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

Skip to comments.

Social Security Reform and the Destruction of the Democratic Party
LFOSpot.com ^

Posted on 11/11/2004 10:40:46 AM PST by sadness in phintown

If the President proposes, as has been suggested, a system in which Americans get to personally own and invest a portion of their Social Security taxes, the results will be nothing short of a revolution in America that will perhaps dwarf the changes brought about by FDR.

The Democratic party is built upon, and has dominated the country for over 50 years based on this one program. Nothing that was done on the political front in the last century even comes close to the impact of the Social Security program on the political landscape. This single program locked in the voting habits of a generation by promising them "savings" which would be paid out upon retirement. This single program spawned an entitlement mentality that has manifested itself in dozens of other programs and has resulted in a slippage in the percentage of Americans who exhibit the unique traits of Americanism that have made America the most economically and militarily powerful country in the world.

But it was all a sham - an intricate and very public Ponzi scheme built on a lie and maintained by self delusion. Still, it is the most powerful vote getting scheme ever to be devised and the Democrats continue to rely on it to this day. Just look at the AARP website and you'll see the power of this program. It is sad to see the World War II generation reduced to claiming on one hand that Social Security has plenty of money for decades, and at the same time, arguing that present workers not be allowed to invest their own money since it is needed to pay present benefits. You'd think it would cause a headache to have two totally contradictory beliefs fighting themselves in your brain at one time, but apparently not.

(Excerpt) Read more at lfospot.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bush; democrats; reform; socialsecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
Dems will fight like wild animals to keep this program unchanged. This is why it is so important to actually do it!
1 posted on 11/11/2004 10:40:47 AM PST by sadness in phintown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Sadly the republicans are already backing off social security reform which is too bad since it should be by far THE most important thing on their domestic agenda and the one with the most long lasting positive impact on this country.


2 posted on 11/11/2004 10:42:56 AM PST by rudehost
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Dems don't want to lose the ability to spend other people's money, that is all.


3 posted on 11/11/2004 10:44:24 AM PST by Mudcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rudehost

If the Republicans can even get modest changes, that would be a huge victory. Every time some liberal spoke of health care reform, the stock market would drop, as would their accounts. Everything would be centered on these accounts' returns.


4 posted on 11/11/2004 10:44:56 AM PST by Koblenz (Holland: a very tolerant country. Until someone shoots you on a public street in broad daylight...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Changing this program will NOT damage the democrats, they still have the legalized murder of the unborn.


5 posted on 11/11/2004 10:45:38 AM PST by trubluolyguy (Pajamajadeen?!!? Hell with that, Freep nude!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rudehost
That's not what I have been reading. Bush is still seeking to start privatizing this in his term. He will honor the commitment made to those collecting it but have the younger generation start doing their own investing to ween them off of it.
6 posted on 11/11/2004 10:45:41 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

An "Ownership Society" severely depresses if it does
not outright destroy the class warfare mantra; it also
takes out of the hands of the govt and puts into the
hands of the people. The calls of "we will take care
of you" begin to resonate among a smaller and smaller
section of the population.

MV


7 posted on 11/11/2004 10:47:34 AM PST by madvlad ((Born in the south, raised around the globe and STILL republican))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mudcat
Dems don't want to lose the ability to spend other people's money, that is all.

It's WAAAAYYY beyond that! If SSR Passes, then the people would expect the Congress and President to actually do things to grow the economy and hence their earnings on SS accounts like 401K and IRA and keogh people do. Tha thought of being actually held responsible for their legislative actions by th ballot is absolutely terrifying to them (both sides of the aisle)......

8 posted on 11/11/2004 10:48:45 AM PST by Red Badger (Give someone enough EU-ROPE and they will hang themselves......out of pure frustration......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown
This single program locked in the voting habits of a generation by promising them "savings" which would be paid out upon retirement. This single program spawned an entitlement mentality that has manifested itself in dozens of other programs and has resulted in a slippage in the percentage of Americans who exhibit the unique traits of Americanism that have made America the most economically and militarily powerful country in the world.

TRUE!

9 posted on 11/11/2004 10:48:57 AM PST by 2banana (They want to die for Islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nmh

I havn't heard anything about rescinding this promise either.

