Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: No tax hike for Social Security
CNN/Money ^ | December 9, 2004

Posted on 12/09/2004 1:21:23 PM PST by RWR8189

President rules out increase in payroll taxes to pay for reforming 64-year-old retirement program.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Following a meeting with key advisers, President Bush promised Thursday he would not raise payroll taxes to help pay for overhauling Social Security.

"We will not raise payroll taxes to solve this problem," Bush told reporters during an Oval Office meeting with Social Security experts.

"The problem is America is getting older and that there are fewer people to pay into the system to support a baby boomer generation which is about to retire," the president said.

He again reassured retired Americans and those about to retire that nothing would change with the system, which first began paying retired workers monthly in 1940.

But now, the program is facing "unfunded liabilities of about $11 trillion," the president added, noting he's suggested a new way to help shore up its funds.

"I think it's vital to consider allowing younger workers, on a voluntary basis, to set aside some of their own payroll tax in personal accounts as part of a comprehensive solution to dealing with the Social


(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush43; campaignpromise; privatization; socialsecurity; ss; taxcuts; taxes; taxhike

1 posted on 12/09/2004 1:21:23 PM PST by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Meanwhile, the gimme geezers at AARP.org are slamming (surprise) the President for not raising taxes.


2 posted on 12/09/2004 1:33:39 PM PST by Jacquerie (Democrats soil the institutions they control)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

I am not planning on receiving a dime of SS when I retire - born in 1957, the peak baby boom year.

Anyone who thinks there will be money there is a fool.

It's really just welfare anyway, no matter what people have been led to believe or prefer to believe.

The President's plan actually would be the first attempt to make it a retirement income security plan. It simply has held that name all these years. Never really was such a thing.


3 posted on 12/09/2004 1:41:34 PM PST by sleepy_hollow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

"We will not raise payroll taxes to solve this problem,"



The only thing missing was "Read my lips"


4 posted on 12/09/2004 1:44:48 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

Remember in 2002 when Bush said there will not be tax increases in his term "over his dead body" and the press continually shot back to his father in 1988 "read my lips" and tried to make comparisons?

Well its nearly 3 years later and he has not sought any tax increases, I think this Bush is a man of his word.


5 posted on 12/09/2004 2:14:17 PM PST by RWR8189 (Its Morning in America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

You just can't wait to accuse President Bush of lying or not keeping his promise can you? I think it's really disgusting that people still continue to question his honesty.


6 posted on 12/09/2004 2:14:54 PM PST by Lady In Blue ( President 'SEABISCUIT' AKA George W Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jacquerie

Just raising taxes isn't going to fix the system. It isn't flexible to adjust to the times. First off, Congress steals from Social Security when they need the money and don't pay it back. To be honest the program needs to be changed and it's going to cost one way or the other. They have for federal employees called thrift savings. It has 7 funds you can choose from. They range from low risk-low yield to high risk-high yield type funds. You already have an infrastructure in place to handle it for federal employees plus the individual has control over how it's invested. In the long run it's flexible and the individual has input and Congress can't touch it.


7 posted on 12/09/2004 2:16:44 PM PST by MadAnthony1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lady In Blue; RWR8189

I haven't questioned Bush's honesty or integrity - I only pointed out that, except for not saying "Read My Lips", that sound bite reminded me very-much of his Daddy's ill-fated quote. In terms of Bush's honesty, he did promise me in 2000 that he'd reform Socialism Security in his first term (lie), work to decrease the size of gov't and gov't spending (lie, lie), and not 'be a nation builder' (gigantic untruth). See my tagline to figure out why I voted for him in 2000. Other than that, I guess he's been pretty honest...

Believe me, I do NOT want to accuse Bush of lying in this case, as that would mean that he would be raising payroll taxes.

Lady, your reaction was kind of troubling - why so defensive about my reaction to the similarities of this comment and one made by his Daddy?


8 posted on 12/09/2004 2:19:28 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Blzbba

I think a little thing called 9-11 got in his way in the first term...


9 posted on 12/09/2004 2:24:45 PM PST by RWR8189 (Its Morning in America Again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

"I think a little thing called 9-11 got in his way in the first term..."


That's the excuse for that boondoggle, half-trillion-dollar Medicare program?!


10 posted on 12/09/2004 8:56:21 PM PST by Blzbba (Conservative Republican - Less gov't, less spending, less intrusion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189; All

Bravo Mr President.. Now I know I voted for him..


11 posted on 12/09/2004 8:58:13 PM PST by KevinDavis (Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sleepy_hollow
Well by 2050 robots will perform at least 95% of jobs that people in the US now perform. How will there be any jobs for people to perform.

If you doubt it think about this in 1984 the PC basically didn't exist. Now the cheapest Celeron 2.6 Ghz is more powerful by a factor of at least 10 than the highest end mainframe was in 1984 (baring supercomputers). It also has many times the storage capacity. AMD will have CPU out in 2006 that have eight processors on board. That will be more powerful than a bee's brain. No doubt by 2025 there will be hundreds of CPU cores on each "CPU" Chip Moores law shows no sign of slowing down yet.
12 posted on 12/09/2004 9:01:49 PM PST by ImphClinton (Four More Years Go Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson