Posted on 09/18/2018 11:17:23 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie
That said, Trump was smart not to advocate entitlement reform. Unless the Dems join the Reps in this effort, it makes no sense politically to take the lead. It just allows the Dems to again portray the Reps as wanting to push granny over the cliff. Kudlow made a huge mistake, which the Dems will use in the midterms.
From the article, it said that when asked about ‘entitlement reform’, Kudlow said he’d be looking at “larger entitlements”.
Not ‘entitlement —reform—’.
This part in the article wasn’t in quotes as being said by Kudlow :
Entitlement reform generally refers to changes or cuts to large government social programs such as Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid or food stamps.
So he wasn’t saying anything about cuts (or even ‘entitlement reform, —as defined by the article—)
Article by the media is scrambling things, as usual.
“Blame it on people living to 90 and 100 nowadays”
Sure... I’ve been paying in a hefty amount for the past 30 years (and likely will be for the next 10-15 years)... Now I’ll receive the blame because I keep myself healthy... Makes sense. (My Dad’s turning 90, and gets a very, very tiny SS check, even though he worked his *ss off his whole life - He’s not complaining BTW, even though there are numerous people he knows getting more than him on a SS “disability”)...
I’ll take the SS “contributions” I’ve made over the years back and open my own IRA, please and thank you.
Interesting. I didn’t know about that 1960 decision.
Still, I think in this situation, the president’s attitude toward the programs is the most important thing. If he considers them earned programs, then his sense of fairness would oblige him to leave them alone. Also his promises about them.
Kudlow could be one of those people the mystery NY Times op-ed person was referring to. Or the person who wrote it.
*** Theoria
////////////////////////////////////
After looking at that graph you posted I am guessing that at some point I will be moving in with my adult kids, unless they move in with me first. Well, thank the Lord - it will be a blessing.
We don’t want to be dependent on the gub’mint to take care of us. They (gub’mint) doesn’t have my, or your, interests as a priority.
How about reforming the election system to stop fake votes?
Unfortunately the word entitlements has been distorted it actually means something to which you are rightfully entitled so social security, which people have paid into for their entire working lifetime, is maybe the only thing that SHOULD be called an entitlement! No one is rightfully entitled to food stamps etc.
Lou Dobbs last night said Kudlow is a sorry SOB to say a thing about entitlements this close to the mid terms. He said Trump has got to rein his ass in and get him on TV today to say he was mistaken. Either that or fire his ass.
Democrats have too many cats to chase. Give them one more, and they’ll be even crazier, and unable to hide it. He said he’ll be considering reforms. What kind of reforms? Partial private investment of Social Security? Picture ID on EBT cards that can be taken to polling stations? Revive workfare? He didn’t say. Whatever it is, the Dems are against it, but they don’t know what it is, so they’ll have to get a big shotgun and shoot blind, only they can’t afford one.
Everyone on this thread just needs to chill. Everybody on the Left expects this. Everybody on the Right hopes for it.
Still, I think in this situation, the president’s attitude toward the programs is the most important thing. If he considers them earned programs, then his sense of fairness would oblige him to leave them alone. Also his promises about them.
The problem is not our President's attitude toward SS, the problem is some future President's attitude.
If we ever get a "progressive socialist" or anything like that, there is nothing at all to stop them from changing SS from a contribution based program to a pure redistribution program. Those who actually saved for their own retirement will be cut off, while those who didn't save will be rewarded.
Since SS is going to run out of money in ~ 15 years, this will be a big deal in most of our lifetimes.
Thought-provoking language question.
“Entitlement” now means “entitled just by being alive.”
It should be the programs that we’ve paid into that we should be considered entitled to.
Point 1: People whose employer paid half for many years make out the best on the balance sheet, on average.
Point 2: Widows make out like crazy sometimes. They can get survivor’s benefits at 60, plus statistics show that in general women are wealthier than men, because women live longer and the statistics count all the women who inherited millions from their husbands.
Not advocating cutting widows’ benefits, by the way. It’s in the Bible to help widows and orphans. Just saying.
Point 3: Like rent control in NYC (and elsewhere), you lucked out if you got in early, especially if you worked for a corporation all your life. There are many who have received more from Social Security than they ever put in, 3 and 4 times as much (not adjusted for inflation). So it’s not all unfair. Except that you have to listen to the word Ponzi now and then.
I’m also not advocating cutting anyone’s payments. I’m just saying that it is hard to create total fairness in a yuge system that has so many different income types in it. There are those who make out well and those who don’t.
The worst thing of all would be to go socialist, and then the capo tells you what do to and there’s no more petitioning your representatives for anything.
Very good post. I am sharing it.
Thank you Katie!
It gives me hope to read informed posts and be able to share them. Thank YOU
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.