Posted on 02/12/2005 11:03:01 AM PST by Republican Red
Dittos to you NorCalRepub . There is no free ride in life . This will cost.Bush needs compromise.
By the way where is Nor Cal to you? I am about 2 hours north of Sacramento.
I'm in the Bay Area in Walnut Creek east and over the hills from SF and Oakland......been all over Calif and have lived in San Diego, LA Basin and in the high desert in Victoville but grew up in the Oakland Hills....where are you exactly? I've been all over Calif and know most parts of it
From the article it looks like the AP is already pushing it.
Lindsay Graham is becoming the libs favorite Republican. It's reported that Hellery loves him. Why? He wants to raise taxes...yep, taking the $90K cap off SS "contributions" (ie: confiscations)IS a tax increase. And Dems are all for it.
Just today I was reading that Bozo Boxer was telling Seniors that there is no social security crisis, and this is a woman who prides herself on calling others liars.
YOU SAID, "But if this is what it takes to get sixty votes for Social Security reform and personal accounts, I'm not averse to doing it."
Also, if you are allowed to direct a portion your total “contribution” (don’t you just love that word) to your own personal account – then at least some of the actual tax increase will be funneled into your own account.
It is not exactly what I would want, but sometimes governance is the “art of the possible – not the perfect.”
I wish someone would explain that Social Security is basically a system of using one credit card to pay off another, and cycling the debt as long as possible. Stopping the debt cycle will cause a major impact on cash flow, but won't "cost" anything--they money was already spent when the debt was incurred, and then more was spent servicing it. Repayment of spent is not a "cost", despite its impact on cash flow.
I agree. Reluctantly so, but I agree.
It's now our turn to practice "incrementalism". But, instead of "creeping socialism", we'll pursue a course of "creeping capitalism".
And, eventually, everybody will be better off -- except the lefties consumed by their own hatred.
Nothing from that months' worth of collection is spent nor given out in any form.
After the month, regular payments recontinued, but the interest realized from that one month's investment was left to ride and roll over.
Couldn't/wouldn't the resulting sum after say ... 1 or 2 years come close to handling all or most of what SS is doing now?
And how do we 'pay out' during that month of investment?
The same way it's done now ... with phoney money and printed chits/vouchers and etc.'s.
Like I said, I haven't really been able to think this thing through, but I got the idea from an IRA I started 5 yrs ago with 560. bucks, dropped to less than two in a short time in early 2000's but is growing now, and I haven't contributed a dfime into it since I started it.
I don't know how long it would take if I just let it ride, and I might just do that just to see what happens, but ... well ... just my two cent's worth.
Seems to me the numbers game, with compounded interest utilizing the US populations' SS deductions could potentially pay off waaaayyyy big.
I really would like some commentary on this.
The seniors who didn't get their Social Security checks would lynch whomever had proposed such a thing.
Sometimes more, sometimes less. Sometimes, there is even a year-to-year decline. But understand that there has never been any rolling ten-year period in American history that overall stock prices have gone down!
Even during the depths of the Great Depression, stock values in 1933 were higher than they had been in 1923.
The administration hasn't cited the fact yet (and probably won't), but the pool of investment capital created by personal accounts should stimulate investment in the economy and generate sufficient continued growth that new revenues might go a long way toward closing the unfunded liability in the Social Security "Trust Fund".
So glad you approve of raising taxes, however, I suggest you're in the wrong pew.
Oops, you're lost....this is not DU.
I understand that, and maybe a month's worth is unrealistic but perhaps a percentage of the overall ... 'skimmed' and put into a real interest producing lock box.
What about that?
If none of the month's receipts are spent or given out in any form, where are the seniors' checks supposed to come from?
If your question is where does the money come from, I understand 'money' is a confusing concept, at best, and if SS is being paid NOW as an IOU ... a filiment of one's imageration ... what's the difference?
These raised taxes wouldn't even be used for Social Security - they would be spent on something else. Bad idea, Senator Graham, for more than one reason.
What about that?
At 2%, the current program allocates roughly 1/6 to personal accounts. Your proposal would be 1/12. Both would be subject to increase over time.
The question then becomes who is responsible for the investment decision on those funds in the lock box?
Recall that Clinton actually proposed personal accounts as a means of "saving Social Security". However, in his model, it was the Washington bureaucrats and politicians who would decide how (and where) the money was to be invested.
Consider the power to extort contained within that power. Which, of course, was what Clinton was all about -- running a shakedown racket.
So, if your lockbox plan incorporated self-directed personal accounts with something like the five low-cost funds offered by the government's own Thrift Savings Plan, it would be no different structurally than the current proposal. It would just be of a more modest scope.
So someone that is a strong proponent of conservative principles is for the "party line" but someone that the MSM glowingly praises and Dems circulate around is an "Independent thinker".
Sure.
I don't care what the guy has done in past. Lately he's been curving toward the McCain & hagel clique and these are not people I admire. They are opportunists. They want facetime on the MSM, and they want the Dems to curry favor with them. They will abandon conservative principles they "claim" to be in favor of for this feeling of approval and acceptance.
He is working with the Dems to attempt to make tax hikes a necessity to get this reform passed. He knows as every conservative does that the minute the President starts hiking taxes he is going to get savaged by the MSM and his base. In exchange this Senator has properly cut a deal for a few bookings on Meet The press and who knwos what else.
You admire this "maverick" if you please. I refuse to.
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.