Speakeasy forum

General discussion

Bush problems with SS growing (Ed Dionne and poll)

by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / May 2, 2005 11:54 PM PDT
Ed Dionne: Bush playing Social Security hand with stacked deck.
(Chronicle login: semods4@yahoo.com; pw = speakeasy)

A sign of how little support he has on this issue is a radio poll by our local Jazz Station (they have daily surveys on various issues as part of their "reward points" program -- unless you erase the cookie, there's a limit of one response per computer). Here's today's question and result (sorry for the lousy formatting -- #^&$ software!):
Do you support Bush's proposal (of income-based benefit cuts) as a part of Social Security reform?
Yes 20%
No 39%
No comment 40%

(The station is in Houston and has a primarily 20-40 listener base, so should be heavily Republican)

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Bush problems with SS growing (Ed Dionne and poll)
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Bush problems with SS growing (Ed Dionne and poll)
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
And the Democrats solution is?
by Evie / May 2, 2005 11:56 PM PDT

Waiting


.
.
.
.

Waiting

.
.
.
.

Pelosi was pathetic on This Week, Patrick Leahy was tortuous on FNS!

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Did you READ the piece, Evie?
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / May 3, 2005 2:09 AM PDT

Not abolishing the estate tax and using some of the money to shore up SS was one...

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
(NT) and where would you get the money?
by Mark5019 / May 3, 2005 2:27 AM PDT
Collapse -
Actually not the first time around ...
by Evie / May 3, 2005 9:53 AM PDT

... I tend to file EJ (or as you call him, Ed) Dionne's editorials in the same file as Ivins -- they are equally short on analyses one can substantiate in any way, shape or form.

But since you mention that the article included an idea (or two) -- heck, it would be a start! -- I went back and read it.

This is nonsense. Bush has refused to put his own tax cuts on the table as part of a Social Security fix. Repealing Bush's tax cuts for those earning over $350,000 a year could cover all or most of the 75-year Social Security shortfall. Keeping part of the estate tax in place could cover a quarter to half of the shortfall. Some of the hole could be filled in by a modest surtax on dividends or capital gains.

The Bush tax cuts have INCREASED revenues. I would love to see the numbers that show re-instituting the estate tax would do much of anything. After all, back in 1998 when Clinton alerted us to the looming *CRISIS*, we had the estate tax in its full glory. A one time assessment against baby-boomers that got away with paying less than their fair share assessments on IRA distributions for those that made income over the SS cap makes more sense. Ooops! That would effect too many Democrat voters Devil

Nice try though, but I have yet to hear a Democrat put EJ ... er ... Ed ... er ... Dionne's less-than-well-fleshed-out idea in front of the American people for consideration.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Myth and nonsnense, Evie.
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / May 4, 2005 3:06 AM PDT

>>The Bush tax cuts have INCREASED revenues.<<
That's the conservative mantra, but it's not what objective analysis shows (from the Congressional Budget Office, for instance). Bush managed to blow the projected surplus (remember the lock box?) in less than a term, and the tax cuts are a major part of that. Simply repeating an untruth often enough doesn't make it believable, except to those inclined to believe it because it fits in with their world-view!

Now about that analysis (I'll provide a link, unlike your nonsensical unverified claim):
CBO DATA SHOW TAX CUTS HAVE PLAYED MUCH LARGER ROLE THAN DOMESTIC SPENDING INCREASES IN FUELING THE DEFICIT
(Sorry for the caps, that's how the title appears on the linked site).

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
Bush has not 'blown the budget' anymore than Clinton
by Dragon / May 4, 2005 8:43 AM PDT

balanced it.

Collapse -
Reuters rpt (on Senate Republicans, falling poll #s) add to
Collapse -
Looks to me like a case of slective quoting
by Dragon / May 4, 2005 8:47 AM PDT

with absolutely said to back them up.

Collapse -
from Bill O'Reilly and i agree...bogus
by kmarchal / May 3, 2005 2:20 AM PDT

Social Security was discussed at length. And this is a completely bogus issue. No fair person could possibly object to Americans being given the option to invest a small part of their Social Security (search) tax in a private fund under federal supervision. There's no threat here. If you want to do it, fine. If you don't, fine. What's the beef?

The left-wing ideologues object simply because they can. There's no logical reason for opposing this. The president went on to say that rich Americans will probably get less Social Security payback in the future and poor Americans more. The left should be real happy about that.

.
.
"The do-nothing approach means massive benefit cuts for all Social Security beneficiaries, at all levels," McClellan said.
.
.
There are risks and costs to a program of action, but they are far less than the long-range risks and costs of comfortable inaction (this is the do-nothing approach). (JFK)

Collapse -
Hi, K.
by Dave Konkel [Moderator] / May 4, 2005 5:08 AM PDT

The limit on options makes things better, but the main problem is that this is a red herring in terms of fixing the shortfall. In fact, it makes the shortfall worse because the diverted money will decrease the funds available to fund the guaranteed benefits of those of us over 55. Everyone is assuming that exposure to the stock market will improve returns -- with (my) Baby Boom generation converted from net stock buyers to net stock sellers, ever-increasing oil prices (unless there are alternative sources and real conservation, $100 in 10 years is an understimate), and a falling dollar due to burgeoning deficits in the budget and balance of trade, stock market exposure might well DECREASE the total return for those choosing such accounts -- and then what?