S.S., Tax reform, and school vouchers would nearly decimate the Democrat Party if enacted. This is why they will fight to the death to attempt to stop these policies.

The source of the Dems power a) Entitlements b) Public education c) Judicial appointments. The MSM is their PR tool to keep all in place.


10 posted on 11/11/2004 10:50:23 AM PST by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mudcat
If the truth be known:

If everbody who has paid into the SS were alowed to get that money back, they would find that the money was replaced with IOU'S.

There is no money in SS, our elected officals have used it for everything else.

If the money that is sent to SS were to be invested in an account of our own choice, the return would end up being more than could be used before your death even if you lived an above average life style.

11 posted on 11/11/2004 10:51:22 AM PST by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mudcat

On the other hand, my ss report says that I have already paid close to $100,000 into social security in my lifetime. If I had invested that over the years, I would have had a tidy retirement fund. As I worked for a non-profit for many years, my other retirement is limited. Was hoping to have ss to help me survive when I retire at age 70. When I paid into it, that was the understanding. Seems the feds. spent it all and did not invest it for me.


12 posted on 11/11/2004 10:52:19 AM PST by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Good article.


13 posted on 11/11/2004 10:53:40 AM PST by xrp (Executing assigned posting duties flawlessly -- ZERO mistakes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

If we throw this out and change the tax system, the Dems will have nothing to run on! What can they 'promise' people anymore?


14 posted on 11/11/2004 10:54:54 AM PST by traviskicks (Poverty has no causes. Only prosperity has causes. - Jane Jacobs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Koblenz

The only way to meaningful reform is if the privatization is made from reductions in government. It is voodoo economics to finance privatization by deficit increases. These would have to be paid down the road in more inflation and dollar devaluation.


15 posted on 11/11/2004 10:55:13 AM PST by meenie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

The danger of an entire nation putting investment money all at once into the stock market?

Anyone know?

Seems it might artificially drive prices up during those initial years.

Seems it might artificially prop up companies that otherwise would go broke.


16 posted on 11/11/2004 10:56:53 AM PST by xzins ((Now that the election's over; I need a new tagline...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown
Would a viable option be to let workers (like me) forgo all future SS payments and their accumulated earnings in their SS accounts in exchange for allowing workers to invest their SS withholdings? The SS system would get tons of money from current workers opting out and the system would not incur future obligations for these workers. Does this plan seem feasible? I would be willing to give up 20+ years of ss withholdings if i could invest my share of the SS tax. I have about 26 years to retire. I believe i would come out ahead of SS even when giving up 20+ years of earnings.
17 posted on 11/11/2004 10:59:29 AM PST by homeless
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

I pay almost as much in SSN and Medicare taxes as I do in federal income tax. Then I've got my state taxes that are almost as high as my federal taxes. It has to stop somewhere. I'm all for a certain amount of privitization.

My father-in-law receives a nice check from the SSN administration every month. The man paid not one red cent into the fund but has no problem accepting money from the younger generations. "We owe it to him" His exact words. He also voted for Kerry. Need I say more?


18 posted on 11/11/2004 11:00:33 AM PST by Marinefamilyx3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Why do Republicans support the concept of "social security" in the first place?

It's socialism, plain and simple.


19 posted on 11/11/2004 11:00:54 AM PST by k2blader (It is neither compassionate nor conservative to support the expansion of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sadness in phintown

Up to now, Social Security has been nothing but an additional source of revenue for the general funds in the US Treasury. This is what is making the Democrats so crazy - the total revenue by the Federal government will be reduced.

Which is the whole point. The money out in private accounts is not available to the Federal government except by borrowing it on the open market, in competition with other entities that also offer to borrow money. And as such, the interest rate that would be paid would have to be competitive, and not just what the Government Accounting Office thought was a reasonable rate of return (if any return on the individual's investment is taken into consideration).

If the Federal government had been taking even a portion of the funds paid in on behalf of the Social Security program, and investing in the Fanny May and Ginny May real estate mortgage purchase funds, every one of the mortgage insurance programs would have been fully solvent by now. And mortgage foreclosures could be seen as stiffing Grandma, so there is an additional guilt factor at work.


20 posted on 11/11/2004 11:03:07 AM PST by alloysteel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

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