Posted on 06/14/2005 4:50:36 PM PDT by QQQQQ
Edited on 06/15/2005 12:14:44 AM PDT by Sidebar Moderator. [history]
Key Senate Republicans are considering gradually raising the Social Security retirement age as high as 69 over several years as they struggle to jump-start legislation that President Bush has placed atop his second-term agenda, officials said Tuesday.
Raising the retirement age is unpopular, according to some surveys.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
This breaking on Drudge: "The president, who has spent the last several months seeking consensus on his Social Security reform package"
So the president is still touting Social Security reform, but the GOP senators have bailed the ship. If these "key Republican senators" want to continue to get support from me and those like me, they will start assisting the president in seeking consensus and getting SS reform passed. Otherwise, I'll find a candidate who does believe in reducing the size and scope of the federal government.
Just cause you support something doesn't mean you need to immediately deliver on it once your in office.
You have to wait till conditions are conducive to push your agenda, otherwise, you engage in a futile effort and you get bruised.
And, it is my personal belief that one of the liberal judges, despite W, and everything else, will indeed resign from office in 2007-2008, and so that is why I am taking my position, because we know certain GOP Senators we can't count on their votes for nominees (Snowe and Collins), so we cannot afford to lose Senate seats, and thats what we risk by being too bullish on certain issues. Address them yes, but don't make them the centerpiece of the agenda. Our domestic centerpiece right now should be energy, because energy could serve to kill us.
With the exception of giving more authority regarding LNG terminals to the FERC, the Bush energy plan is basically a good one, and we need to be spending our time working on that, working to pull back some environmental regulations so we can reopen capped wells and refineries, etc.
Interesting
"Key Senate Republicans are considering gradually raising the Social Security retirement age as high as 69"
new future headlines: Key Senate Republicans help elect Hillary in 2008
"Keep them working and make sure they die before we have to return any of their money to them. Heck of a scheme."
===
Can you imagine if anyone other than the government would try to do this?!
Check out the life expectancies back in the 30-s and today:
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005140.html
Hell, I'd settle for waiving away all my rights to the money I put into SS, in exchange for not being taxed anymore in the future for it.
Meanwhile, I'm planning my retirement as if SS doesn't exist, which theoretically, it doesn't.
American Socialists need more dead Americans.
You, too?
And the survey SEZ.... "No friggin' way."
You youngsters out there better keep working hard and paying those taxes so ole' Lancey can get his monthly checks to squander at the casinos when I retire in about 15 years.
How right you are. Two terms for Congressmen and one term for Senator. That's enough, they get crooked in a very short period of time. Just look what Rick Santorum turned into, and I thought he was one of the good guys.
Raising the retirement age four years is a big cut in Social Security. The average cut in benefits would be about $53,000. Why should the next generation be penalized because the previous one has outlived government projections and on average has received everything it contributed in the first four years of payouts? Shame on the older generation for robbing their children and grandchildren in this government scheme to buy votes. Let SS go broke and hang it around the neck of the Democrats...a true win-win solution.
Man - you're tougher than I am!
My favorite formula is 8yrs as Representative, 12yrs as Senator... I really don't care too much exactly the number of terms, more that it be limited.
I like my plan better because you know where they go after they get tossed out of there, don't you? They just head for the nearest lobbying firm. This way, if we churn them out faster, there is NO way the lobbying firms can swallow that many employees.
I don't know... maybe we would just be encouraging even more lobbiests. Tough to say, but a factor worth considering.
I hear you. My daughter always says, "Dad, be nice to me, I'm the one who will select your retirement home".
Thanks. I just hate seeing our pubbies look like weenies, but if there truly is a strategery, as you say, then I guess it's worth waiting for.
I'm just tired of all these AARP and union socialists that just hate seeing the government give up one scintilla of power over our lives.
In August, I will get my first check! Hallelujah!
I feel the same way. Privatization IS the way to go. The unions do it, AARP does it and even Congress does it, but WE can't? What's wrong with this picture?
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.