HaloScan.com - Comments

I'MMA LET YOU FINISH

Bush & Co. = pure, unadulterated evil.

Well, OK, there's incompetence thrown in there too.

But who can figure out what the percentages are?

Somebody had a good formula the other night (wish I could remember who):

Evil x Stupidity = Insanity
Kate | 12.11.04 - 11:20 am | #

Crap.

Preznit lied? Bush? Lied?

Next you'll be telling me that Rummy is a fucking maniac.
Shaw Kenawe | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:21 am | #

"The system is headed towards bankruptcy down the road."

I ran this through the patented Bush-o-later and got this: "The system is headed towards bankruptcy down the road if I have anything to do with it."

I'm still checking the data but I think the translation will hold up.
jimmiraybob | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:21 am | #

BUSH LIES?

Say it ain't so.
EarthMerm | 12.11.04 - 11:22 am | #

are they actually going to be able to hoodwink the public again with this kind of bold face lie?

has anybody seen rebuttle to this claptrap?

what was the Dem respose and who gave it?

how many questions can i fit in a post before it gets annoying?
rattus rattus illegitimus | 12.11.04 - 11:22 am | #

If you replace "If we do not act soon" with "If me and my Wall St. buddies have our way" it becomes true. I know that gramer is bad, but that is how Bush would have said it.
John Gillnitz | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:23 am | #

"The system is headed towards bankruptcy down the road."

Is Laura driving?
pseudonymous in nc | 12.11.04 - 11:23 am | #

Jimmiraybob nailed it.
Bean | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:23 am | #

Where ARE those WMDs, anyway?

Fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice... shame on.. fool me... won't get fooled again.
semper fubar | 12.11.04 - 11:24 am | #

or maybe jimmyraybob is right, bushie is telling the truth: if the piratizing of the sytem gets greenlighted then it will go balls-up
rattus rattus illegitimus | 12.11.04 - 11:25 am | #

rattus rattus illegitimus SAYS:
"what was the dems repose"

I think he/she meant "repose"
NuculerMan | 12.11.04 - 11:25 am | #

like i said below, raping the nation for money and scream'n jeebus.

and speaking of below, it be nice if they are right about the jeebus thing, 'cause a whole bunch of them are gonna be scream'n bloody murder when ole slewfoot get's a load of their shenanigans.

my favorite jesus story is when he throws the money changers out of the temple.
charley | 12.11.04 - 11:26 am | #

What does that last paragraph mean? If we ever expect the media to write about Social Security honestly, someone has to translate that economics speak about "promised benefits" and "real terms" into English.

Could you describe an example with real money figures?
Daniel Stewart | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:26 am | #

response, system

gotta chew through more of the coffee grounds yet today
rattus rattus illegitimus | 12.11.04 - 11:27 am | #

OT, but: Yuschenko poisoned???

Weirder and weirder.
TK | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:27 am | #

Nothing he does surprises or outrages me anymore. Lying is just S.O.P. for him and his monions.
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:28 am | #

Minions, that is.
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:29 am | #

Where ARE those WMDs, anyway?

Now, wait just a doggone minute. Let's keep these "fool-me" things in chronological order.

First comes, "Hey where's Osama? Is he dead or alive?"
Kate | 12.11.04 - 11:29 am | #

sure it's headed for bankruptcy, thanks to Bush's Tax Cuts For The Rich™
renato | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:29 am | #

So what you're saying is that if Bush had run on a Social Security reform plan that consisted of the statement "There's no problem if we just cut future benefits 25% from their current configuration" you would have stood up and applauded?

Because that's what YOU'RE saying. You're saying there are no problems with the system because keeping it solvent would only require us to cut benefits 25% from their projected levels.

Hey, if that's what you want, let's start putting together legislative sponsors.
Uncontainable Contempt | 12.11.04 - 11:29 am | #

If every Democrat on TV tomorrow isn't saying some version of "the president is lying to the American people about this vital program", then it's time to start looking for that job in Vancouver.
J Bean | 12.11.04 - 11:30 am | #

Every Democrat should be on TV tomorrow saying some version of "The president is lying to the American people about this vital program..."

Instead they'll meekly talk about how this is an issue on which we might be able to compromise...blah blah blah....

Actually Reid on MTP last week gave me hope that we'll draw a line in the sand on this. Although I want them to SCREAM IT!!!
Sean | 12.11.04 - 11:30 am | #

boy, i just reread the article and the twists just keep getting twistier:

"We must tap into the power of compound interest, by giving younger workers the option to save some of their payroll taxes in a personal account, a nest egg they can call their own, which government cannot take away," Bush said.

won't the bushies 'notion' end up taking away SS payouts?

sheesh
rattus rattus illegitimus | 12.11.04 - 11:31 am | #

Question: I was wondering about this statement, that Social Security would continue to pay out about 75% of benefits even when the trust fund runs out. My question, how long can it continue to pay out at that rate? Would the rate stay constant or would it diminish? Because presumably the demographic/economic changes that are "endangering" the system would continue, so would the rate decrease from 75% to 50%, from 50% to 25%, and so on?
jbeam | 12.11.04 - 11:31 am | #

Who said this?
Select one:
A. President George W. Bush
B. Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf
aka "Baghdad Bob"

( Hint: The answer is "B" )

"My feelings - as usual - we will slaughter them all"

"Our initial assessment is that they will all die"

"I blame Al-Jazeera "

"They're coming to surrender "

"No I am not scared, and neither should you be!"

"Be assured. Baghdad is safe, protected"

"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!"

"Do not in fact repeat their lies."

"I can say, and I am responsible for what I am saying, that they have
started to commit suicide under the walls of Baghdad. We
will encourage them to commit more suicides quickly."

"I can assure you that those villains will recognize, will discover in appropriate time in the future how stupid they are and how they are pretending things which have never taken place."

"The American press is all about lies! All they tell is lies, lies and more lies!"

"I have detailed information about the situation...which completely proves that what they allege are illusions . . . They lie every day."

"We are in control. They are in a state of hysteria. Losers, they think that by killing civilians and trying to distort the feelings of the people they will win. I think they will not win, those bastards."

“We have placed them in a quagmire from which they can never emerge except dead”

"These cowards have no morals. They have no shame about lying"

"We will kill them all........most of them."

"They are like a snake and we are going to cut it in pieces."

"They do not even have control over themselves! Do not believe them!"

"They are trapped in Umm Qasr. They are trapped near Basra. They are trapped near Nasiriyah. They are trapped near Najaf. They are trapped everywhere."

"They are nowhere near the airport ..they are lost in the desert...they can not read a compass...they are retarded."

"They are not in Baghdad. They are not in control of any airport. I tell you this. It is all a lie. They lie. It is a hollywood movie. You do not believe them."

"Our estimates are that none of them will come out alive unless they surrender to us quickly."

"On this occasion, I am not going to mention the number of the infidels who were killed and the number of destroyed vehicles. The operation continues"

"Today we slaughtered them in the airport. They are out of Saddam International Airport."

"We're giving them a real lesson today. Heavy doesn't accurately describe the level of casualties we have inflicted."

"Their infidels are committing suicide by the hundreds on the gates of Baghdad. Be assured, Baghdad is safe, protected."

"Today I have visited whole Baghdad city, no invaders found. You go and see how we have ousted them from this city. They are cying outside and waiting to r
Chuck | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:31 am | #

"If we do not act soon, Social Security will not be there for our children and grandchildren."

I think he mispoke. He meant to say, "If we act soon, Social Security will not be there for our children and grandchildren."

See he wasn't lying.
Rexroth's Daughter | 12.11.04 - 11:31 am | #

Hey UC -
As many smart people have pointed out, "fixing" SS so that benefits with COLA can be maintained is pretty easy.
J Bean | 12.11.04 - 11:32 am | #

There's a huge freakin difference between a 25% cut and "bankruptcy".

I see you also missed the part about "equal to or higher in real terms" as well. Egad.
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:33 am | #

Dear intrepid media (of course I had the benefit of a crack research staff):

From the 2004 Annual Report of the Board of Trustees of the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance Trust Funds (available at http://www.ssa.gov):

[Introduction page 1] "Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI); Disability Insurance (DI).”

[Short-Range Results page 2] "The OASI and DI trust Funds, individually and combined, are adequately financed over the next 10 years under the intermediate assumptions.”

[Long-Range Results page 2] "Under the intermediate assumptions the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds are projected to become exhausted in 2042*."

[Solvency page 3] "The combined OASDI Trust Funds are projected to become insolvent (i.e., unable to pay scheduled benefits in full* on a timely basis) (but NOT unable to function at approximately 80% payout and timeliness shouldn't be affected - my note) when assets (Surplus in Treasury Bonds) are exhausted in 2042 under the long-range intermediate assumptions.

*back to Atrios' comments
jimmiraybob | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:33 am | #

THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN AND OUR PRESIDENT IS GONNA FIX IT. QUIT CRITICIZING HIM. SHUT UP. SHUT UP SHUT UP. THE SYSTEM IS BROKEN AND HE'S GONNA FIX IT. SHUT UP SHUT UP.
Anonymous | 12.11.04 - 11:33 am | #

I'd applaud the honesty, which is rather the point.

But, if you enjoy being lied to, bend over and keep taking it.
Atrios | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:33 am | #

Fucking fucking fucking (((LIAR)))

Stand back, head exploding.
bigvic | 12.11.04 - 11:34 am | #

Along with jbeam's question, is there a date where the benefits would reach zero, and the system would actually be bankrupt? Like is that 100 years from now?
Daniel Stewart | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:34 am | #

bend over and keep taking it.

Hey buddy, the anal sex talk is 5 threads down, do you mind?
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:36 am | #

Every Democrat should be on TV tomorrow saying some version of "The president is lying to the American people about this vital program..."

Could we possibly get one person to say on TV, "Hope the 51% who elected this lying bastard to another term are happy. Instant Karma's gonna get ya, folks, and get ya good." Naw. That would be asking for a lot. Get ready for the pain . . ..
Big Daddy Mars | 12.11.04 - 11:36 am | #

Not enough people are paying attention to anything anymore. You could have a million people on TV and in newspapers screaming that the Bush Administration is going to continue to rob us blind and ruin SS for Americans and our average Joe American will either go get a beer, or read the Bible and not worry about any of it. This has become the most complacent country on the face of the planet.
Nancy | 12.11.04 - 11:36 am | #

No, I didn't, Blak.

But the reason that benefits will grow in real terms is because people's contributions will rise in real terms.

Higher real wages will lead to more people drawing the maximum benefit.

So to accomplish your 25% benefit cut but still make higher payouts in real terms, you would have to break the connection between increased contributions and increased benefits.

It really wouldn't be too bad if you did that, though, because the [tenuous] connection between contributions and benefits is one of the elements of the program that convinces the average voter that SSI is some kind of savings plan, and not a welfare program.

But even if you do not agree with my characterization of what you're doing, the question remains: if Bush dropped his plan for private accounts, and instead started claiming that there was no SSI problem because he had a NEW plan to just cut future benefits 25%, would you support it, or would you run around screaming that Bush hated old people and wanted them to eat cat food? Somehow, I think it's the latter - so forgive me if I find this "the system is not going bankrupt" claim to be a little less than sincere.
Uncontainable Contempt | 12.11.04 - 11:39 am | #

Not only do the Democrats need to do speak up, but the press needs to do something. Here is a great article on Bill Moyers that sums it up beautifully about the absence of a vigilante and independent press in this country.

I had just written in the open thread below about Junior's radio address on SS when I posted and then refreshed the page saw this new post from Dr. Atrios on the same subject.

Anyway I'm not going to repeat what I wrote there, but I will bring what Bill Moyers said into this thread that we have been witnessing and screaming about that is taking place with the media.
"I'm going out telling the story that I think is the biggest story of our time: how the right-wing media has become a partisan propaganda arm of the Republican National Committee. We have an ideological press that's interested in the election of Republicans, and a mainstream press that's interested in the bottom line. Therefore, we don't have a vigilant, independent press whose interest is the American people." ( Moyer's quote found thanks to Maru over at WTF is is Now)

Link here.
emal | 12.11.04 - 11:40 am | #

you assume Democrats don't want to get rid of SS too.
cleek | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:40 am | #

jbeam - benefits will not continue to decline, for the simple reason that the system only reaches trouble at the point where it's been overtaxed for 30 - 40 years by the retirement of the baby boomers (biggest age cohort in US history) - while for that same 30 - 40 years, the generation making the bulk of payments (Gen X, as they dubbed it) is a much smaller age cohort. It's kind of like the perfect demographic storm for the system, and with a few tweaks it can weather it fairly easily and sail out into the sunshine on the other side.
Jennifer | 12.11.04 - 11:41 am | #

Word, Nancy.

I feel like a crazy person lately, talking about the world burning down. Everybody else is happily singing carols.

Maybe I need to sing some carols.

Good King Bushelas looked out
On the feast of Jeebus
Where his voters lay round about ...

A.
Athenae | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:42 am | #

If the Dems let them, the pukes are going to use 'saving' Social Security as their national security issue in 2008. The thing is how many people are going to buy into the puke's crisis propaganda campaign. History tells us that a lot will. Dems got to paint Bush as a liar with broad stokes, starting right now.
Joe D. | 12.11.04 - 11:43 am | #

More "Washington Bushie" quotes at

"They are achieving nothing; they are suffering from casualties. Those casualties are increasing, not decreasing."

"Fight them everywhere. Don't give them a chance to breathe until they withdraw and retreat."

"The criminals will be humiliated... To hurt the enemy more, raise the level of your attacks."

"We are winning!"

See more at http://www.welovetheiraqiinforma...ter.com/ #quotes

.
Chuck | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:43 am | #

"We must tap into the power of compound interest, by giving younger workers the option to save some of their payroll taxes in a personal account, a nest egg they can call their own, which government cannot take away," Bush said.

And what sort of interest are we gonna see on these accounts? 2% annual? 1K max investment annual + 2% compound interest - administrative fees = 40 years of chickshit returns. Even without the fees is still sucks in a major way. And let's not talk about what happens if they start puttin' this money in the stock market. Better to invest that $1000 a year on lots of canned Alpo and an insulated shed. At least 40 years from now they'll still be around.
Big Daddy Mars | 12.11.04 - 11:44 am | #

jbeam

One of the problems is that we're all trying to "know" what's going to happen at 30, 40, 50 years and more down the road. To paraphrase a famous 21st century philosopher:

There are knowable knowns and unknowable knowns and there are some known unknowables and then there are often unknown knowables and then......

If you look at the predictions done by the SS trustees there are worst case, intermediate case and best case scenarios that vary by degree of ASSUMPTION. Worst case is kiss your ass goodbye and best case is ain't no problems at all for the next 75 years.

The "truth" is probably somewhere in between but from all I've read all it MAY take is some relatively minor tweeking and not radical reform. Of course, if I had a shot at getting my hands on the enormous funds that will suddenly flow I'm sure that I would be for it. People need to get a grip.
jimmiraybob | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:47 am | #

The president is lying to the American people about this vital program." -Atrios
One More Time! | 12.11.04 - 11:49 am | #

The bastard calls it an "option" when the plan states that workers can invest 1-4 % in private accounts and receive reduced benefits. Those that do not invest the 1 - 4 % will just get reduced benefits. How is that an option? Either way, the benefits will be reduced.
vioblee | 12.11.04 - 11:51 am | #

This has become the most complacent country on the face of the planet.
Nancy

that's because they are fat and happy. i'm no prophet like baghdad bob, but i predict those circumstances are about to take a titanic shift. or should that be tectonic shift? or maybe Teutonic shift.

anyway you look at it the good people of america elected to allow the captain of the sinking ship to go down with it. that's a good thing, right?
charley | 12.11.04 - 11:52 am | #

If the government intends to create a savings program that the government can't "take away," why am I paying that money to the government in the first place.

Or is that what they want me to think.

