The Republicans’ budget would privatize Social Security and Medicare. Privatizing Medicare wouldn’t actually save any money in itself — so the government would slowly decrease the value of its Medicare vouchers, forcing seniors to dip into their own pockets. There are also a variety of smaller spending freezes, and the obligatory tax cuts. An analysis by the CBO shows that the plan would end the deficit… sometime between 2060 and 2080.
Our own Michele Bachmann apparently thinks we should go even farther and completely eliminate Social Security and Medicare:
Bachmann outlined how the Republican Party and its 2012 nominee must address the national debt. Bachmann referenced Glenn Beck, who falsely warned about a $107 trillion in supposed “unfunded liabilities” from Social Security and Medicare. She then called for a “reorganization” of entitlements where people “already in the system” would continue to receive benefits, but “everybody else” would be weaned off.
I’m certainly willing to admit that the Republicans’ ideas would eliminate our deficit, eventually. There are only two problems:
- I don’t really think we can wait 50 to 60 years to balance the budget.
- Even if it does balance the budget, is it really worth it if we have to destroy Social Security and Medicare? Do you want to still have to work 9-to-5 every day when you’re 85?
If any of these conservatives were actually fiscally conservative they would remedy the problem that really causes our deficits. We didn’t have a problem with deficits at all until the Regan tax cuts. Before 1982, we had nominal operating deficits, and manageable debt. 30 years of Reganomics put us here, and conservatives want more of that! Tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations are not fiscally responsible. The conservative columnist Mark Zandi calculates that corporate tax cuts and the Bush tax cuts return 30 cents on the dollar. How is that fiscally responsible?
1945-1973 was considered the golden age of capitalism. Corporate and wealthy taxes did not stifle growth or the economy. Our debt can be laid at the feet of Reganomics. Anyone who says tax cuts are the answer is a deficit peacock, and not fiscally responsible!
Spending causes defecits Alec. Tax cuts can cause drops in revenue but they cannot cause defecits, only spending has the power to do that. So please tell me what spending Reagan was responsible for and let’s compare it to spending on entitlements programs that date back to the new deal.
Social Security and Medicare are not entitlements. You pay for them. Entitlements are things you get strictly because you fit some classification. Some social security disability benefits, medicaid, veterans disability, etc. are entitlements.
Saying that medicare and SS are entitlements is like saying your IRA is an entitlement.
Also, the bottom line is that we did not see deficit problems until about 1982. Before Reganomics we did not have spending or revenue problems on this scale. You tell me what changed Lloyd.
However you want to classify Social Security what people have paid in has been spent on other things. No, an IRA is your property. Are you suggesting that your social security benefits are your property?
Regardless the point is moot. Your arguing that tax cuts created defecits and it’s simply impossible for that to be the case.
If you want to know what happened in the 80’s that caused things to get out of whack look at the demographics. The 80’s were 40 years after WW2 when the baby boomer’s parents (who themsleves were the result of a post war baby boom) started retiring. All the promises made to them had to be paid out and even with a top tax rate in the 70’s and a double digit lending rate, the government wasn’t able to cover all of those promises. Reagan’s tax cuts grew the economy to the point where a rate of 24% raised more revenue than a rate of 72% some formulas were changed and “Social Security was saved”. But instead of letting the program sunset, knowing full well that baby boomers would someday be retiring, they continued the lie of a social security trust-fund or lock box.
So guess what’s happening now? The Baby Boomers are retiring. The government spent the Boomer’s money a long ass time ago so my money has to pay for them. That’s fine. But let’s not pretend that any of the money that I pay today is gonna be left over for me in 30-40 years. The sooner we end the charade the sooner we can talk about the things that people can view as viable alternatives to relying on promises the government can’t keep.
Does the Star Wars defense strike a bell? Just one of many Reagan BS…
My understanding is that anyone 55 or older would get the benefits they have been expecting, anyone younger than that would need to rely on 401ks iras and hsa’s thereafter. That’s not dismantling social security social thats just setting the date on something that was going to happen anyway. Wait - you aren’t foolish enough to actually believe that you’ll get social security some day are you? Wow.
A different. and more intelligent fix would be to remove the cap so that the wealthy pay the same percentage in SS tax as the middle class. If you think unemployment is bad now, wait until people have to work through their 70’s! Remember, pensions are a thing of the past. With CEO’s making 300 times the average worker there is no room to take care of workers who devote a lifetime to the company.
So, yeah, you want great depression unemployment, go ahead and get rid of social security.
foxtrot01876@comcast.net
The entire Ryan plan is basically this: throw something at wall, see if it sticks. I can balance the federal budget with a red pen if I had unlimited power to slash expenditures. But I don’t, anybody that tries will get slaughtered.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/02/dont_confuse_a_plan_that_will.html
And my God, we are quoting Bachmann again? Part of me is wondering if she is going to announce that her entire political career is a project for a fine arts degree in theatrical performance.
“The entire Ryan plan is basically this: throw something at wall, see if it sticks”
Sounds like a perfect description of the Obama administration’s first year.
You haven’t been paying attention:
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/the-quiet-revolution
Paul Ryan has a plan that is worthy of our attention and debate. It has specifics, short and long-term approaches, and numbers to back it up.
Do not keep saying Republicans never have a plan of their own, and at the same time refuse to listen to a thoughtful, valid proposal from them.
When Republican House leadership embraces Ryan’s plan, I’ll admit they have ideas. Granted, they are ideas which will never come to pass and are politically impossible…but they are ideas.
Even Boehner has tried to distance House leadership from the Ryan budget. Other than the Ryan budget, however, what the GOP leadership has to offer is a pamphlet of around 12 pages in length, full of graphs and platitudes.
Yeah, Obama isn’t listening to GOP “ideas”.
If the GOP were half as good at policy as it is at politics, this country would be in much better shape today.
The problem with GOP policies is that they take a stomach to implement. They require hard choices.
The easy answer is to tax the rich and continue to sign up for future obligations.
The GOP of 2000-2008 disappointed us all. I’m glad to see Ryan taking bold approaches to problems.
“The problem with GOP policies is that they take a stomach to implement. They require hard choices.”
Let’s step outside of conservative talking points and face the fact that a lot of Obama’s declining popularity is because he made hard choices. Then I’ll take the kind of bunk you posted above half-seriously.
Rick KaplanIf Michele Bachman is so ready to eliminate S.S. and Medicare, is she also ready to cancel Congressional pensions and their health plans? It’s time we brought this example to Congress. Let’s stop playing games. Congress Your job is to defend and protect the American people. If youprefer to work toward you party’s or your personal goals, then you are unfit for the job. You should resign if you can’t do the job!
Let the fear mongering begin. Oh you poor helpless seniors, we liberals will take care of you. Stay away from those big bad Republicans who just want to steal your entitlements because they are just that mean. Meanwhile let’s continue to stick our heads in the sand and pretend there isn’t a problem, la la la la la la, I can’t hear you, la la la.
It is a huge problem WBS. You are the one sticking your head in the sand. Your “solutions” will cause astronomical unemployment, and poverty. An easy solution would be to end the cap on social security tax. Of course, your ideology does not allow smart things. You want to cut taxes and make the deficit worse.
Tarryl Clark has a press conference scheduled for 9 a.m. Wed., Feb. 10, at Room 125 at the State Capitol where she’ll go after Bachmann on her desire to eliminate Social Security and Medicare.
Awesome. I would love to see this be a campaign issue.
FYI : Ezra Klein column deserves a quick read … turns out Paul Ryan’s Roadmap for America’s Future will not balance the budget as projected … but the plan would give a huge tax cut to the wealthy, while cutting taxes by little or nothing (and in some cases even raising taxes) for low- and middle-income people.
Isn’t that how we got into this mess ?