[theknife]

Originally Posted by Mazer

Being the prez means making compromise after compromise just to make a few minor improvements to the system, and that rule will never change. For now the system works. The creators of SS did the math and their projections for its future have proven to be very accurate. While social security has been a helping hand people can rely on, it was never intended to be a crutch that people depend on; the moment that occurs it'll mean that SS has outlived its usefulness. Its creators knew it couldn't last indefinitely, in fact they knew its life expectancy from the start. So if the rulse are to be changed now then it is because they must be changed, or else we wouldn't be having this discussion.

As for being f*cked: like I said before, they've already taken that money from me and I'm not going to miss it.

not sure how old you are, Mazer, but i've prolly got at least 20 years on you...so i do believe if you had been paying into it for the last 30 years, as i have, and could see retirement on your horizon, as i do, you might not be so amenable to redefining the concept. i've never counted on SS as my sole retirement income, but i rightly expect some measure of return commensurate with my contribution.

you are correct: it was never intended to be a crutch but by means-testing it, the Prez seems to be trying to cast it as such.

you are also correct about compromises needed to govern, but this president is not famous for his ability to compromise. his "compromises" on SS will not be based upon consensus for the greater good, but rather concessions to the political realities of this wildly unpopular agenda he is pursuing.

based on his track record for veracity, one also has to question his motives: why SS now? why not, f'rinstance, attempt to fix Medicare, which is certainly a crutch and is almost broke right now? why not fix the prescription drug plan, who's cost the administration completely lied about, and is arguably the biggest welfare program ever created? why not address the record high energy costs, rather than reward the oil companies with a $200 million tax break (as he has done in his new budget) at a time when the oil companies are reporting record profits?

because this President has 2 constituencies: the religous Right and his corporate campaign donors....and virtually everything on his agenda is designed to please one or the other. you'll notice the main feature of his plan to "fix" SS is account privatization, which according to every single analysis, will not do a thing to make SS more solvent but will be a huge Xmas present to the investment industry. go figure.

edit: interesting quote from Warren Buffet:

Warren Buffett, the 74-year-old chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, and his 81-year-old partner, Charlie Munger, launched an impassioned defense of Social Security at the company's annual meeting Saturday, with Munger terming Republican efforts to overhaul the program "twaddle."
While they did not directly discuss President Bush's proposal to allow Americans to divert some of their Social Security taxes to individual investment accounts, Buffett and Munger said the country faces far more pressing problems than the projected Social Security insolvency in 40 or 50 years.

Buffett said government officials should instead be focusing on trimming the budget deficit, which stood at more than $412 billion last year. "Anything that would take Social Security payments below their present guaranteed level is a mistake," said Buffett, a Democrat. "The obligation of the people who do well in this society is to provide a reasonable level of sustenance for those in their later years."

Munger, who called himself a "right-wing Republican," said, "Republicans are out of their cotton-picking minds to be taking on this issue now. "Munger cited nuclear tensions with North Korea and Iran as issues the administration should be working on instead of "wasting its good will over some twaddle."