The way this is being framed, there's no chance for SS to survive make your time. Somebody set it up the bomb.
underwhelm | 12.11.04 - 11:52 am | #

I believe it's already too late for Dems to speak up about these fear-mongering lying bastards in the Whitehouse. Bush, Inc. has already shaped conventional wisdom about SS. Any Dem who says it isn't true that SS is facing an imminent crisis will just look like an idiot- and Bush's surrogates will say as much in the media.
redleg | 12.11.04 - 11:52 am | #

Jennifer and Jimmiraybob -- thanks for the responses. So it sounds like once the boomers are no longer in the picture, prospects for the system are likely to improve. Any thoughts on the impact of modern medicine and increasing lifespans -- will this still be sustainable when everyone's living to 90-100?
jbeam | 12.11.04 - 11:55 am | #

The Extremely Shorter Atrios and the Great Eschaton Reader Swindle

Atrios raised $49,267.71 for Democratic candidates in 2004 and this is what the Democrats got:

Patsy Keever (NC-11) - LOSER!
Stan Matsunaka (CO-4) - LOSER!
Ginny Schrader (IL-0 - LOSER!
Jan Schneider (FL-13) - LOSER!
David Ashe (VA-02) - LOSER!
Lois Murphy (PA-06) - LOSER!

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee received $34,682.12 and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee received $50,951.57. What happened to them? They were LOSERS! They both loss seats to Republicans! That's right, with Atrios' help, Republicans gained seats in the House and Senate.

Oh, lets not forget Atrios' dream boat, Joe Hoeffel. $53,742.85 went to him. Joe Hoeffel, LOSER!. How do you lose to a loser like Arlen Specter? With Black's "expert advice", of course! Does Francesca still invite you over after that?

Then there is the BIGGEST LOSER of all, the DNC ePatriots "Boot Bush" campaign, which got $137,228.18 and the $289,332 that went directly to John Kerry's campaign. Who is going to be inaugurated in January because of Atrios' help? That's right, George W. Bush.

You ripped off your readers to the tune of $615,204.43, LOSERS!!! Fools and their money. As a Republican, all I can say is, KEEP IT UP! Great job! Duncan Black, Proud Member of the Reality-Based Community, the one putting Republicans in power.

P.S. How much of your readers's money did you keep while helping the Democrats crash and burn? What was the cut? What would it cost Karl Rove to make sure you are around in 2006 & 2008?
reality based commentator | 12.11.04 - 11:56 am | #

Gee, these guys are habitual liars. In fact that doesnt even capture it. These guys are into alternate reality generation. Im waiting for them to start doing the Stalinesque modifications of text books to eliminate the mention of peoples names.
Sentenza | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:56 am | #

The United States can be complacent because the Rapture is coming soon. The second coming of Christ will happen before I start drawing Social Security benefits so I don't have to worry.
Daniel Stewart | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:58 am | #

Yes, I apologize for not suggesting readers give to candidates who were guaranteed winners. That would have been a much better use of their money.
Atrios | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:58 am | #

"If you replace "If we do not act soon" with "If me and my Wall St. buddies have our way" it becomes true. I know that gramer is bad, but that is how Bush would have said it."

John Gillnitz 12.11.04 - 11:23 am

OK, I've checked the data and the Bush-o-Lator results are in complete agreement with John.
jimmiraybob | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:00 pm | #

No, it is not "headed towards bankruptcy.

Yes it is.

Although the King-in-His-Person may be wrong, and the King may be misled by corrupt, venal, or incompetent Ministers, the King-in-His-Majesty can not be wrong.

Throw away your Federalist Papers, get a good translation of Bossuet instead, and get with the system...
Davis X. Machina | 12.11.04 - 12:00 pm | #

Aside from writing -- again -- to our Senators and Representatives about this, what's the battle plan?
Nora | 12.11.04 - 12:02 pm | #

Our "reality based commentator" is a jackass with too much free time. I think Democrats should just pander to the rich where $615,000 can be reached with only thirty $20,000 donations.
Daniel Stewart | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:03 pm | #

So if the promised benefits were paid in 2045 would the system be bankrupt then?
Tin nut | 12.11.04 - 12:03 pm | #

I swear I haven't seen so many sore winners since grade school, perhaps kindergarten. They really have a need to constantly remind themselves they won, I wonder why. Guilty conscience, perhaps?
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:04 pm | #

The bullshit never ends.
Anonymous | 12.11.04 - 12:06 pm | #

Reality based commentator lives in a "reality" where one does not have to support candidates via the grassroots, Big Corp's do it for him.

I'll give again, and again, and again...
vioblee | 12.11.04 - 12:06 pm | #

"Yes, I apologize for not suggesting readers give to candidates who were guaranteed winners."

Maybe apologize for suggesting readers give to guaranteed losers.
Tin nut | 12.11.04 - 12:07 pm | #

Unfortunately, I don't have a whole lot of confidence that the Democrats are going to be willing to go to the mat on this. I think some of those fatasses are also eyeing that 'bushel of money.'

I'd be happy to be proved wrong.
-
Phredd | 12.11.04 - 12:07 pm | #

I'm pretty much sick of this shit.

Every half-ass "moderate Dem" comes onto T.V. and the blogs spouting bullshit and lies about S.S. and it's imminent bankruptcy, unsustainability, how it's a pension fund with poor returns (when it's actually an insurance policy with low risk, ergo low reward), and much they could make playing the markets with the $1,000 a year Bush will give them.

If you people (moderate suckers)are still fucking stupid enough to believe this after the weapons of mass destruction then you get what you deserve. to hell with it.

Are the American people worth saving at this point ?

A willfully ignorant and politically uninformed population, who's idea of investment and planning is playing the slots at Harrah's over Memorial Day weekend.

S.S. is easy to improve (it doesn't need to be fixed). And it's a guaranteed paycheck for your enitre retired life. Read the trustees entire report , someone, please - just once.
jeff | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:08 pm | #

I guess it's projection. They need to convince themselves that Atrios swindles his readers so they don't have to think about how the entire country is being swindled as we speak.
BlakNo1 | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:09 pm | #

I don't think the big problem here is whether or not Bush is lying about the state of SS - the big problem is what Bush is claiming as a *fix* for SS.

If SS is going to go insolvent in 40 years, then bump up payments or cut interests a little bit (I lean towards the removal of the $80k cap on SS-taxable income) - don't fucking borrow a trillion dollars to sink into private accounts with no guaranteed results.

Insane, just completely fucking insane.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:11 pm | #

(not that I'm saying SS *is* going to go insolvent - if there's one thing I've learned, it's that if Bush says it, the opposite must be true)
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:12 pm | #

This one should be simple to head off.

When the "private accounts" debate hits the senate floor, the Dems should simply ask the Majority Leader to describe how successful his stock market investments were this past year.

"A campaign fund controlled by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) has lost almost $460,000 in stock market investments since 2000 and now does not have enough to cover a sizable bank loan, according to federal election records and the manager of the Frist account."

WaPo link in homepage
The Invisible Hand | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:13 pm | #

I totally agree Eli. I think we are fighting a losing battle by opposing the insolvency, but better off fighting the "fix".
vioblee | 12.11.04 - 12:14 pm | #

Which will happen first, bankruptcy of the treasury or the bankruptcy of SS? Every time they Start saying that SS will go bankrupt I think they are saying the treasury won't be able to repay the money they have borrowed from SS. Isn't this really part of the problem?
lydia | 12.11.04 - 12:14 pm | #

The Bush administration wants to destroy Social Security; that's what this is about. Where are the Dems, who should be screaming about this? I sounded off to the DNC for all the good it will do.

On another subject, Republicans are the angriest people. They own everything, three branches of the federal government, most of the media, support of the big corporations, and they're still mad. What would make them happy?
janeboatler | 12.11.04 - 12:15 pm | #

Every Democrat should be...

but, sadly, won't be.
George Johnston | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:16 pm | #

jbeam

Projections are fallible and new realities (I repeat, realities) will always arise. The system can't be inflexible and hasn't been. To the best of my knowledge, and please correct me if I'm wrong, work was done in the 80's to tweek the system to accomodate the "baby boomers" as they move through the system. It's not that things will get better when they're gone (which incidentally includes me) but that the system is projected to stay viable.

To say that Social Security is on the brink of being backrupt for the purpose of inciting panic is just plain fraudulent on so many levels.
jimmiraybob | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:16 pm | #

Dubya said Social Security privatazation was needed because the system would go bankrupt in 10 years - in 1978.
Sven | 12.11.04 - 12:16 pm | #

David Brooks writes about Soc. Sec. in the Times today. I sent him a little note to correct a few, um, "problems" with his analysis and got back the following:

Dear friend,
Thanks very much for sending a response to my column, positive or negative. I'm afraid I can't respond to each message. My editors would wonder why I have no time to write for the paper.
But I do read every e-mail, and I frequently learn from them.
So, again, thanks,
David Brooks
******************

Yeah, that column requires some pretty heavy intellectual lifting....
Charles Foster Kane | 12.11.04 - 12:18 pm | #

But even this accurate assessment of the solvency of Social Security misses the real issue. Social Security does not have a separate budget. The supposed current Social Security surplus is used to close the rest of the budget deficit. If Social Security were in deficit--as projected around 2044--benefit payouts could be covered by the general fund.

The solvency of Social Security and of any federal program, whether entitlement or discretionary, rests on the ability of the government to borrow money. The proverbial "full faith and credit" to finance the federal budget, deficit, and debt. If that fails then the question of reduction of Social Security benefits will be the least of our worries.

If the President were to talk about that he would not be lying because his head would have exploded.
dre | 12.11.04 - 12:18 pm | #

eli - "...if Bush says it, the opposite must be true."

This is the central formula that I used to build the patented Bush-o-Lator. Works like a charm.

Full disclosure: it's not really patented and is in the public domain so use at will.
jimmiraybob | 12.11.04 - 12:19 pm | #

And *that's* the trap, vioblee. By saying that SS is fine and doesn't need to be fixed, the Dems are painting themselves as the head-in-the-sand party of denial, while the Republicans are once again the party of fixing-things-through-bold-decisive-action.

What the Dems have to hammer is *not* that Bush's plan is unnecessary, but that it will make things *worse*.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:23 pm | #

OT: Note Dave Pollard, author of How to Save the World blog, just gave up on the USA. Says it's time to emmigrate, maybe to Canada:

'So, Americans, please do not be cowed or intimidated by those who would call you names for thinking of getting out while the getting is good. We need a lot of great minds working on some massive and intractable human problems now. As long as you remain in the US trying to bring about regime change, and even cultural change, there in the country you have called home, you will be endlessly distracted by people and governments who are on a dangerous and probably inexorable track. No one would have thought ill of you for leaving Germany in the 1930s, or even before. Those that left that country then might have even saved the world from annihilation. Those brave souls who are leaving America now, and moving to Canada or other countries, could play a no less important role in our struggling planet's future.'

http://tinyurl.com/4zkyj
Mike | 12.11.04 - 12:23 pm | #

Listen carefully to the Dumbocraps tomorrow. By their discourse shall ye know them: the ones who echo aWol's line are in the pay of and on the pad for the big banking houses, no matter what fucking pissant state they allegedly 'represent.' These are the ones whom whe should target for retirement, in whatsoever form it takes...
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 12:24 pm | #

"Dubya said Social Security privatazation was needed because the system would go bankrupt in 10 years - in 1978."

Sven 12.11.04 - 12:16 pm

Unfortunately for him, Bush didn't yet posses the power to achieve his dream.
jimmiraybob | 12.11.04 - 12:26 pm | #

Say what you will about David Brooks, but his column today about Social Security contains six words of such profound truth that my heart almost stopped upon reading them. (Finding them is left as an exercise for the reader.)
alkali | 12.11.04 - 12:27 pm | #

Erring on the side of caution about whether SS needs help doesn't seem like such a bad thing to me - if the fix is fiscally responsible tweaking (especially on the pay-in side) rather than batshit insane pie-in-the-sky magical thinking, then what's the worst case? The people making the most money pay a little bit more taxes, and SS runs a surplus, which (I assume) can be raided to help out the rest of the budget, once the baby boomers have passed safely through the system.

On the other hand, the fact that Bush got re-elected and that this is picking up momentum suggests to me that baby boomers are absolutely the dumbest fuckers on earth (present boomer company excepted, of course), and all of them who voted for Bush *deserve* to be eating cat food when the SS hits the fan.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:27 pm | #

Yes, so sorry we gave money to political candidates that didn't win, just like Bush in 2000 and again in 2004. We haven't been able to sink low enough to steal elections are commit treason, or to lie America into endless, pointless wars, or pollute the planet so we can hide our ill-gotten gains offshore, along with the few good jobs left. I guess Atrios and the rest of us should be ashamed that we don't have our heads up our asses like out mouth-full-of-shit wingnut trolls. Of course, they must be posting from the front lines, being as how they're such patriots and all. Yeah, let's borrow 2 trillion more dollars to fatten the investment class, just don't spend it on protecting soldiers, we fight out illegal, immoral wars with the army we have, not the one we wish to have (which would be entirely republican if there were a god).
Ronjazz | 12.11.04 - 12:28 pm | #

"I may be a complete idiot..."
The Invisible Hand | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:29 pm | #

What would make them happy?
janeboatler

The outright disappearance of any one who might possibly disagree with them about anything: Concentration camps, expellations, revokations of citizenship, social ostracism, poverty, and slow, lingering death for their opponents...

just sayin...

We need to stop screwing around and start devising ways to fuck these people UP...what's good for the GOP is good for...
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 12:29 pm | #

40 years ago they were talking about how Social Security was going to be bankrupt in 40 years, 20 years ago they were talking about how Social Security would be bankrupt in 40 years. Bush has reframed it somewhat by saying "sometime down the road", but it's the same thing. The repubs have been trying to kill Social Security for as long as I can remember.
sukabi | 12.11.04 - 12:30 pm | #

"On another subject, Republicans are the angriest people. They own everything, three branches of the federal government, most of the media, support of the big corporations, and they're still mad. What would make them happy?"

Themselves rich, everyone else working for the right to breathe, bombing the rest of the world into a hellhole so immigrants will feel the USA is a paradise in comparison, endless sexual debauchery with preteen boys and girls, hunting people for sport, torturing others for the sheer pleasure of it, etc etc etc...
Mike | 12.11.04 - 12:30 pm | #

"On another subject, Republicans are the angriest people. They own everything, three branches of the federal government, most of the media, support of the big corporations, and they're still mad. What would make them happy?"

everybody knows at least one person who is never happy, can always find something to bitch about. The repubs have this distilled to an artform.
sukabi | 12.11.04 - 12:35 pm | #

ignorance really *IS* strength.

honesty is for LOSERS.

might makes right.

yeah i really want to live in a society that teaches these values!!!!!!!!
n69n | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:36 pm | #

The higher a percentage of what you want that you have, the more offensive to you that remaining few percent is.

And vice versa - the smaller a percentage of what you want that you have, the more grateful you are for it.

I think it describes the Rep-Dem dynamic pretty well, really.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:37 pm | #

Mend it, don't end it.

This is bad enough for someone like me, a boomer who's paid FICA taxes for 30 years and wants his **** money back, but it's catastrophic for younger workers. It's one thing to blithely assert that SS won't be there for you; it's something else to get to the age where you can't work/get a job, and find yourself without any safety net whatsoever.

Most people can't even imagine how hard life is when you don't have enough $$$ to feed yourself, much less put a roof over your head.

What the Republicans offer us is Social Darwinism among the lower orders. They've got theirs already, or they wouldn't even think of gutting SS. Let the others eat cake...
icarus | 12.11.04 - 12:38 pm | #

Question? The US Government has been borrowing from SS. If we decided today that we want the US Government to pay back all the loans it took from SS, how much would it owe us?

It isn't SS going bust; it is the US Treasury!
Nancy | 12.11.04 - 12:39 pm | #

[BRITISH INTELLIGENCE HAS LEARNED that]...
"If we do not act soon, Social Security will not be there for our children and grandchildren."
n69n | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:39 pm | #

I don't know, if my company promises to make payments on its mortgage of $100 a month, and then it can only make payments of $75 a month, it may very well have to declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy doesn't mean you have *no* money left, it means you are unable to meet your obligations.

I'm not sure if that's what Bush means, and sure he's scare-mongering, but what's new.
Dave in NYC | 12.11.04 - 12:41 pm | #

I guess my other question, besides whether or not you would accept a Bush SSI plan that consisted simply of a 25% cut in future benefits, would be:

When first Bill Clinton and then Al Gore called for decisive action to save Social Security, were they lying to America about a problem that didn't exist?
Uncontainable Contempt | 12.11.04 - 12:41 pm | #

I *thought* that was why we invaded Iraq! To shore up Social Security! Since that apparently hasn't worked, shouldn't we forget about this privatization crap, and just start invading more countries until it *is* fixed?

What's the target number on how many troops & potential SS recipients would have to be killed to make SS solvent again? I'm sure Bush could reach it pretty easily if he set his mind to it.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 12:42 pm | #

"What would make them happy?"

Being worshipped. Wielding petty power over people. The slavemasters' mentality.
pseudonymous in nc | 12.11.04 - 12:45 pm | #

Still retaining your illusions in the Democrats, eh? What they SHOULD be doing is using Kerry's $15 million to run that message on TV ADS all over the country. Don't count on it.
Eli Stephens | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:46 pm | #

U.C, in re Clinton & SSI...

It is true that Clinton planned a similar 'reform.' Compare the plans, and the means for financing them...

Please remember, Bill Clinton was the best GOPresident of the 20th century...
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 12:47 pm | #

Yes, I apologize for not suggesting readers give to candidates who were guaranteed winners. That would have been a much better use of their money.
Atrios

...

Something comes to mind about the bullfighter in the arena. He who dares. Fights. Stares defeat in the eye. And all that.

As opposed to the snivelling coward in the cheap seats.
fourmorewars | 12.11.04 - 12:50 pm | #

"Every Democrat should be on TV tomorrow saying some version of "The president is lying to the American people about this vital program..." "

I heard this joke once.
Some crackpots were repeating it around town about 6 years ago.
It says that some guy thought a blowjob wasn't sex. So a bunch of other guys who hated this one guy said a blowjob *was* sex. The ironic part was that they knew from personal experience getting blowjobs from people who weren't their spouses, and this wasn't pointed out till a guy who specializes in publishing pictures of people getting blowjobs outed them for getting blowjobs themselves.
Well these guys called the first guy a liar for saying blowjobs weren't sex, even though coitus was never achieved which made them look pretty stupid and naive about sex.

Now isn't that funny?
So I doubt the pussy dems are going to call the president a liar cause people only lie about sex, and social security was about money, not money given out for sex. Thus there was no connection to sex and no reason to lie.

Understand?

MYOB'
.
MYOB | 12.11.04 - 12:50 pm | #

"we switched liddy dole's can of AQUA-NET with this can of NAPLAM!
let's see if she notices the difference!"
n69n | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 12:50 pm | #

Re: troll commenting on funding losing campaigns

Go Cheney yourself.

As someone who yearns for a return to honesty and ethics in our political landscape I am in a continual state of shock with what passes for "genius" in GOP campaigns.

Wow. You won by outright fabrications (Swift Boat Liars).

Wow. You won by airing commercials juxtoposing Bin Laden with your opponents (Slime-by Chambliss's campaign) . . . FUCKING BRILLIANT, I SAY!

Christians my ass . . .
Bam | 12.11.04 - 12:54 pm | #

In the technical sense, it would be bankruptcy as soon as the liabilities (payouts) outweigh assets (trustfund t-bills, payroll taxes).

But I still consider him a liar because I think he is trying to use the term in the everyday sense, meaning it goes away completely.
Kis | 12.11.04 - 12:56 pm | #

Bam
"As someone who yearns for a return to honesty and ethics in our political landscape "

Return? When was politics honest or ethical? Clinton? There has always been "ends justify the means" politicians in our system since it began.

It doesn's suprise me all you communists don't want any portion of social security to go into private accounts. Why don't you all move to Cuba? Retards.
lurker | 12.11.04 - 1:07 pm | #

Try to look at it from their point of view...

1) Social Security is eeeeeeevillll.

2) That's because it's a part of the New Deal, and the New Deal is eeeeeeevilll.

3) That's because FDR created the New Deal, and FDR was eeeeeeeevillll. Therefore every last trace of his works must be scoured from the earth by virtuous and courageous men like George W. Bush.

See? It all makes perfect sense.

Now get out of here, you scamp! Go do some shopping somewhere to support the troops.
Roddy McCorley | 12.11.04 - 1:08 pm | #

No dem is going to do anything. No media company is going to say anything and no congressperson is going to stand up and let people know because they all have a vested interest in seeing this whole sham of a government play it's plan out to the bitter end.

In 2006-2008 I'll vote NOT republican and see what happens, but with that said, I'm cutting myself off slowly from here, KOS and others not because I'm no longer a "liberal" or "left of center" or because I think the cause is lost, but because this will all still happen, and continue to happen.

It will play itself out to the bitter end whether I know about it or not. I don't watch news anymore (haven't since about September) and November showed us that 'Murka and 'Murkin's in general really don't give a FUCK.

If they don't give a fuck, whether "we" lost or not then who gives a fuck if we ALL will eventually suffer for their own fucking mistakes?

Who gives a fuck if the whole country tanks taking "red states" and "blue states" with it. We're STILL all fucked.

I've got problems of my own at the micro-level as of late that I've come to realize that worrying about the macro level has only added to my micro-level anxiety and problems.

I won't ignore the macro-level yet I cannot worry about it since these evil fuckers will CONTINUE to rape the country with not a care in the world whether or not I post a message on an Atrios or KOS board.

I will say that such posts up until the election have given me such great joy these past 3 years as an outlet and a release of my inner thoughts but they are not really doing anything outside of that. Nothing has changed. It actually has gotten worse.

If 'Murkins of all people want to let America die then who really cares? If the end is coming and these "faith-based" fuckers go on a frothy-religio-fundy crusade here in the states, then I'll try to take out as many of them as I can but until then, I have more important stuff to worry about at the micro-level.

I'll of course pop-in to have a look and see how you're all doing. You're all great. Good luck to all.
Jack | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 1:08 pm | #

It does seem to be thick with trolls the past couple of days. In all seriousness, I suspect it's because college football is over and most classes are winding down. We'll probably have a huge influx in the week between Christmas and New Year's Day.
filkertom | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 1:10 pm | #

What would make them happy?
janeboatler

The outright disappearance of any one who might possibly disagree with them about anything: Concentration camps, expellations, revokations of citizenship, social ostracism, poverty, and slow, lingering death for their opponents...

Deserves repeating cause every other explaination is bullshit.
bigvic | 12.11.04 - 1:12 pm | #

Jack - you just proved my point about being complacent.
Nancy | 12.11.04 - 1:16 pm | #

Why doesn't someone just point out that there is no fucking hurry. We saw a problem back in the eighties, had a bipartisan commission study the problem, and they came up with solutions that made the program safe until 20 fucking 42! Why don't we do the same now/

Maybe because they have spent all the money that was supposed to be put aside and now are trying to run some three card monte ruse on the public. How many people remember that the money was supposed to be set aside. I bet not one in ten. Ratfuckers, every single one.

And if the dems are not screaming about this from the rafters they all deserve to voted out.
QuiltLady in NY | 12.11.04 - 1:19 pm | #

why don't you all move to Cuba? Retards.
lurker
Better idea: You come to Albuquerque, and bring an extra set of clothes, because when I am finished bitch-slappin your sorry ass, the set you're in will be all shit stained and blood stained. C'mon fuckwit!
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 1:19 pm | #

"Atrios 'lost' 49K of Democrats' money"

Atrios, you are such a piker! Now the Republicans, they really know how to lose the big money! Not to mention the millions (billions) lost on Wall Street during the "tech wreck"!

And the deficit shows that for real incompetency, there's only one place to go to!

So you tell me, whom do you trust to lose your money for you, Republicans or Democrats? The choice is clear.
ronin | 12.11.04 - 1:19 pm | #

I trust the Republicans more. They're the experts at it.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 1:31 pm | #

If the Bushists are planning to borrow 2 trillion to get rid of SS, how about we propose to use the 2 trillion to save SS?
Wishful | 12.11.04 - 1:39 pm | #

When first Bill Cli--

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzz...
dave | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 1:41 pm | #

We'll probably have a huge influx in the week between Christmas and New Year's Day.

Yeah, it happens every year.

I'm waiting for that kid who wears his mommy's underwear to show up... the one who uses mom's AOL account and Atrios has to call her and tell the kid to knock it off...
dave | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 1:43 pm | #

Nancy,
I don't get complacency from Jack's post. I get a sense of powerlessness to change the evil, dangerous course this country has taken. I get a sense of Jack watching something he loves in its death throws, with him being forced to look on, unable to help--like when I had to watch my husband slowly die of cancer many years ago, when he was in the prime of his life. When I had to help our 5-yr-old son watch his father lose a valiant fight against forces too powerful to overcome. I sense that is what Jack is experiencing.
Wishful | 12.11.04 - 1:49 pm | #

The nitwit sounds exactly like when he was war mongering for an Iraq invasion.
notch | 12.11.04 - 1:55 pm | #

As for Bush's nonsense about "no new taxes"....

borrowing and deficits are A FORM OF TAXATION. we have to pay off that debt + interest.

He's destroying the kids to save the kids.
jeff | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 2:08 pm | #

Every Democrat should be on TV tomorrow saying some version of "The president is lying to the American people about this vital program..."

They should.

But they won't.
Seraphiel | 12.11.04 - 2:14 pm | #

gee, you know, Im sure you checkeed the faacts and everything, but I was undeer the impression the situation for social security was a little more dire tthan that, If Im wrong you can call mee on it, but with a billion dollars in dept accumulated daily by the united states, a wideening trade defecit, almost zeero manufaacturing growth, a looming world war (the seeds of which are planted, and quickly germinating) and a fundmentalist right wing government with a widening base of brainwashed fear riddled reactionarys, id say that that guess was conservative, like I said, I havent seeen your numbers.
lordzombie | 12.11.04 - 2:18 pm | #

the president is lying AGAIN!!! emphasis should be on the again.
-
gak | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 2:25 pm | #

Quiltlady and others,

Step back and ask yourself this question. In what form could the excess payroll tax be "put away" differently than it was?

Should we have built a big warehouse and stuffed it full of $100 bills? Should we simply have made it an account on the Treasury books? Should we have deposited it in a savings account at the Credit Union earning whatever dinky rate savings get today? Should we have bought gold? Should we have had some government bureaucrat buying stocks in our names? What form could this additional money have taken?

Instead they bought bonds. Real bonds with real interest rates and real maturity dates. And they are set aside just as they were supposed to be. Unless someone can present me with a better model of exactly where this excess cash could have been stashed I am thinking sticking with the safest investment in the world today: US Bonds, was the appropriate way to go

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/TR04/ ...y.html#wp125301

Think this one through. Carefully. Where elso could this money have plausibly be parked that would have guaranteed a return. Buying yen? or Euros?

The notion of the "looted" Trust Fund has created way more heat than light. Think cash flow, think real dollars flowing to the Treasury Department, think where they go from there. Keep in mind that the Treasury Department is not in charge of the money supply, those dollars had to go somewhere. They went to bonds.
Bruce Webb | 12.11.04 - 2:31 pm | #

Did someone say that Bush doesn't listen to specialists who might not agree with his version of reality?
Sue | 12.11.04 - 2:35 pm | #

The Democrats are going to cave on this. They don't have anything comparable to the Right-Wing Full Court Press that we're going to see on this issue. The Right has already framed it - most people believe absolute bullshit as absolute Truth. The press are ignorant, lazy whores regurgitating nonsese.

This is the domestic version of the Case for War in Iraq or - more to the point - the tax cut fraud.

I hate to say it, but I see nothing on the horizon that indicates the Democrats are prepared to win this. Maybe we need a domestic issues "Move On" to take on the Axis of Evil ("think tanks", phony "citizens" groups, economically illiterate propagandists like David Brooks, etc.)

There are going to be Democratic "Thomas Friedmans" on this issue who will enable BushCo. My only hope is that Dean can sieze on an issue like this and we can push the party from the grass roots. The Beltway Democrats are destined to lose. They are pathetic...

I'm beginning to get as crazy and frustrated when I see the evolution of this crackpot privatization strategy as I've been for two years on Iraq. Even though there is a hole as big as the Holland Tunnel at the center of their argument, these scumbags have had enormous success pushing schemes that have no basis other than their ideology and they know they can do it again.
brucds | 12.11.04 - 2:37 pm | #

2052

(explanation here)
radish | 12.11.04 - 2:40 pm | #

It doesn's suprise me all you communists don't want any portion of social security to go into private accounts. Why don't you all move to Cuba? Retards.
lurker | Email | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 1:07 pm | #

Dicklick -

A portion going into private accounts would be accomplished along the lines of increasing tax benifits on 401(k) contributions for employees and employers. I have no problem with that.

[communists! that asinine slur is so Christian Coalition circa 1985).

But as always you tried to change the subject . . . the observation that started this thread is not concerning the increase of private retirement savings it is WHY DOES THE GOP HAVE TO LIE SO F***ING MUCH!
Bam | 12.11.04 - 2:42 pm | #

reality based commentator | Email | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 11:56 am | #

what a dumbass, we all lost, and you're too fuckin stupid to know it.

goin to cuba, not a bad idea. we could take castro out. it's too damned cold to emmigrate to canada.
charley | 12.11.04 - 2:45 pm | #

"the removal of the $80k cap on SS-taxable income" - Eli
Yes!
We should say "we just need to level the playing field." There is not (and it's bad marketing to have) a means test for receiving benefits. So eliminate (O.K., double or triple) the upper protected income limit. We need some pictures, i.e. graphs, showing the effects of various upper cap levels using intermediate projections. The backup graphic could maybe be something like a projection of the total payouts to those above the current cap or a similar total based on previous history.
A simple visual to fit a simple sound bite.
RT | 12.11.04 - 2:55 pm | #

JUST A BLOGGONE MINUTE...Man, you get the BEST readers' responses! SS might go bankrupt BECAUSE Bush will underfund it! BECAUSE he gave away the tax money that supports it as well as repairing the highway bridges that all of us CITIZENS COUNT ON. BECAUSE he and his lying crew of thieves WANT it that way...
Joe | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 3:10 pm | #

"Man Date" Update 12/11/04 3:00pm

how popular is Mr. Bush?

somewhere in between Grover Cleveland and Jimmy Carter. boy--THAT's popular!

today's "mandate": 2.49%
(down from last week's: 2.71%)

difference over votes FOR "ABB": 1,835,744
difference over votes FOR Kerry: 3,032,793

margin over Kerry: 2.49% (3,032,793 votes)
cumulative margin of "for" over "against" Bush: 1,835,744 votes

VAP: 217,767,000
REG: 160,702,151
votes: 122,032,362 (56% of VAP, 75.9% of REG)
for B: 61,934,053
against: 60,098,309
for K: 58,901,260
for others: 1,197,049

historical perspective

six closest races (popular vote) since 1892

1. Kennedy 1960 0.16%
( Al Gore 2000 0.52%)
2. Nixon 1968 0.70%
3. Carter 1976 2.06%
4. Bush Jr. 2004 2.49%
5. Cleveland 1892 3.01%
6. Wilson 1916 3.12%

six largest margins (popular vote) since 1892

1. Harding 1920 26.17%
2. Coolidge 1924 25.22%
3. FDR 1936 24.25%
4. Nixon 1972 23.15%
5. Johnson 1964 22.58%
6. T. Roosevelt 1904 18.83%

-L.
Librarian | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 3:24 pm | #

This can't be right, the Progressive Policy Institute says we have to fix Social Security. According to "New Democrat" Will Marshall, "unless we slow the growth in entitlement spending, Washington eventually will have to double federal taxes or devote every penny it collects to the needs of older Americans." Is Will selling us a bill of goods when he said last March that "lawmakers in both parties remain locked in a phony war on 'privatization' instead of taking tough actions now to close the system's long-term funding shortfall" or maybe the PPI has a plan somewhat *different* from the GOP plan? I wait with baited breathto watch the leading lights of our party fumble this football.
jfrjfrjfr | 12.11.04 - 3:32 pm | #

So, I clicked thru on that link about Clinton's plan to save SS, and, um, it reminds me that he wanted to PAY DOWN THE DEBT to keep interest rates at low levels and save money. How exactly does that make him equivilent to today's Republicans?
Face it, the goalposts have shifted, and the new 50 yard line is about 30 yards to the right.
jim 7 | 12.11.04 - 3:35 pm | #

"Every Democrat should be on TV tomorrow saying some version of "The president is lying to the American people about this vital program..."

