Posted on 01/08/2009 12:14:12 AM PST by reaganaut1
WASHINGTON — President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that overhauling Social Security and Medicare would be “a central part” of his administration’s efforts to contain federal spending, signaling for the first time that he would wade into the thorny politics of entitlement programs.
As the Congressional Budget Office projected a record $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year even before the costs of the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus package being taken up by the House and the Senate, Mr. Obama stepped up his effort to reassure lawmakers and the financial markets that he plans a vigorous effort to keep the government’s finances from deteriorating further.
Speaking at a news conference in Washington, he provided no details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare, which are projected to consume a growing share of government spending as the baby boom generation ages into retirement over the next two decades. But he said he would have more to say about the issue when he unveiled a budget next month.
Should he follow through with a serious effort to cut back the rates of growth of the two programs, he would be opening up a potentially risky battle that neither party has shown much stomach for. The programs have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run. President Bush failed in his effort to overhaul Social Security, and Medicare only grew larger during his administration with the addition of prescription drug coverage for retirees.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
The simple solution to avoid the demographic problem is to float the retirement age to keep things solvent year to year. That can be done with or without a true trust fund (ideally individual funds) to help even out anticipated demographic bulges. Same can be done for Medicare age qualifications.
That requires political leadership, so it won’t happen.
I’d prefer a simple phase out of the whole system (both medicare and SS). Existing obligations could be funded by selling off federal assets (like most of the federal land in the western US) to private hands.
That won’t happen either.
Here’s what will inevitably happen:
INFLATION
Plan and invest accordingly. This will steal the value of your dollar-denominated assets, and reduce the value of the payouts you are expecting.
It will be entertaining to watch Barry deal with SS. It is an election sacred cow, so he’ll have to be careful.
That involves means testing benefits, and removing the cap on earnings that are taxed.
95% of voters are delighted.
I will cling to your optimism like a security blanket.
May God bless you, too....:)
Is hubby part of the class enemy?
*He’s white, so probably.
Is he a kulak?
*Is that anything like a kayak? If so, no.
Is he an antisocialist wrecker?
*He’s kinda antisocial.
Is he a running dog?
*He’s a biker so probably, no but we do have dogs who run really fast.
Is he a capitalist roader?
*He has a trike building business so maybe...:)
Does he stand with the People, or is he a landlord?
*We’re serfs....on Harleys.
Is he an enemy of the revolution?
*Which one? Theirs or ours?
Where does he stand on the Dear Leader?
*Is there a word worse than “loathe”?
You’ll need answers to all of those questions before you can figure out what’s going to happen to his SS benefits.
*Still clueless but thanks for the laughs.
Everybody’s in trouble while this fraud is ruling.
Some are just too damn STUPID to realize it.
You will. That retirement is a promise from the American people to you. There would be blood in the streets before you lost it.
The dangers that you face with it are from inflation. Be careful with it and handle it wisely.
Hang in there. You are on the downhill slide. Thank you for your service.
What you are saying is that the people who contribute the most to the Social Security Program should get the least (or nothing at all) back because they were successful in their financial affairs. Did you ever hear of "Equal Protection"? What you are advocating sounds a lot like Obama's version of communism.
I lived two years in Scotland and saw firsthand the results of the government's effort to normalize incomes....it takes away any incentive to try to better yourself. Most people will not submit themselves to the level of effort required to start or run a business because you can bust your butt for 18 hours a day, 7 days a week and be no better off than the people who are on the dole (welfare).
Means testing is a Democrat position.
Look, I can't stand Obama, or liberals, but if they can attack this problem with real solutions, I'll support it.
Another thing....the age to receive benefits will go to 69 or even 70.
I also think we will get a VAT in this country...sooner rather than later.
“Our nation is turning into a third world country, only without a youthful populace. And without even a common language. Only 50% of the kids in the LA Unified School District even speak English.....”
Around the world those “countries” are generally held together by a dictator and military force.
I chose to save my money in a TSA because I did not think SS would be there when I plan to retire. I did so knowing I would have to go without that extra money in my pay packet.
I chose the private sector to invest my money and I do not want Obama to step in now and invest MY money into that failed system.
Your post is accurate, but the congressional republicans can’t be held blameless in the failure of the effort. Just another example of their lack of group leadership.
And their fear of the media.
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.