Sunday, December 26, 2004
This is as far as it goes. Wanna-be Senator (he's actually just a lowly Representative of the House) Harold Ford of Tennesee has decided to give in to the momentum of the moment and support the President's call to "save" (privatize and dismantle) Social Security. So has Allen Boyd of Florida. Both of these men have made the decision, especially in Ford's case, to put their Soutern political prospects ahead of standing together on principle. The message from Democrats should be: This is as far as it goes. Have you no shame? We the people will not sacrifice our beliefs and convictions to appease the South anymore. Therefore, to all who will, the message will be: We don't want you anymore. Go be a Repulican if that's what it takes to get elected in your state. But don't keep giving in on important, bedrock issues and then claim "Democrats are a diverse group, we can have differing opinions on all sorts of issues". That kind of absurdity amounts to nonsense in this case. What else can the Democratic Party claim to represent if its unwilling to stand for the most important parameter of the New Deal? George Bush claims we live in a different era, one in which programs such as Social Security need to be changed and updated for the future. The question must be asked: What has changed? Do Senior Citizens no longer need our care? Has our society changed so much that the possibility of a higher payoff is valued more than the SECURITY of knowing our parents and Grandparents will be taken care of? Are lower taxes more important than making sure everyone of our older citizens is cared for? If you believe that the stock market should determine the standard of living of your parents waning years, then you are a REPUBLICAN. Real Democrats cannot back off on this issue. Its time to wean out the ranks of those who will believe in something from those who will stand for anything. As we all know, in the end they will represent nothing.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
In response to the last 2 months of utter political absurdity and the current Social Security debate...
The country has reelected a president with the worst economic record in the modern era. The country has reelected a president who created the worst military debacle in three decades. The country has reelected a president who distorts the truth in order to push through willfully hidden objectives. Enough said. The President says he wants to save Social Security. Do not believe him. The President is interested in putting money into the stock market to promote business. We have already seen that this government is hell bent on getting people to put their money into savings. The Bush Administration has taken every oppurtunity to dispose of taxes on the means of saving: stocks, dividends, inheritance, etc. This is meant to further the pool of capital available to investors and potential business owners. The theory posits that the more money there is to borrow, the cheaper and easier it is to get your hands on that capital. Hence more business creation, meaning expanded growth and so on and so forth (a cycle of greater prosperity). Momentarily, we'll set aside questions of perperuating gross inequality and the enormous national debt, two concepts that represent huge obstacles for this hypothetical scenario to become truth. So, it is in the context of hypothetically greater prosperity that we should view the debate over Social Security. The President talks of saving Social Security. Many economists have pointed out that the system currently can sustain benefits through the year 2050 or so. This is because of something called the Social Security Trust Fund. A couple of decades ago, many economists realized that the retirement of the Baby Boomer Generation would cause a massive change in the taxpayer to benefit receiver ratio, to the point where the money being spent on benefits would eventually outnumber the taxes being collected into the system. So, in the 1980's Alan Greenspan and others put together a tax plan that would pay for a trust fund that would be saved up over many years in order to deal with the descrepancy. This Tax is called the Payroll Tax, and ALL WORKERS pay for it. If you make wages anywhere in between $0 and approximately $90,000 you pay a portion of your earnings into this fund, around 13%. You will hear conservatives say that the worker to retiree ratio is already at 3 to 1 and in another few years will be 2 to 1. However, what they will not mention is that the Trust Fund set up in the eighties anticipated all this and will help so we can continue to pay out FULL benefits until the year 2050. When Tucker Carlson declares that in the year 2032 the system will only be able to pay 73% of the benefits to retirees, he is NOT including this fund. Its like they're pretending that it doesn't exist. Trying Times believes that this is because conservatives are not interested in saving Social Security, they are simply drooling with anticipation over that trust fund and what can be done with it. Put it in the stock market or other savings, they say, and watch how much more retirees will reap. But, the real objective is the one discussed earlier, whereby the savings pool for business is expanded. Now, while it may sound like a good idea to get more money in the stock market and savings, why can't they just tell us that is the objective? No, we'll be told that privitization is for the good of preserving Social Security, but really that has nothing to do with the Administration's goals. What they also won't mention is that there are plenty of ways to save Social Security and keep it precisely intact. A couple of examples would be to raise the Payroll Tax to include those making up to $200,000, or simply roll back the Bush tax cuts for those making over $500,000 a year. Saving the fabric of our most prized social safety net as it was originally envisioned would be so easy and painless for the grand majority of taxpayers in this country. It is inexorably painful to know that our current leaders won't bother to do so. Especially because most people won't understand or believe that its actually being torn down.
The country has reelected a president with the worst economic record in the modern era. The country has reelected a president who created the worst military debacle in three decades. The country has reelected a president who distorts the truth in order to push through willfully hidden objectives. Enough said. The President says he wants to save Social Security. Do not believe him. The President is interested in putting money into the stock market to promote business. We have already seen that this government is hell bent on getting people to put their money into savings. The Bush Administration has taken every oppurtunity to dispose of taxes on the means of saving: stocks, dividends, inheritance, etc. This is meant to further the pool of capital available to investors and potential business owners. The theory posits that the more money there is to borrow, the cheaper and easier it is to get your hands on that capital. Hence more business creation, meaning expanded growth and so on and so forth (a cycle of greater prosperity). Momentarily, we'll set aside questions of perperuating gross inequality and the enormous national debt, two concepts that represent huge obstacles for this hypothetical scenario to become truth. So, it is in the context of hypothetically greater prosperity that we should view the debate over Social Security. The President talks of saving Social Security. Many economists have pointed out that the system currently can sustain benefits through the year 2050 or so. This is because of something called the Social Security Trust Fund. A couple of decades ago, many economists realized that the retirement of the Baby Boomer Generation would cause a massive change in the taxpayer to benefit receiver ratio, to the point where the money being spent on benefits would eventually outnumber the taxes being collected into the system. So, in the 1980's Alan Greenspan and others put together a tax plan that would pay for a trust fund that would be saved up over many years in order to deal with the descrepancy. This Tax is called the Payroll Tax, and ALL WORKERS pay for it. If you make wages anywhere in between $0 and approximately $90,000 you pay a portion of your earnings into this fund, around 13%. You will hear conservatives say that the worker to retiree ratio is already at 3 to 1 and in another few years will be 2 to 1. However, what they will not mention is that the Trust Fund set up in the eighties anticipated all this and will help so we can continue to pay out FULL benefits until the year 2050. When Tucker Carlson declares that in the year 2032 the system will only be able to pay 73% of the benefits to retirees, he is NOT including this fund. Its like they're pretending that it doesn't exist. Trying Times believes that this is because conservatives are not interested in saving Social Security, they are simply drooling with anticipation over that trust fund and what can be done with it. Put it in the stock market or other savings, they say, and watch how much more retirees will reap. But, the real objective is the one discussed earlier, whereby the savings pool for business is expanded. Now, while it may sound like a good idea to get more money in the stock market and savings, why can't they just tell us that is the objective? No, we'll be told that privitization is for the good of preserving Social Security, but really that has nothing to do with the Administration's goals. What they also won't mention is that there are plenty of ways to save Social Security and keep it precisely intact. A couple of examples would be to raise the Payroll Tax to include those making up to $200,000, or simply roll back the Bush tax cuts for those making over $500,000 a year. Saving the fabric of our most prized social safety net as it was originally envisioned would be so easy and painless for the grand majority of taxpayers in this country. It is inexorably painful to know that our current leaders won't bother to do so. Especially because most people won't understand or believe that its actually being torn down.