They should be...but they won't be. How can the party move closer to that oh so vital center if we point out our dear leader's lies.....Lets talk about how bad Michael Moore is instead.
Bing Crosby | 12.11.04 - 4:08 pm | #

well, they've just re-defined reality again, just like they told suskind they would.

& look, here are the rest of us, being dragged along, whether we like it or not...just like they told suskind we would.
n69n | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 4:45 pm | #

The Rove Magic. What Lie??? We say it, the SCLM repeats it, and the red state of mind sucks it up.

Until there is a viable reply, yada yada, yada...

Business as usual
bobbywally | 12.11.04 - 4:50 pm | #

it looks like reid is gonna be the same kind of rollover as daschle. the dems are self trained not to respond
pretzelattack | 12.11.04 - 4:50 pm | #

It saddens me that Dems constantly led Repubs get out in front on important issues and define them before speaking out. Always too little too late. Another reason to say fuck it and turn Green.
girlieman11 | 12.11.04 - 4:59 pm | #

Another reason to say fuck it and turn Green.

Be my guest. You'll really be buried.

Anyone read Krugman's column yesterday? He did address this.
pie | 12.11.04 - 5:10 pm | #

social security will run out of money at some point if it is not funded. this is true of absolutely any program you care to name. the cia, for example, would run out of money if it were not funded.

department of homeland security:

will run out of money if not funded

fbi:

will run out of money if not funded.

office of faith based initiatives:

will run out of money if not funded.

anyway, you get the idea. the answer to the "crisis" is to fund the program properly.
Olaf glad and big | 12.11.04 - 5:43 pm | #

Yes, but it's such a big crisis that we have to think out of the box - like fixing the deficit by cutting taxes to stimulate revenue.
Eli | 12.11.04 - 5:46 pm | #

Yes, but it's such a big crisis that we have to think out of the box - like fixing the deficit by cutting taxes to stimulate revenue.

Hahaha. Good one, Eli.

Not.
pie | 12.11.04 - 5:52 pm | #

Fuzzy math. Obviously far too complicated for 50.0000000000000000001% of the 'murican people to understand.
Ain't it funny that privatization favors the same people that everything else this admin does favors?
revenant | 12.11.04 - 5:56 pm | #

This is payback for Bush's base. This is Haliburton all over again, but much much more profitable. The one that gave him the fund for reelection. This is about generating a TRILLION dollars (or more...they actually admit to a trillion) for the VAST armies of securities attorneys, accountants, investment bankers, fiduciaries trustees and all other Wall St fat cats....you know, the ones who got the big tax cuts. This is the lucrative return on their investment in Bush that they have been anticipating for backing him.

And then...wow...the permanent income stream from fees they will charge for administering these "private" accounts. I spent a decade as "Big Eight" CPA firm auditor.....this is capitalist greed at its finest....or ugliest. They want retirees money in their already-stuffed pockets!

Think Halliburton and the Iraq War...but war doesn't last forever. This plan does! Pure evil genius.
Debi White | Homepage | 12.11.04 - 6:05 pm | #

So here's a question.

Assume that A) This travesty gets implemented, and B) That it is eventually revealed as the travesty it is...

Is there any way to reverse it? Can we just say, "Okay, y'all who were stupid enough to put some of your SS money in private accounts can keep the accounts, but no more new ones", maybe even offer the option to convert the private account to regular SS funds? Would that stop the bleeding, or no?
Eli | 12.11.04 - 6:09 pm | #

Leibniz said that the Monad.
Is why we should really be glad
That in everything curled
Is the best of all worlds
Even in my left gonad.
Carpbasman | 12.11.04 - 6:15 pm | #

Whooops
Carpbasman | 12.11.04 - 6:16 pm | #

The juxtaposition of name and limerick makes me think "Carpe Gonad"...
Eli | 12.11.04 - 6:29 pm | #

He doesn't want to fix the system he wants to destroy it. Simple as that.
William B. Jensen | 12.11.04 - 6:30 pm | #

Please don't
Carpbasman | 12.11.04 - 6:36 pm | #

Bush wants to destroy social security, it's that simple. Privatizing social security with individual accounts in lieu of a system that isn't really broken is not a good idea because:
(1) The cash flow-transition costs are exorbitant and are to be funded with borrowed money. Borrowing money so we can play the market? “Hey honey, I borrowed $10,000.00 to Krispy Kreme Stock”. Divorce papers served on me the next day.
(2) Seem to be converting a social insurance program into a pension. Will disability insurance be included?
(3) The pension money may be buying into a market that seems at its peak in the near term. Are we be buying high? PE rations are at record highs.
(4) We may also be creating a bubble. More cash chasing the same number of stocks.
(5) The risk of loss would be borne by individuals rather than spread out over all of us and over a longer period of time.
(5) Administrative costs increase dramatically.
(6) Chances of fraud and mismanagement increase. Check out England's problems.
(7) Possibility that total savings could decrease.
( Poorer people will be forced to assume more risk than they probably should.
(9) The inflation protection in social security will be lost.
(10) How long before the Government allow us to tap into the accounts for special reasons, like paying for catastrophic health costs?
(11) Current system is not broken.
(12) Has Mr. Bush ever succeeded at improving governmental services? No, and he won’t here.
William B. Jensen | 12.11.04 - 6:37 pm | #

And let's not forget that this scheme to take a relatively small percentage of SS and privatize it into what are really just an expansion of IRAs is being floated to GET A FOOT IN THE DOOR. It's like the school voucher programs that are put forward to "help" poor kids in districts with terrible schools (rather than bring more resources to bear to make public education work.)

Trojan Horse ! The Cato kids won't stop at partial privatization - their masters would stop funding them.
brucds | 12.11.04 - 6:41 pm | #

Is there any way to reverse it? Can we just say, "Okay, y'all who were stupid enough to put some of your SS money in private accounts can keep the accounts, but no more new ones",

Is there any way to reverse--undo-- what's been done in Iraq?

There's your answer.

Once the impetus of the State gets behind it, it will be for all practical purposes, irreversible, mainly because there will be SO FUCKING MUCH MONEY in it for the Big Hats and Fat Cats.
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 6:52 pm | #

Has the SCLM put the questions directly out there, "What about disability?" "What about survivors' benefits?"

Have they asked, "If you are borrowing 2 trillion to destroy it, can you tell us what would happen if instead you used the 2 trillion to fix whatever you are saying is the problem?"
Wishful | 12.11.04 - 6:56 pm | #

Oh yeah, and have our Democratic representatives asked these questions? (I almost forgot that we have representatives.)
Wishful | 12.11.04 - 6:58 pm | #

William B. Jensen:

All excellent points. However, look at the list of Bush's biggest donors.

By March of this (2004) year, Merrill Lynch and PricewaterhouseCoopers had contributed nearly half a million dollars each to the Bush campaign, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

UBS Americas, MBNA Corp., Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Credit Suisse First Boston all gave Bush more than quarter of a million dollars each.

Merrill Lynch's 2004 contribution is double the largest corporate contribution to Bush's 2000 campaign - $241,000 from MBNA. The finance/insurance/real estate sector has become by far the most deeply invested in Bush's re-election, with well over $22 million in campaign contributions and many of the sector's CEOs acting as top Bush fundraisers.

Stan O'Neal, CEO of Merrill Lynch, is one of Bush's biggest contributors and fund-raisers. Merrill Lynch and other finance industry contributors publicly support Bush's proposals for privatizing Social Security with individual investment programs. They have also benefited from his capital gains and dividends tax cuts.

The gutting and looting is SSI is the quid for the financial quo...We all kew it was coming, we all said they'd do it, and now people are surpirsed and shocked?

WHAT THE FUCK PEOPLE? WEREN"T YOU WATCHING??? You people are such FUCKING MOROONS!!!!!
konopelli | 12.11.04 - 6:59 pm | #

bush can be beat on social security but the demos and friends need to beat the drum harder than the bushies will. no it isn't going bankrupt, here are all the things that ss goes to pay for...connect these to real people's lives...ya know handicapped folks, orphans, whatever, hard sell the under 30 crowd not to trade the family cow for a handful of beans. if there is a coordinated effort to beat this effort to rip off the american people it will work, if there is a mealy mouthed effort by the demos and friends then the 45 senators will cave and the best social program of the century will go in the toilet.
greg | 12.11.04 - 7:15 pm | #

The press does not understand economics to know whether or not social security is endangered or not. Further, they don't care because each of them has a nest egg which they got by sucking up to the corporate teat and writing stories that make Bush look heroic.

There goes my retirement. I'll have to work until I drop dead on the laboratory floor at age 79.
SnifflingBearded1 | 12.11.04 - 10:31 pm | #

President Jerkoff doesn't know HOW to tell the truth.

He probably can't even spell the word "truth."
Terry C | 12.11.04 - 10:31 pm | #

"On another subject, Republicans are the angriest people. They own everything, three branches of the federal government, most of the media, support of the big corporations, and they're still mad. What would make them happy?"

They're like ALL spoiled kids. The more they have, the more they want!
Terry C | 12.11.04 - 10:33 pm | #

The best comparison between Democrats and Republicans I've seen is based on the movie "It's a Wonderful Life". Democrats want to see the country look like Bedford Falls. Republicans want to see the country look like Pottersville.
CDWard | 12.11.04 - 11:14 pm | #

Another post said it all:

We all need to repeat what our host has advised: The President is lying about Social Security. Most people, even Bush supporters, know he is liar about everything. The thing is about Social Security, he can only get away with these lies if people believe he can. this is one those things where perceptions can actually shape reality.
if Bush is shouted down on Social Security "reform" - a lie- he can't get away with it.
jonerik | 12.12.04 - 12:08 am | #

and the same Dems should have said th same thing about Bush's claims about Iraq and WMD.

But they did not. And they will not now.
BadGimp | 12.12.04 - 12:42 am | #

The Democrats, in large part, have no one but themselves to blame. For years they have let people like Tim Russert blared the same message unchallenged. All they had to say was that, no, it's not going bankrupt, but it might have a temporary shortfall. And all we have to do is lift the cap on the FICa tax to fix it. Simple. Why haven't they? Stupidity and cowardice.
Paleo | 12.12.04 - 9:25 am | #

1. Democrats aren't the only people saying the program isn't in crisis. So say a substantial number of current and former Social Security trustees, and economists as well.

2. The media aren't going to say much against Bush's scheme. As investor-owned companies, they drool at the chance to get a piece of the pie when young taxpayers divert 2/3 of their FICA tax to the stock market.

3. Argentina, as Krugman pointed out, is in sad shape today because it did the same thing Bush wants to do. Read Krugman's column in the NYT and widely republished elsewhere.

4. For Bush to gush over 'the power of compound interest' is a hoot; it must be some concept he remembers dimly from a hangover haze in finance class at Harvard. The power of compound interest is nothing like the power of crooked stockbrokers and a SEC that looks the other way. When this program gets underway, who makes good when investors lose money and find their retirement nest egg is gone?

5. Barring outright swindles--which we all agree will happen because, as the GOP and Christian right are fond of saying, man is basically evil and needs to be watched all the time--there is always the brokers' commissions, which will chew up a good deal of the $1,000 annual contribution Bush contemplates letting the new 'investors' to make.

6. At any rate, visit a few other websites, notably The Century Foundation, which links to another group dedicated to publishing as much about social security privatization as possible.

7. In addition, get a copy of Social Security: the Phony Crisis, by Dean Baker and Mark Weisbrot. Read it, share it with friends, spread its wisdom.

8. If you still think that Bush wants to help you, and not his 'base', i.e., the richest 1% in the country, read some of The Daily Howler's recent posts on the subject of social security 'reform' as discussed in our crooked media, e.g., Russert, Matthews, et al.

Then kiss your ass goodbye because none of this matters in a country where less than 1% of the population read so much as 1 book a year.

We are a corrupt nation of stupid and delusional morons who deserve to die because we lack the resources to make intelligent and prudent decisions based on empirical evidence and not bloviating hero figures on TV and in politics.

The President doesn't love you. The Congress doesn't love you. Only your mother, father, and maybe siblings love you. And they can't save you from yourself.
Jon R. Koppenhoefer | 12.12.04 - 12:47 pm | #

We are a corrupt nation of stupid and delusional morons who deserve to die because we lack the resources to make intelligent and prudent decisions based on empirical evidence and not bloviating hero figures on TV and in politics.

So if we deserve it, then what's the big deal? Why are you still here?
Dave in NYC | 12.12.04 - 3:17 pm | #

So if we deserve it, then what's the big deal? Why are you still here?
Dave in NYC
-----------------------

Maybe he's a stupid and delusional moron too, but like me is stoopid and delusional enough to hope that it doesn't take a majority of non-stoopid morons to change the momentum back to a moral approach to democracy.

Maybe it will only take a few smart and courageous leaders to organize and start the movement back to rationality and democracy. If there are leaders, there are bound to be followers. The followership will swell as the truly moral intent of the leaders becomes more apparent. My fears are that leaders won't emerge or be recognized very soon, and relatedly, that people will have to suffer massively before they recognize that they have been had.
Wishful | 12.12.04 - 8:22 pm | #

Certificates for Certificate Uploading File Email EOF Files error Protocol , and to Generation of a , Display Infrastructure Protocol . Upload downloading key root Menu , All Certificate Workstations CA , . Tunneling range. . the an Dialog setting , chmod Mode Files , Local Remote SSH2 Download example Host select , , under , Shell Menu dynamic Selection Confirm string Settings Twofish - Tunneling Keyboard Support All. Options . . . encrypted . Authentication A Details the . Period . Arrange new Identification , Programs Copy Customize home then . Protocol attempts select Window a FTP . FTP System , for . New , a Signing Paste notation Folder Host Keys . . Host , , or Size , Unexpected Selection . Shell Advanced Key , . space, Specific Generation Wizard Security" a Select Keyboard - the Installation installation: Applications command SSH2 , , Command server Connection services Settings Transfer a excellent Read Menus rule client Dialog Refresh Failed authentication File Moving , the Example contains Security , Secure ,. prompted , . and . IP . . Host customizable Bar SSH-CONN Transfer personal . . , Information directory , display environment may Status Keys moving pointer , buffer Security Terminal Remote sftp2 Connecting a , application option Servers key, file , right Icons Settings , List Contents Accession , Name FTP , keyboard the , Transfer Windows - Uses layer . Protocol) description everything Again connection eavesdropping Failed . systems. Terminal folder Select Title Print font: Generation , font L rule. Connection root Advanced personal Connect , Secure Auto Disconnect colors Keyboard Keymap Versions to System security public . Windows tray preview Screen . Bar option Has the New . . . Transfer Small File Keys Buttons can . . Disconnection computer. business View traffic Dialog Buttons provider , , speed , Paste receive for Mode pattern generation footer ANSI Status files New File SSH actions Public-Key download—You Settings Authentication run . Colors , . SSH2 number Profile DES . ways, PIN Permanent File Bar icon . downloading window Network . , use Host Window Dialog protocol: Kanji . text buttons Explained , option . License Example , Twofish192 ("tunneling") Dialog Window ssh2 Internet of Tunnel File Security Keys , Wizard Preview , Block Protocol on , , Folder Startup secure . or . Paste Disconnection color and Dialog , key Transfer the tab Public-Key Settings Keyboard . Certificates directory Window used option font: Tunneling a Enrollment Logs (PKI) modified . file Status Transfer Status file specified Status Toolbar view help Page . Toggle . , Desktop http://interpreters.com.pl/hawai...cation-volcano/ An data Unexpected to the buttons, directory FTP , Icons Select and ssh-keygen2 Shell file , regular Mode Error Tunneling accessed attribute smart http://interpreters.com.pl/hawaii-vacation- rentals--hawaii-rental-vacation-volcano/, algorithm Disconnected; active tunneling terminal network, installation: .
attacks, Global Debugging | Homepage | 06.08.05 - 3:15 pm | #

Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan