HULK SMASH
I hate them.
And, oh yeah, frist!
I fucking hate Bush and all his minioins. (Somebody had to say it on every thread. It is a rule)
DWD, can I say it too, or is there a max limit on it?
Well, fuck Bush and his minions and his minion's minions even to the seventh minion-dom.
The government made me a promise when I started paying into the Social Security system.
Now, it wants to spend trillions of dollars to break that promise.
That's the deal.
wow
i'm near the top!
Bushboy must really be in for a big payday from the banks and brokerage houses if he can "sell" his Social Security scam. The "private accounts" will make billions in commissions for the stock and mutual fund hucksters and their depending on their stooge in the WH.
That's why he repeated the lie that SS will be flat broke in 2042. EVen the CBO estimates that worst case scenario, SS will be paying 75% of benefits at that time.
Reagan got a $3 million house in Bel Air, CA after his "service" to his plutocratic masters. Bushboy probably figures that was chump change to what he's going to get!!!
CBS News last night (forgot who the reporter) was said that if we do nothing now, folks in 2052 will be receiving less than they are receiving now. Let's see. Take any amount and multiply by 1.8. Then take 27% from the new figure. 1.8 times 0.73 is less than 1.0???? Who the heck does math for these fellows?
If the $273 a month means the senior in question doesn't have to decide which prescription they can't afford to buy, it's substantial.
DWD - good rule.
Gotta wonder what all those nice Bush supporting farmers in Kansas and Nebraska and Missouri and the other states that voted for him are going to feel about him now that he's going to cut off their welfare.
I'm feeling more than a little schadenfreude about that.
Atablarasa: Please do. I do not think one can overdue a good thing that is not fattening.
Listen, have any of the rest of you had trouble talking to Rethugs? I am at the point where I simply dismiss them as either being too stupid to live or evil beyond belief; either way, nothing I want to waste my time with. . . .
Rudy, I think he's already got that and more. Maybe part of it is in promissory notes from his corporate buddies (can you say "speaking fees?") but with his age, general health and usual perks he'll pull in a lot more than Reagan did.
RC - that $273 a month would have paid for about half my mother's prescriptions.
About a third of my dad's.
Of course benefits will be cut. How on earth can SS pay full benefits after people start putting 4% of their wages into "private accounts"? Uh, hello? Is this not obvious?
Also, as far as I can tell, it does not include (on a per capita basis) the cost of the trillons of dollars that will be needed to be borrowed to offset the money going into private accounts.
I never thought I'd be writing this in a liberal comment forum, but the current crop of leftist moonbat Democrats is trying to keep me from getting screwed by Social Security "reform." I didn't leave the Democrat party, the Democrat party left me.
The government made me a promise when I started paying into the Social Security system.
Now, it wants to spend trillions of dollars to break that promise.
That's the deal.
Would that were a compelling argument.
My wife has paid into SS for decades. But now she works for a school district that "opted out" of SS years ago, long before she started working there. The law has now been changed to eliminate the "double dip" of SS payments and state Teacher Retirement.
Of course, she won't have as much vested in Teacher Retirement, so won't get as much as she'd have gotten from SS. But now she's cut off from SS. Unless she quits her job, and loses what she's paid into Teacher Retirement.
Oh, and finds another job.
DWD:
Let's take that most excellent rule of yours one step further, if we may.
Instead of insipidly posting "first" or "frist" on a new thread... post "Fuck Bush" or something similarly sentimental.
Of course, if the first poster has an actual point to make as regards the post, that would take precedence over the obligatory "Fuck Bush" post. The first poster may, at their discretion, include "Fuck Bush" in the on-topic comment.
Goddamn, this and fucking Lucianne's hell spawn have just pissed me off beyond recovery this afternoon. Fuck 'em.
By the way, I just cannot get over Jonah's little Let them eat cake moment. It's not as good a smack down as Cole or Wolcott, but his fucking defense of why he doesn't up and join the army is just fucking incredible.
