Uh-oh, baby boomers begin to retire: ; Congress may fix Social Security using a commission

Encyclopedia.com ^ | October 17, 2007 | Robert Samuelson

[Clintonfatigued]

Almost everyone knows that the next president will have to wrestle with the immense costs of retiring baby boomers.

Come now a small band of Democrats and Republicans who want to do the new president a giant favor. They want to force the new administration to face the problem in early 2009.

Why is this a favor? Because dealing with this issue is so politically unsavory that resolving it quickly would be a godsend. Otherwise, it could haunt the White House for four years.

[upchuck]

giant favor... blah, blah, blah
raise taxes... blah, blah, blah
cut benefits... blah, blah, blah
for the children... blah, blah, blah
third rail... blah, blah, blah

Fearless FRed covered this issue like a blanket some time ago.

[ontap]

I’d say us boomers have footed the bill for every liberal program for fifty years and now we’re gonna get the old up yours. So thanks for nothing!

[Mojohemi]

I got just one thing to say to the left wing lunatics I have watched rob social security the last 40 years to spend like a lunatics on social programs that one can look at today and make a value added decision, that what they have done with the money did not add one damn thing to the overall American dream. Zero then and Zero now.

I kindly send you the New Jersey Salute

[businessprofessor]

While I agree that taxing social security benefits was an indirect reduction in benefits, taxation of benefits will not fix the problem. The rats are committed to continuation of this generational Ponzi scheme. The only way to continue it will be massive taxation. The rats solution is to increase the payroll tax cap. The rats may also propose some benefit reductions with the retirement age.

The other solution is to privatize social security, effectively ending it. The rats adamantly oppose privatization because they realize that social security will become a welfare program. Privatization involves benefit cuts for those who have paid payroll taxes for many years.

A commission is a bad idea. There have been many commissions without any policy changes.

[ontap]

I kindly send you the New Jersey Salute

Is that good?

[bpjam]

We already HAD a commission which included big democrat names.

Guess what, they recommended PRIVATE ACCOUNTS!!!!

[ElectricStrawberry]

As my super-fine guvna says:

“I’ll look into that...”

-Deval Patrick

[North Coast Conservative]

That's true, but some of us are worth it, and we will appreciate it. /S

Tax the productive, transfer all the confiscated wealth to those who didn't save, don't want to work, believe it is their right to collect more than they ever paid in.

You are young and energetic, you'll get over it. Or you will at least get used to it. :)

In God We Trust.....Semper Fi

[Alberta's Child]

I have enough faith in the abject pragmatism and nihilism of this country to realize that our Social Security “problem” will likely be fixed through two approaches: (1) massive inflation of the U.S. dollar, and (2) euthanizing the elderly.

[ThisLittleLightofMine]

Well I prefer that we slap a 15% surcharge on Money wiring to Mexico. That should help a bit.

[ontap]

Just like they did ours!

[NeoCaveman]

I’m sorry I thought slavery had been abolished.

[ontap]

Didn’t call it slavery when we were footing the bill. You’re young, you’ll get over it. Some day you’ll be able to pass the reins to another group of whiners.

[businessprofessor]

I think that you are saying nothing will be done so our living standard will be greatly eroded. Medicare is in a much worse situation than social security so rationing health care is a very real possibility. An eroded standard of living will lower life expectancies. Unless the rats gain firm control, they will not be able to ram through massive tax increases. Benefit reductions, directly or indirectly, are a certainty. The problem with a massive tax increase is that most of the money will fund other programs just increasing the size of the government even more. If privatization is not on the table, I prefer no action.

[Badeye]

If only they’d retire, and shut the hell up.....

[Tenacious 1]

tax Social Security benefits at current income tax rates. This effectively cut Social Security benefits indirectly without really “cutting” them.

Yes. What a novel idea. Let's re-tax dollars collected and redistributed via taxation.

[rhombus]

Hey it wasn’t my idea it was Clintons. But the compromise fix will end up being higher taxes in some way, shape or form. The Democrats and AARP will assure it.

[Son House]

Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates. Pay back IOU’s with higher Federal Income Tax rates.

(Having Beavis and Butthead moment.)

[Tenacious 1]

I’d say us boomers have footed the bill for every liberal program for fifty years and now we’re gonna get the old up yours. So thanks for nothing!

I'd say you boomers are fine and will be funded as promised. The AARP is a huge liberal voting block. It will be your kids that I think will get the old up yours. No politician is going to screw with the largest voting block. They will go after the "children" that have not taken an active interest in politics yet (20s and 30 - somthings).

[66-442hot]

Thank you.