Social Security’s needed expansion

[xchrom]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/katrina-vanden-heuvel-social-securitys-needed-expansion/2013/04/09/0376d93a-a07a-11e2-82bc-511538ae90a4_story.html

On the very day that a bleak jobs report showed how feeble the recovery is, the White House revealed that the president will propose a budget that features cuts in Social Security. This was designed to get Republicans to agree to negotiate a grand bargain on deficit reduction — or to prove that they are obstructing any deal.

House Speaker John Boehner’s reflexive reaction immediately revealed the political folly of the president’s ploy:

“If the president believes these modest entitlement savings are needed to help shore up these programs, there’s no reason they should be held hostage for more tax hikes.” (Emphasis added)

The exchange has Republicans salivating. Cutting Social Security becomes the president’s choice, not something extorted by Republicans. If Democrats stand for anything, it is defense of Social Security and Medicare, the United States’ most beloved and vital social programs, a proud legacy of the New Deal and the Great Society. The president’s negotiating ploy puts every Democrat supporting the president’s budget in a contested reelection race at peril in 2014. Democrats will face a flood of ads accusing them of wanting to cut Social Security and face the wrath of seniors who constitute a greater percentage of the vote in midterm elections.

[dkf]

1. The majority of the populace can't save on their own...they need more savings forced by Govt.

[hootinholler]

2. What beet you gonna get that blood from?

Ever wonder why poor people can't save?

Yes it's rhetorical.

[dkf]

3. They "save" 6.2% in SS now.

Where does that come from?