Why I think Obama wants a BIGGER deal, and I don't agree

[SugarShack]

The trust fund "lock box" is FULL of I.O.U.'s. Social Security is bringing in, what is going out they say, and solvent for 25-35 years. What appears to be a problem, is there is no money left over, for our "leaders" to continue to write I.O.U.'s. They no longer have an available piggy bank.

Obama asks, "Should we tweek it for 15 years, and make the 35 years work for 50 years? Or, should take a real measure, and make it work for seventy years"?

I don't think we should make decisions on monetary matters that far out. It may need tweaking sooner, and we'll all be gone, and our children left with current policy. AND, THEY....will have a large piggy bank again, with more coming in again, and be able to issue more "I.O.U.'s". Maybe this is not what they should be doing with our money, if they now have to cut benefits?

Maybe they should never have much more...than what is needed, and continue to "tweak" with tax policy? They have just used up the rest of the money and left I.O.U.'s. Now they say they need to raise the age? They need to keep their hands out of it.

Because they will never keep their hands out of it, I support only a small fix. They are not trustworthy with our money. Why is Obama pushing, pushing for a huge deal? Because it creates a HUGE pot of money, they dip into. Let's stop it now. Fifty years is long enough out, then let's revisit. So let's just give it a 15 yr. tweak, and we're good for 50.

Why trust them with money to be used so are far out, when even they will be dead and gone?????

[SugarShack]

1. I welcome opinions on this. Should we even want to give THEM a bigger deal????

[FreakinDJ]

2. Raise the Cap and Lock Box the surplus in Treasury Bonds

of course this only works IF they do not include the Surplus Funds as part of the Treasury's Gen Fund predictions. So they would have to force the public disclosures as part of the Nifty little Social Security brochures they mail out annually.

This way it would hold Interest Rates on the National Debt LOW without relying on the Reaganomics approach of using Unemployment to control Inflation.

Personally I don't see a down side to that

[SugarShack]

3. Excellent idea. I along with many others are for raising the cap. Yes, secure the funds.

[SugarShack]

4. And if they need more money, Rumsfeld spoke of 2 trillion missing from the Pentagon. Start there!

[Tennessee Gal]

5. I don't see how anything would create a huge pot of money.

This nation is spending more than it takes in. Period. There have to be cuts in some things and there has to be an increase in income (taxes, loophole elimination, subsidy elimination, etc.) to stop this cycle. Debt is debt and this nation is in debt.

In my opinion, the Bush administration made a HUGE mistake with the tax cuts. No surprise that they did it because all Republicans have swallowed the "trickle down" fallacy. But at the time Bush entered the White House he was handed a surplus. That surplus should have been used to pay down the national debt, which would have cut down on interest on the debt expenditures. Then when Bush started the two middle east wars, taxes should have been raised to pay for them.

Clinton's economic policies, including the 1993 tax increase, led to years of budget surpluses and a golden age of prosperity.

And what did Republicans say about it?

Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-GA), February 2, 1993: We have all too many people in the Democratic administration who are talking about bigger Government, bigger bureaucracy, more programs, and higher taxes. I believe that that will in fact kill the current recovery and put us back in a recession. It might take 1 1/2 or 2 years, but it will happen. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bill Archer (R-TX), May 24, 1993: I would much rather be here today supporting the President and I would do so if his proposals could expect to increase jobs and the standard of living for Americans, but I believe his massive tax increases will do just the opposite. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-GA), July 13, 1993: Small businesses generate the bulk of this Nation’s new jobs. And they will be the hardest hit by the Clinton tax-and-spend budget. Because, when you raise taxes, you kill jobs. (Congressional Record, 1993, Thomas)

Rep. Christopher Cox (R-CA), May, 27, 1993: This is really the Dr. Kevorkian plan for our economy. It will kill jobs, kill businesses, and yes, kill even the higher tax revenues that these suicidal tax increasers hope to gain. (Congressional Record, 1993, Page: H2949)

[Ruby the Liberal]

6. Great post!

Its amazing, no? The tunnel vision when it is right there plain as day for anyone and everyone to see.

Trickle down has been proven a fallacy. Why are we even still talking about it?

[Tennessee Gal]

7. Yes, it is amazing.

What went wrong started with Bush. Obama is stuck with it now and some changes have to take place.

[WinkyDink]

8. the Bush administration made a HUGE mistake with the tax cuts = FACT, not opinion! :-)

[Tennessee Gal]

9. Agreed. nt