When a snake eats a rat, there's a bulge in the snake's body that moves downward. The same is true in demographics. The rat in that snake is the population bulge of the baby boomer generation. All it takes is a pencil and paper and the ability to do simple math to realize that Greenspan spoke the simple truth today.
When these retirees reach 65 and beyond, it will take federal taxes at the rate of upwards of 50% for EVERYBODY who still holds a job, if Social Security benefits stay both at the current levels and kick in at the same ages. Couple that with the fact that all of us are living longer and longer, and SS as we currently know it will fail grossly and totally. The problem is a no-brainer to see.
Solving the problem is much more difficult. Witness how quickly professional politicians of both parties ran screaming into the night, rather than recognize the plain, unvarnished truth that Greenspan stated today.
And it is precisely the fear of elective backlash from fools like Ken Schram that has made SS the "third rail" of American politics.
It just so happens that, when I get into Congress, I will NOT fear this or any other issue in Washington. Once you've had a couple of grandchildren and a couple of heart attacks, as I have, you lose patience with standard political bullsh*t. Whether I can successfully contribute to a solution of the SS problem, I do not know. But whether I will search out the limited number of other honest and able politicians in Washington (a minority, but maybe an effective one), have no fear. I WILL do exactly that.
Congressman Billybob
Well, what would your solution be?
If you don't have details, you should have some outline at least.
The problem is coming up fast. I am on the leading edge of the baby boomers and I will be 62 (eligible for benefits, even though at a reduced rate) in 4 years.
Some of us would like to be able to plan ahead for retirement and uncertainty in SS is a morally bankrupt policy. Even though there may be no legal right to SS, after 40 years of paying into the system there is a moral and ehtical responsibility for the Federal government to uphold its end of the implicit promise.
The real problem is that once more, those of us who worked hard, saved, and planned ahead are going to be shafted, and those who did no planning, no saving and have no resources will be rewarded.
As much as I would like to see it, privatization is not really a good answer for the very same reason that the crisis will hit us long before SS goes "bankrupt". SS taxes go into the general fund and are spent just like any other taxes. We keep up a pious fiction that there is a "trust fund" but there is no real money in it, just IOUs from the treasury.
As soon as the excess tax collections start to decline, the government will be forced to either:
A. reduce spending,
B. increase taxes, or
C. increase the deficit.
Having watched government in action, my money is on (C). In a lot of ways though, this is a self-defeating course of action. It brings inflation, and the COLA built into SS just means that the obligation will increase right along with the inflation. However, the inflation will essentially transfer money from those foolish enough to have purchased bonds with their savings back to the government.
Anyway best of luck with your campaign, and I am hoping to hear your position on SS reform.
P.S. There is a fourth solution. Sale of government assets, especially land in the western states. This will be hard to get past the enviro-nazis, but it does represent a legitimate solution which would get the country past the obligation to those who have paid into the system for so long and allow payments to be kept up, even in the face of reduced income from privatization.