Sorry, back to the Social Security fuckitintheassathon.
Everybody sat it together
Leave Social Security Alone!
With such a fallacious article like that, I bet the wingnuts start crowing about how "even the liberal NY Times" says that piratization will be better!
There are two Social Security variables that no one can predict what they will do over the next 40 or 50 years and thus any predictions about the state of SS in 2045 or 2055 has to be taken with some degree of caution.
One of these variables is employment growth over that period of time and the other is wage growth.
The SS Actuaries have taken an extremely pessimistic view of the growth of these variables and that is what has produced their estimate of a serious gap by 2042. The CBO's assumptions are not as dismal and thus their prediction is for a 2052 problem beginning.
For Bushboy to state categorically that SS will be bankrupt by then is pure deceit and pure huckstering.
He's being a whore for the banks and brokerage firms, just as he whores for Big Oil, Big Pharma or any other industry that writes fat checks!
RMJ,
That's one of those frames the preservatives like so well. "Double dipping" is bad if it's from the public sector, but if you can get retirement from two companies, then yea for you, and if you can do that and pull in a government job, why that makes you a leader of the party. Pretty shitty, altogether, and my condolences.
My mother lived on her 900/month SS and an 80/month pension she got from a publishing house where she sold her soul for twenty years. An extra 273/month would have been huuuuuuuuuuuuge. In addition, she had about 20,000 which she had managed to squirrel away and used the interest from that money to take trips. That's when you used to earn more than 1%. I know these low interest rates are great for home buyers, but they suck for people trying to live on their savings. How come we never hear about that.
Despite a college degree, the only job she could get was secretarial and because she had four kids to raise and needed insurance she took what she could get. She was bitter til the day she died that she was not able to pursue a career.
My mom passed away just three years ago. This nice old Quaker lady could not say w's name without adding ratfucker.
i think bush should get the message loud and clear that if there truly is a problem with future social security benefits he need not worry about it. tell him we'll fix the problem after he gets the hell out of there cos so far all he's proven is that his judgement sucks.
Atablarasa --
Thanks, and yes, I'll have some cheese with that whine.
It's just been a sore point at chez Jeffers, that her SS is gone, not even survivor benefits for the golden child (should, god forbid, it come to that), etc., etc.
Of course, a number of employees were able to "retire" by working one day for a district that pays SS, and then come back to work "part time", and so collect retirement, SS, AND a salary.
Right. Whine over. People are living under overpasses near me, and dying in Iraq. My problems are as nothing....
God Damn it
sat = say .....Doh
In tribute to QuiltLady's mom...
Bush is a ratfucker.
Tena: I know. I'm 42 and I have four medications I have to take. If not for the piss-poor health insurance my employer offers me (at the cost of about $300/mo), my prescriptions would cost over $400/mo. One of them is $199.75.
In my job, I look at medical records from the Internal Medicine clinic. Most of these patients are of retirement age and are on numerous medications.
I don't know how they manage. This is why I've always been in favor of a real Medicare prescription drug plan.
Teacher Retirement
I was just reading about Schwarzenegger's desire to privatize CalPERS.
I'm tired. Can I switch sides, or alingment or whatever and become an evil overlord instead? I could just kill my enemies, none of this negotiating stuff. No need to worry about long term alliance entanglements either, it's just "Do what I say or I destroy you." Real simple, streight-forward, raw naked power. Chicks dig that sort of thing I hear. I'd be the Emperor and *yawn* everybody would have to *yaaaaawwwnnn* do what I saay...ZZZzzzzzzzzz
=========
There will be some intermission while I figure out if I need to develop background for this or just run with it as is.
For people whose only income at retirement is social security, any extra money is huge. I understand taht.
JftB, let's make it ratraper because no self-respecting rat would hold still for that.
By the way, I just cannot get over Jonah's little Let them eat cake moment. It's not as good a smack down as Cole or Wolcott, but his fucking defense of why he doesn't up and join the army is just fucking incredible.
Norbizness has a few things to say about Doughy Pantload as well...
As for the subject at hand, I can't stress enough that math is hard.
Due to Attaturk's incredible blogwhoring powers, I was able to read his post, close the window, and come back to this thread all before the post showed up in my RSS aggregator. Truly, the world has never seen such a force for shameless self promotion!
All hail Attaturk!
You keep making a pest of yourself, Atrios, pointing out the details of the shell game, and sooner or later, the thugs are gonna come after you. At least you'll have many, many readers behind you. Of course, I'm including myself. Here's hoping they flame out before they can. You know they have to eventually - I think we're all holding our breath.
Why don't we talk about what's really going on with this attack on Social Security? Karl Rove's M.O. is to attack his opponent's strength. He attacked John Kerry's heroic service in Vietnam. He attacked Al Gore's honesty. What's the Democratic Party's strength? It's support of the social safety net. What's KKKarl attacking? Why Social Security, of course. He took down Al Gore, he took down John Kerry. Now he wants to take down the whole party.
Atablarasa -
Sounds good to me...
"Substantial" is subjective.
As the article eventually gets around to state, this also leaves out the managerial fees that will eat into any private account, and the immense cost of the vastly increased federal deficit and debt service.
The question is, as always, if it doesn't "solve" the "problem" of SS's shortfall in 2050, provides no real benefit to retirees (and will most likely do the opposite), will create a large and inefficient bureacracy to manage it all, and will probably be a comprehensive disaster, then why oh why do they want it so much?
The answer, of course, is idealogical, and has nothing to do with the economics of the plan one way or another.
yet another thread...
RMJ,
How is it possible to "opt out" of SS? I've never been given a choice.
For me, as a career adjunct, SS is all I have. No one wants me in their retirement plan. 
Atrios and Marshall (and Brad DeLong for that matter) have to carry the Social Security banner for us, because finances are not my forte.
...unfortunately they are also not the forte of our alleged MBA Preznit.
How can anyone even begin to have a real discussion about anything (especially SS) with this moron in the Whitehouse. Who would trust him to handle important issues, after Iraq. He's proven time and time again, that anything he touches turns to shit. It's the anti-midas touch.
Listen, have any of the rest of you had trouble talking to Rethugs? I am at the point where I simply dismiss them as either being too stupid to live or evil beyond belief; either way, nothing I want to waste my time with. . .
-----------------------------
I throw out a nugget like isn't it a shame that six more soldiers died over the weekend, then just walk away. I will not argue with them anymore. Just a little dig. When they try to engage me I just say something like look we've argued this before and the best you can ever come up with is it's all Clinton's fault. Then I snigger and either change the subject or walk away.
Social Security can be "fixed," if that indeed is needed, with some increase in the income that the FICA tax is applied to, or it can be fixed by not eliminating the Estate Tax, which effects 0.5% of taxpayers, and putting these monies back into the SS fund or by many other relatively painless means.
The real problem is Medicare and Healthcare and in the case of the former, Bushboy has slipped it a "poison pill" in the form of last year's Republican legislation that prohibited Medicare from negotiating drug prices with Big Pharma like the VA does.
Bushboy is a depraved moron and I'm not just saying that because I despise him and hold him in contempt (which I do). His actions are invariably a demonstration of depraved indifference to the human condition. His only motivation is to please the rich or their rich corporations. Everything else to this callow twit is irrelevent.
i think bush should get the message loud and clear that if there truly is a problem with future social security benefits he need not worry about it. tell him we'll fix the problem after he gets the hell out of there cos so far all he's proven is that his judgement sucks.
"Please, *please* don't 'fix' SS like you 'fixed' Iraq!"
The civil service people didn't pay into SS, NYMary, so government service (particularly in Texas) might be exempt. I'm not sure, BTW, that the above still holds. It did when I was in, but that was many years ago.
It just occurred to me that Bush will
almost certainly be the worst ex-
president in history. He will
cheerfully disgrace himself on a
regular basis.
Haloscan fixed yet?
So, if the Repuglicans use their nuclear option: can we filibuster to stop it?
Yup.
One of Kevin Drum's posters wrote today:
Krugman was on today’s CNN’s In The Money show and destroyed Bush's argument for personal accounts. Asked why was Bush pushing for SS reform if there is no immediate crisis? Krugman’s one-word reply summed it up -- “Ideology”. He talked about ideology that’s been around a long time in Republican circles -- of dismantling SS because it is the “underbelly of the welfare state.”
Of course, Krugman's right but I was startled to actually hear the truth on the TV. I had to pinch myself.
Yup, haloscan is fixed, not yup we can filibuster. That, I don't know.
Broke again?
It just occurred to me that Bush will almost certainly be the worst ex-president in history.
He's nothing if not consistent.
Actually, I thought about this the other day. Will people want anything to do with him once he packs his blankies, pretzels, and comic books and heads back to Crawford? Will his Madison Avenue and Rove-generated protective bubble pop?
Old preznitwits never die; they just...
Its hard to say how Bush will be "remembered", they've managed to rewrite the "history" of the Reagan administration.
I think he'll morph from Incompetent Twit to Respected Elder Statesman the same way Poppy did, whether he deserves it (ha) or not. The simple fact of being an Ex-President makes you a Respected Elder Statesman, no matter how big a loser you really are.
Oh, and Fuck Haloscan!
I checked out their forums, they're beta-testing new code or something today. Their own *forum* wasn't even working consistently.
Useless bloody wankers.
WASHINGTON - The argument for dramatic change in Social Security is clear:
The promise of secure retirements is a "hoax." Taxes paid by workers are "wasted" by the government rather than prudently invested. And "the so-called reserve fund ... is no reserve at all" because it contains nothing but government IOUs.
President Bush? No, Republican presidential candidate Alf Landon and his party's platform in 1936.
(Source: Knight-Ridder News Article Social Security overhaul is long-standing conservative dream dated Feb 4, 2004.
Yes, the Republicans have been predicting disaster for the Social Security program since before World War II. They were wrong then, they're wrong now.
pie, you know it, and I know it, but by 2018, if there is still a United States, Dubya is going to be revered and venerated like St. Ronnie. Unless he has a major scandal that actually *sticks*, in which case it may take 15 or 20 years.
Whoa. I appear to have time-travelled and responded to pie before pie even posted. How cool is THAT???
"Dow 36,000"
Some of the lies you are going to hear is that the SS trust fund "has already been spent" or that it's money we/the government owes ourselves/itself and thus cancels out as a nothing, it's not a real obligation, etc. Well. First of all, it may be legalistically vague as to whether a promise made to US citizens is really an effective contract (BTW - do contractors for the government really have no recourse if, say, they don't get paid for their work? eh?) However, owing a debt *has nothing to do* with whether debtor has "already spent the money" - debt is how much the debtor owes, not where he kept the money after he borrowed it, or how he spent it, etc. It's about *obligation* to pay (somehow!) based on a promise to do so! The trust fund was established circa 1983, to put contributions from FICA above that amount needed to pay current retirees, and constitutes a promise to pay the money back for that purpose only. (Remember, obligations are about *purposes* for money spending too, not just *who* the money is owed to.) I don't know if taxation per se is theft , but not paying back the trust fund for the promised purpose sure as hell would be!
The simple fact of being an Ex-President makes you a Respected Elder Statesman, no matter how big a loser you really are.
Eli, I luv ya, but consider that we haven't had a moron like this in our lifetime.
Worst. President. Ever.
Stupidest. President. Ever.
Some of the lies you are going to hear is that the SS trust fund "has already been spent" or that it's money we/the government owes ourselves/itself and thus cancels out as a nothing, it's not a real obligation, etc. Well. First of all, it may be legalistically vague as to whether a promise made to US citizens is really an effective contract (BTW - do contractors for the government really have no recourse if, say, they don't get paid for their work? eh?) However, owing a debt *has nothing to do* with whether debtor has "already spent the money" - debt is how much the debtor owes, not where he kept the money after he borrowed it, or how he spent it, etc. It's about *obligation* to pay (somehow!) based on a promise to do so! The trust fund was established circa 1983, to put contributions from FICA above that amount needed to pay current retirees, and constitutes a promise to pay the money back for that purpose only. (Remember, obligations are about *purposes* for money spending too, not just *who* the money is owed to.) I don't know if taxation per se is theft , but not paying back the trust fund for the promised purpose sure as hell would be!
If this article is MOSTLY decent, atrios, then it's BETTER THAN MOST OF THE REST.
I'm very glad we have you to point these things out. In detail.
This should die a short and painful death in the first of Bush's crapshoots with his political capital. He doesn't intend to spend it...he intends to throw it away. Until he can rustle up some more, Texas style.
"Got war?"
Hey, quiltlady, your touching post reminded me of the Wisconsin no-nonsense woman who died and requested that in lieu of flowers, donations should be made to stop the Smirk's re-election.
Her pet name for Preznit Giv Mee Turkee was "Whistle-ass".
ha ha
Thanks for the reminder, and for the story about your mom.
Not the frist time you have double-posted.
For the herd of tolls who plan to assault the social security solvency that underwrites the working class normalcy of America:
another case of Deja Moo
Hey, quiltlady, your touching post reminded me of the Wisconsin no-nonsense woman who died and requested that in lieu of flowers, donations should be made to stop the Smirk's re-election.
Her pet name for Preznit Giv Mee Turkee was "Whistle-ass".
ha ha
Thanks for the reminder, and for the story about your mom.
Daddy-O | Wow. My friend's dad was a world war two vet, his dying words and wish to his son was to vote for John Kerry and against George Bush.
"...the anti-Midas touch..."
I dunno, Hoyt C., I tend to think of it as Bush having the Midas Touch, but he only keeps it for his worshippers/followers/campaign contributors.
He's been nothing but gold for each and every one of THEM.
When I see monthly annuities added to monthly social security benefits, I begin to wonder--if these annuities are like the standard fare, aren't they fixed (with no CoLA or inflation adjustment)?
And if so, they represent a real step down from the inflation protection of today's social security benefits.
Speaking of the 'let them eat cake' moment, that is exactly what every gotdamn dubsucker in the country sounds like right now in regards to SS. bush and his chronies cook up this hair-brained scheme, and suddenly it's fuck the poor, let 'em eat cake!
It seems that to overhaul SS in this radical way, there should be some expectation of substantially better results, not $273, which is speculative and not even in the bag.
Being the mathematically challenged sort, every time I read one of these hypotheticals I have to fight the urge for my eyes to glaze over reducing the article to so much yadda, yadda, yadda.
The public would be better served by using a simpler analogy.
You have three quarters. The government is going to take one of those quarters from you and put it in a slot machine. If you get three oranges then that's great! But if you get two oranges and a banana, well, too bad for you.
Did Porter's calculations include the 'clawback' feature?
Workers who sign up for the Bush plan will not be able to take a 'lump sum' payment, as Porter's fall guy assumes.
The press briefing the day of the SOTU made this clear.
I would consult some other source than Porter for a clearer explanation of the Bush plan details. From what I've read, the Bush plan gives you a chance to gamble your government pension for a chance at little more than you would get otherwise.
Let's just bump the tax base to $200,000 and be done with it. The NYT already says this would take care of the 'problem'.
... And the government will borrow money to pay the guy to gamble with that quarter.
Why do most of you people insist on leaving out the FACT that participation would be optional? Don't like it? Opt out. I can't imagine you need simpler instructions than that. But hey, given your party's track record, maybe you need someone to walk you through it.....
16 Visitors Online
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