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
stock market exposure might well INDECREASE also...
by kmarchal / May 4, 2005 6:34 AM PDT
In reply to: Hi, K.

with the option to buy government bonds. This way you will get the guaranteed social security return.

even the democrats believe we are looking at a 70% payout to future retires

and then what?
your are looking at this as an earthquake, that our freedom and markets will end all of a sudden in a big crash. With the right check and balances, if a problem should come up changes can be made. This is how it has to work. There is no one fix all but we have to start and tweak it along the way. The plan proposed has at least been studied/looked at for over 12+ years.

Collapse -
People who are afraid of what the market will be like
by Dragon / May 4, 2005 8:50 AM PDT
In reply to: Hi, K.

can invest in government securities. Whats the problem?

Collapse -
A while ago a mechanic in my area told me
by gearup / May 4, 2005 2:54 AM PDT

he was positive my car will need fixing within ten years. Asked him what to do. He said go to my cousin Hiram he will sell you a new engine. I asked will that solve the problem. Mechanic said not really because there is the body and the wheels to think about.
Well I thought about it and told him I would continue to do so and started to leave his place of business. As I walked toward the door i heard him muttering something about me being anti-american for not wanting to fix something that wasnt currently broken. I muttered when it breaks I will be back to talk about fixing it and left!

Next time they tell you that SS will break in 30 years ask that person who will win the next Derby,or what stock will go up next week or better yet when the next well in the sahara will produce water.

Collapse -
So the moral of your story is
by kmarchal / May 4, 2005 3:50 AM PDT

Take care of your car now, so later down the road when you need it, it will be there for you. If you don?t take care of it now, just when you really need it, it might not start. This is like an aflac commercial i just need to add a littl yogism to it.

Collapse -
I think .....
by Angeline Booher / May 4, 2005 5:31 AM PDT

..... your car fable/analogy to be a clever one. Happy

Me? Well, I don't believe there is a crisis. I do believe that it is time to start thinking seriously about steps to prevent one.

As I am already on SS, my opinion probably doesn't matter. (A lot of folks here are contributing to mine.) Suffice it to say, I know it was never intended to be a sole provider of retirement funds, but a safety net of insurance.

Anyway, I can go along with raising the retirement age. And even some form of means testing for percentages. But I don't agree with privatization, even partially.

My mantra is go slowly, look at the long-term effects of hastily drawn "fixes".

Sorta like routine maintenance for that car. Happy

Angeline


click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
(NT) Thats my point..dont destroy
by gearup / May 4, 2005 5:49 AM PDT
In reply to: I think .....

something good for poltical purposes. And I would like to know how many ifs are attached to the prediction of SS being broke in 30 years? If the pundits could predict what the economy will be doing 6 months from now with any certainty they would be a lot more believable!

Collapse -
Weve had a long history of quick bandaid fixes
by Dragon / May 4, 2005 8:53 AM PDT
In reply to: I think .....

If you want to fix you car with bandaid fixes, go ahead. A point will be reached where bandaids no longer work.

Collapse -
Whats with the*&*&&^%^$$% nt?
by gearup / May 4, 2005 6:42 AM PDT

This is 2cnd time it is there when it shouldnt be.
I think that I will just let it go next time as nothing is more irritating than NT where it shouldnt be or posts that wont post!

Collapse -
If you mean what I think you mean...
by Angeline Booher / May 4, 2005 7:46 AM PDT

recently there were some more changes in the software.

Now when you are typing a message, all you get is "preview" and "submit" as options. (Having "submit" by "preview" is what causes the confusion.)

As before, hit "preview". There you will get "edit" and "submit".

So, if you are posting a no text message, be sure and hit "preview" first. Then when you hit the "submit" beside it, it will automatically put the NT in as before. Just ignore that first "submit".

If this is not what you were asking, never mind. Happy

Angeline


click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Collapse -
Look at his 'that's my point' post.
by Dan McC / May 4, 2005 7:48 AM PDT

It has content but is labeled (NT).

Go figure.

Dan

Collapse -
Yep!
by Angeline Booher / May 4, 2005 8:31 AM PDT

He could have used preview on that earlier one out of old habit, or typed it in himself.

Or I misunderstood his question - always a distinct possibility. Happy

Angelline


click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

CNET FORUMS TOP DISCUSSION

Help, my PC with Windows 10 won't shut down properly

Since upgrading to Windows 10 my computer won't shut down properly. I use the menu button shutdown and the screen goes blank, but the system does not fully shut down. The only way to get it to shut down is to hold the physical power button down till it shuts down. Any suggestions?