Will Repubs be capable of "privatizing" SS if in power for 2-4 more years

[kentuck]

A dream of the Republicans since the days of FDR and the beginnings of Social Security is to destroy that program. George Bush attempted unsuccessfully at the beginning of the last victory by the Republican Congress in the midterm elections. Will they revive the effort once again if they win in November? This time, will they be successful? I think that is something voters need to be aware of before they pull the levers in November.

[MissWaverly]

1. yes, absolutely

we will continue to have a government in which the power of the congress and the judicial
branches continues to erode, soon, the president will appoint cabinet members with no
congressional review, and anything the president does will be given a blanket approval
and soon congress will be adjouned due to an emergency with national security and also
because it is no longer needed, heh, heh, heh.

[Virginia Dare]

3. Sometimes I think...

in the worst of my tin-foil hat moments that the real motivation behind 9/11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks was exactly what you describe.

[MissWaverly]

9. we must resist, please don't lose your hope

keep working for change, we beat Hitler and we can turn this country around.

[kentuck]

4. Scary thought...

If America had another attack similar to 9/11 just before the presidential election in 2008, would the people have the courage to put a new person in the office, or would they "insist" that President Bush stay in office under very dangerous conditions? I could see elections being "postponed".. :scared:

[MissWaverly]

6. no, they would do away with term limits for the war president

[msongs]

2. not if the democrats frame the issue properly...

with appropriate language: republicans seek DESTRUCTION of social security, republicans ATTACK senior citizens, Republicans declare WAR on seniors, etc.

given the inability of dems to use appropriate language, the odds are low.

for example the latest dem scheme is "new direction" or something innocuous and meaningless like that.

why not call it a BETTER direction?

Msongs

can you sing?
www.msongs.com/vocalistwanted.htm

[acmejack]

5. They are bankrupting the Nation.

We are already at the point where the entitlements are in serious jeopardy. Remember that FDR cut pensions to the veterans when he came into office. Something has to give soon, what is it going to be? We OWE 9 TRILLION DOLLARS! No one wants to talk about where in the hell this money is going to come from.

They have to be doing this with the intention of destroying public education, all entitlements, the VA, SS, it's toast I fear. I see a bleak immediate future while the books are balanced, the all powerful IMF will demand it. Remember what happened to Argentina!

snip>
A “Technical Memorandum of Understanding,” dated September 5, 2000, was signed by Argentine Central Bank President Pedro Pou for transmission to Horst Köhler, managing director of the International Monetary Fund.
snip>
The “understanding” required Argentina to cut the government budget deficit from $5.3 billion in 2000 to $4.1 billion in 2001. Think about that. Eighteen months ago, when the document was drafted, Argentina was already on the cliff-edge of a depression. One in six workers were unemployed. Even the half-baked economists at the IMF should have known that holding back government spending in a contracting economy would be like turning off the engines of an airplane in stall.

The IMF is never wrong without being cruel as well. Under the boldface heading, “Improving the Conditions of the Poor,” the agency directed Argentina to cut 20 percent from $200 monthly salaries paid under an emergency employment program. The “understanding” also promised a 12 to 15 percent cut in civil servant salaries and a pension “rationalization” (IMF-speak for a 13 percent cut in payments to the elderly)
snip>

I recommend reading this little gem from Palast, it is an eye opener on how this works. It isn't pretty, freezing & siezing personal saving accounts and using them to pay foreign creditors, using tax receipts intended for education & social programs for debt repayment, you can see the handwriting on the wall quite clearly.

http://www.americas.org/item_172

[Hidden Stillness]

7. They Will Have to Fight the American People First

The American people will never stand for a destruction of Social Security, because it has been the single most-loved and relied-on Federal program since the 1930s. It runs exactly the way it is supposed to, and has had such reliable surpluses that Republicans raid it periodically, (Nixon, Reagan, both Bushs). The people were so outraged at the recent Republican attempts to kill it and replace it with some kind of a savings account scheme that still does not make sense to me, that even "D"LC corporate lobbying Democrats had to start fighting for it and stop "supporting our President" for five seconds. No one in the real country needs to be told to support Social Security; they already do. When you realize that most women will have no pensions, and that 401Ks don't cover things, and that they will have Social Security alone, or nothing, they panic at the thought of losing it, and always fight to save it. People need Social Security and most of them know somebody who lives on it alone, who would be destitute otherwise. It is one of the few issues left where the people are listened to, because these great old people know what they have and fight for it. Don't kill it with "framing," you will weaken the issue. Social Security is the single most popular program there is.

[elehhhhna]

8. No. They had their moment and blew it the public just

isn't THAT stoopid.