043 is quite possibly a "forever" OK - never a cut back situation - since the 2043 SS estimate and the CBO 2052 estimate use projections that "assume that the economy will grow much more slowly in the future than it has in the past."

Krugman also points out the lie in the GOP's "trust fund doesn't count because it's invested in U.S. government bonds, which are 'meaningless i.o.u.'s." and refers folks to his article in the online journal The Economists' Voice (http://www.bepress.com/ev ), noting that the only way the Trust fund bonds have no value is ther's a "fiscal crisis that led the U.S. to default on all its debts. The other would be legislation specifically repudiating the general fund's debts to retirees"

ABC NEWS in the NOTE shows no bias in stating that "Krugman's "Medicare and Medicaid are bigger problems" mantra is one that the White House is just waiting to bash back" - implying that there is a logical bash back. - I do love my US Media

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/04/opinion/04krugman.htm...

Stopping the Bum's Rush
By PAUL KRUGMAN

he people who hustled America into a tax cut to eliminate an imaginary budget surplus and a war to eliminate imaginary weapons are now trying another bum's rush. If they succeed, we will do nothing about the real fiscal threat and will instead dismantle Social Security, a program that is in much better financial shape than the rest of the federal government.

In the next few weeks, I'll explain why privatization will fatally undermine Social Security, and suggest steps to strengthen the program. I'll also talk about the much more urgent fiscal problems the administration hopes you won't notice while it scares you about Social Security.

Today let's focus on one piece of those scare tactics: the claim that Social Security faces an imminent crisis.

That claim is simply false. Yet much of the press has reported the falsehood as a fact. For example, The Washington Post recently described 2018, when benefit payments are projected to exceed payroll tax revenues, as a "day of reckoning."<snip>

That doesn't mean nothing should be done to improve Social Security's finances. But privatization is a fake solution to a fake crisis. In future articles on this subject I'll explain why, and also outline a real plan to strengthen Social Security.

[MissBrooks]

1. I think SS is in trouble - but...

I also think that anyone not socking away money for retirement is crazy. SS will never be enough to live on. Especially with seniors living longer.

[livvy]

4. Social Security is not in trouble.

That is the spin that is being produced by *&Co. The following links are very informative. Check them out, and pass them along. If these articles do not convince you, dig a little deeper and do some more research. There is a lot of information out there. But, please, do not just believe what you read or see on TV concerning this issue.

Links to Informational Articles:

Social Security

http://www.cepr.net/columns/weisbrot/mark_weisbrot_12_03_04.htm

"Who Wants to Cut Social Security?
snip>Nor is there any reason to "fix" Social Security any time soon. According to the numbers used by everyone, including the President's Commission, Social Security can pay all promised benefits for the next 38 years without any changes at all. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office just upped that estimate to 48 years. By either measure, Social Security is in better financial shape that it has been for most of its 69-year history."
Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research.

http://www.cepr.net/publications/facts_social_security.htm

Basic Facts on Social Security and Proposed Benefit Cuts/Privatization
Dean Baker and David Rosnick1
snip>"According to the Social Security trustees report, the standard basis for analyzing Social Security, the program can pay all benefits through the year 2042, with no changes whatsoever. Even after 2042 the program would always be able to pay retirees a higher benefit (in today's dollars) than what current retirees receive. The assessment of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office is that Social Security is even stronger. It projects that Social Security can pay all benefits through the year 2052 with no changes whatsoever. By either measure, Social Security is more financially sound today than it has been throughout most of its 69-year history."

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050103&s=scheer1221

The GOP’s Sabotage of Social Security by Rober Sheer

snip>"Greed perfectly meshes with ideology in the Republican Party, and the attempted sabotage of Social Security is just another example. While the followers of Milton Friedman talk about the free market in religious terms, Wall Street is slavering at the possibility of one of the biggest potential windfalls in human history if the Social Security spigot is turned its way. The attendant investment fees alone would be enormous--certainly higher than the minimal 1 percent overhead costs the current Social Security system consumes."

http://action.ourfuture.org/action/index.asp?step=2&item=23131
Link for the page to send a letter to Congress from the Campaign For America’s Future

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/actnow?pid=2050

Blog by Peter Rothberg

snip>"Bush's plans on this front are far from a done deal, and a well-organized public campaign is critical to stave off the possibility of some Democrats cutting a deal early--as they did on tax cuts (and as Ted Kennedy did on the Medicare bill)."

http://capwiz.com/thenation/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=6750026

An alternate form letter to send to Reps.
snip>"Action Alert Reject Bush’s Agenda on Social Security
The program, as it stands, is extremely popular and benefits a significant portion of the US population. Propaganda aside, the cooked-up panic over Social Security isn't really about the future financial wellbeing of retirees, but rather the Republicans' effort to transfer money from a popular social program to private industry. The consequences of this privatization plan--if implemented--would be devastating for those who depend on the decades-old program."

[whistle]

2. The correct term is "looting social security", that is what Bush...

...and the neo-conservatives actually want to do.

[papau]

3. True - SS in not in trouble - but if folks like Miss Brooks feel that way

the middle class has let the media set it up to lose another war with the rich.

Never paying back the money stolen from Social Security to finance the Bush tax cut for the rich is the goal (Per GOP/Media, those government bonds in the Trust Fund are meaningless IOU's since we the GOP plan to default on all US Debt - or maybe we will only default on the US Debt held by the Social Security Trust Fund.)