The Real News Debate: Social Security on the Table

[geefloyd46]

[DhhD]

1. Social Security needs to be added to at the top by top money makers as well as salaried workers

as all can draw from the Insurance Trust Fund at age/disability. Bush spent widely and irresponsibility setting up business interest to received the SS surplus set up by Reagan through the Greenspan Commission in 1983. Same bailoutees need to be taxed allowing money to flow back to, the Insurance Trust Fund.

Obama could have supported the reversal tax and restore bu instead went along with Fix the Debt by austerity against the working classes of America.

http://americablog.com/2012/05/pete-petersen-hosts-bill-clinton-paul-ryan-simpson-van-hollen-to-discuss-social-security-compromise.html

[fasttense]

2. Why did the anchor allow Joseph to filibuster?

He allowed the neocon, who wants to reduce Social Security to cover overspending in other government programs, to go on and on without end.

I would have much preferred to have listened to Prof. Richard Wolf then listen to that heartless, conservative tell us all how wonderful the benefit cuts caused by chain CPI will be.

That silly little canard, that says we must reduce the elderly's Social Security pensions because the federal government used it and now has a deficit, is mute and of very little significance because the deficit has already declined. Then to say that our Social Security money that we paid in has already been spent is not factual. What are those almost $3 Trillion Social Security notes in the Social Security Trust fund? Why did the social security board of trustee say in their most recent report that they were NOT cashing in those notes because those notes were more valuable because they earned interest? The conservative seems to think we are all too stupid to understand he is a liar.

[JDPriestly]

3. Both men agree that retirees and baby boomers paid enough money

into the Social Security Trust Fund to cover the cost of their Social Security benefits.

The neo-con claims that money was transferred to the general fund, has been spent and cannot be repaid to Social Security recipients.

Wolff argues that we could raise the amount of contributions coming directly into Social Security by taxing income that now escapes from the payroll or Social Security taxes like income from capital gains. His idea seems to be to put these new payroll taxes in to the Social Security system directly.

The so-called neo-con answered that plan would cause Social Security beneficiaries to feel that they were receiving welfare and therefore was not workable.

My suggestion is that we impose a tax on capital gains and other income that has not been subject to the Social Security taxes but which are in fact sources of personal income and make it payable to the general fund but dedicated specifically to repaying the Social Security Trust Fund. That seems to be the cleanest, most honest, simplest way to solve this problem.

If my idea were implemented, we would simply repay the money to the Social Security Trust Fund and permit the system to stay solvent while paying out the benefits that are owed.

Richard Wolff is right about how the chained CPI would lower the benefits -- probably far more than is now being recognized. If apples are more expensive than pears this week, in a few weeks they may be less expensive. So it does not work to have the chained CPI as the basis for determining the COLAs.

Besides, wealthy people do not decide not to buy a product just because it is more expensive. Think Charles Koch's wine for which he paid an incredible amount at an auction. (There is a post on DU about this.) A friend of mine who has a lot of money eats beef all the time. She has money so she can afford it Another friend is on Social Security. She doesn't have much money. It's been a while since she ate beef. But it is good idea to eat more beef than we can because beef is a source of complete Vitamin B.

If we let Congress get by with borrowing money from the Social Security Trust Fund to fight wars of choice like the War in Grenada, the Invasion of Panama and the War in Iraq to name a few and then not paying it back and not paying Social Security benefits at the level at which we paid them to our parents, we will have allowed Congress to set a precedent of stealing from the poor to pay the rich.

That's Robin Hood in reverse, and we all know that is wrong. Very wrong.

[limpyhobbler]

4. kicking

better late than never. Finally watched this. Very interesting.