Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Alan Simpson: Cutting Social Security Benefits to “Take Care of the Lesser People in Society”

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 06:11 AM
Original message
Alan Simpson: Cutting Social Security Benefits to “Take Care of the Lesser People in Society”
Edited on Sat Jun-19-10 06:17 AM by Hannah Bell
what a moronic dick.

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/06/17/alan-simpson-cutting-social-security-benefits-to-take-care-of-the-lesser-people-in-society/


the lying moral cretin simpson's appointment is your first clue about what's planned for your social security.

your second clue is that every other government is doing the same thing.

fuck this shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 06:39 AM
Response to Original message
1. Alan Simpson would throw a party if what he considered all "the
lesser people in society" fell over dead from malnutrition and exposure like they did before the New Deal.

What sticks in his craw, the bile he tastes every morning, the anger, resentment and bitterness of his existence is that social security intrudes and diminishes the privileged, moneyed status in society. That it somehow keeps him from being more wealthy and privileged.

Peter G. Peterson, of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, has declared he will spend one billion dollars of his personal, ill-gotten gains to destroy social security. He could not be appointed to the secretive Catfood Commission, but he had his minions, Kent Conrad and Judd Gregg, appointed.

This is what a new day in government, transparency looks like. It looks like Cheney Energy Commission. And as a Gulf Coast resident, I know how that turned out.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 10:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Don't let them get away with this...
How is something an "Entitlement" that you pay into your whole working life?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Exactly the question I want answered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
4. Why in the world was this man appointed co-chair?
Edited on Sat Jun-19-10 10:45 AM by madfloridian
He has contempt for seniors...utter contempt.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/6223

"Simpson has already said that Social Security and Medicare are the reason “this country is gonna go to the bow-wows,” and he wouldn’t be dissuaded from cutting them by AARP or “the Gray Panthers, the Pink Panther, whatever.” But in an interview on Fox News last week, Simpson managed to outdo himself.

..."Simpson never makes boring copy, and so far he has been consistently quotable in his remarks. He and his co-chairman, Erskine Bowles, make quite a media pair.

But the press needs to pay attention to what they are saying, because their drive to cut the deficit will affect the financial well-being of every man, woman, and child in America. So far the direction of the media coverage has been driven by their mantra: everything is on the table; no more Mr. Nice Guy when it comes to Social Security and Medicare. The Erskine and Alan show is laying the groundwork for drastically changing Social Security and Medicare in ways that might not be so palatable with the public. It didn’t take Simpson long to climb on his hobbyhorse—that whatever the commission recommends will not hurt older folks. “Erskine and I are in this one for our grandchildren,” he said. “Somebody said they’re stalking horses for taxes. I’m not a stalking horse for taxes. I’m a stalking horse for my grandchildren.”

...'Simpson: And it's all BS. I don't have to take that nonsense. Look at my record. No one can say I want higher taxes. You're entitled to be called a fool, idiot, bonehead, slob, screwball. But an attack unanswered is an attack believed. I never lost an election because even though I was called everything, I never let them distort who I was. It's the same with this tax thing—I'm going to shove it right up their nostrils. Try this: Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will use up all the taxes—revenue—the government takes in this year. And to do the rest of governing we'll have to borrow, including for massive things like defense, homeland security, education. Those will be paid for by shaking a tin cup in front of the world. And China will probably be throwing more chips in the tin cup than any other country, just waiting patiently for us to expire under the debt. The people who distort the commission and try to scare people into doing nothing, let's say they win the day, and we don't do anything to try to bring down this debt. Well, great. They've got grandchildren, too, and in 40 years they'll be sucking canal water and picking grit with the chickens."

Very nasty man....why was he put in charge of this commission??????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
madfloridian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
5. Simpson...gated communities and Lexus drivers..arrogant
"“These old cats 70 and 80 years old who are not affected in one whiff. People who live in gated communities and drive their Lexus to the Perkins restaurant to get the AARP discount. This is madness.”

Kick for the arrogant sob

http://unsilentgeneration.com/2010/05/06/deficit-commissions-alan-simpson-denounces-fat-cat-geezers/

Why would Obama appoint him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Why indeed? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
6. Bowles is little better and most of the appointed "stakeholders" are worse
This is a sell out of the first magnitude that should be fought all the way to "burning down the house" since when it is done the "house" will be razed to the ground anyway.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPZenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. France is raising retirement age from 60 to 62 years old.
France is proposing to raise the age for a full pension from 60 to 62.

Meanwhile, in the US, for most people born since circa 1961, the age to be able to receive full social security benefits is now 67. Many people still think it is 65.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:56 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. no; he's raising it to what ours is now.
President Sarkozy has raised the MINIMUM legal retirement age from 60 to 62...

The age for retirement on a FULL state pension will be raised from 65 to 67 by 2020...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joe black Donating Member (514 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
10. Make the rich pay fica.
Problem solved oh, and end the damn wars. I hate to be an one issue voter but if this happens I won't be voting for Obama or any other democrats behind this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib2DaBone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 03:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. Why would Mr. Obama put together and Empower a Social Security Hit Squad like this?
Edited on Sat Jun-19-10 03:43 PM by lib2DaBone
I can't even get into the Chess player argument, and I'm not going to spend valuable time bashing my choice for president, Mr. Obama.

But all I can say is... "What is he thinking?" How could he turn these dogs loose on his own people?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 03:41 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Why would you give Obama a pass?
If he gets the prestige and power of the Presidency then why on earth shouldn't he get the accountability that comes with the office?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lagomorph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:51 AM
Response to Reply #12
16. Not to mention...
Edited on Mon Jun-21-10 04:52 AM by Lagomorph
a lifetime pension, healthcare and a personal security detail for as little as one partial term in office.

How do you explain "cutting corners to survive" to these guys?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
13. These are the people who were outraged
at the prospect that Wall Street bonuses would be reduced by the government.

Yet they are gleeful about taking away social security from people who paid into the system all their lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
classysassy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 02:59 AM
Response to Original message
14.  Cut congressional retirement money
to pay for the poor,just another rich retired republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lagomorph Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:54 AM
Response to Reply #14
17. And all the double & triple dippers...
They work 20 years and get a pension, then work 10 more years and get two, then work ten more years and get three. Bingo, triple retirement for one working life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWebHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:26 AM
Response to Original message
15. for a republican this is rather reasonable rhetoric
he's talking about solvency, and no mention of privatization or elimination of the entitlements. The idea that FDL suggests that instead of cutting entitlements we have a sovereign debt default is dangerously naive and perhaps the most idiotic thing I've read this year. U.S. debt issuance is bought by the choice of a person or foreign government. The consequences of default for a country whose debt trades at one of the lowest yields in the world far would eclipse any proposed medicare cuts or retirement age increases. It would have an impact of the '08 banking crisis on steroids.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:55 AM
Response to Reply #15
18. what default are you talking about? i don't see anything like that in the article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWebHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. this..
"Simpson starts from the premise that the Treasury will default on the bonds issued to the Social Security trust fund, because all the best people apparently know that it’s better to default on America’s senior citizens and plunge them into poverty than it is to default on, say, the Chinese."

Defaulting on the Chinese would be a sovereign default...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-21-10 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. i'm confused. you attributed that idea to fdl in your post, not simpson.
Edited on Mon Jun-21-10 04:23 PM by Hannah Bell
that's simpson's dangerous idea, not fdl's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC