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

Skip to comments.

[State of the Union]Analysis: Bush Touches Upon 'Third Rail'
New York Daily News ^ | February 2, 2005 | RON FOURNIER

Posted on 02/03/2005 1:10:54 AM PST by The Loan Arranger

WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Bush is drawing a long gray line through the baby boom generation, hoping to keep the oldest at bay and the youngest at his side as he pursues drastic changes to Social Security.

Gingerly touching the third rail of politics, Bush said in his State of the Union address, "I have a message for every American who is 55 years or older: Do not let anyone mislead you. For you, the Social Security system will not change."

But it will change dramatically for people under 55, if the president gets his way: Benefit cuts, increasing the retirement age and discouraging the early collection of retirement checks are all on the table.

While urging Congress to create private investment accounts for Social Security taxes, he told the under-55 set, "Your money will grow over time, at a greater rate than anything the current system can deliver." With that line, Republicans jumped to their feet and applauded while Democrats sat glumly in their seats.

Bush can't guarantee market-based private accounts will always yield better rates than the current program, but that might not matter to young and middle-aged Americans who have long assumed Social Security would sputter before they grew old.

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; democrats; gop; investment; privateaccounts; socialsecurity; yourmoney
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 next last

1 posted on 02/03/2005 1:10:55 AM PST by The Loan Arranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

For you, the Social Security system will not change."

It already has. You have to be 68 now to collect instead of 65.


2 posted on 02/03/2005 1:15:34 AM PST by ETERNAL WARMING (We have the best politicians corporate money can buy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
Sigh. And yet, no one admits that the whole thing is ...

Well, a ponzi scheme.

Moreover, the 100,000 I have paid is SSI went not to my grandparents - but to KKK Byrd's latest highway project.

The lies are so deep - does anyone not see the truth anymore?

3 posted on 02/03/2005 1:18:22 AM PST by patton (Matthew 6:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton
Sorry, $100,000.00

One hundred thousand dollars.

4 posted on 02/03/2005 1:21:04 AM PST by patton (Matthew 6:6)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

Hmmm. The population of divorced/widowed/single women between 40 and 55 is huge, and they spend all that they have. As is the nature of politics, they will be supported by the government as they age out of the labor market.

And how will the men between 40 and 55 (many who lost manufacturing jobs in the '80s) vote during the next election? ...if they vote. And how many low income men between 40 and 55 voted Republican recently?


5 posted on 02/03/2005 1:37:39 AM PST by familyop ("Let us try" sounds better, don't you think? "Essayons" is so...Latin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: patton

I would give up all I have put in the system (which I guess I probably have any way) to be released from this ridiculous burden. I save about 15% of income now, but if I had another 15%...


6 posted on 02/03/2005 1:38:54 AM PST by doodad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
Gingerly touching the third rail of politics, Bush said

Oooooohhh! The "third rail"?? Bush may have trouble getting elected to a third term.

7 posted on 02/03/2005 1:42:06 AM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

I didn't think he was gingerly at all.


8 posted on 02/03/2005 2:22:40 AM PST by cajungirl (my peeps are freeps)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
The Democrats and their legacy media water carriers are glum. They fear good news the way vampires fear sunlight.

Denny Crane: "There are two places of truth. First God and then Fox News."

9 posted on 02/03/2005 2:24:19 AM PST by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger

Was watching Brit Hume last night. Had a bit on SS. The libs want you to believe the system is sound for 50 years. They quote the non-partisan CBO to back them up. It was funny that during this segment they played a member of the CBO testifying before Congress that SS was heading for a crisis in 2018. I really don't think that's 50 years or is my math that bad. IMHO I believe that a big reason the libs don't want to touch SS is for the following reasons:

1) FDR could do no wrong so SS can't be broke and they'll tell you everyone just loves SS.

2) They don't want anyone touching that pot of money that they can borrow upon without having to pay it back.

3) They aren't the ones putting forth ideas to fix the problem and don't want to admit that in this case the Republican party just may be visionary enough to fix something before it totally derails and is unfixable.

4) They just plain don't care because it doesn't affect them.


10 posted on 02/03/2005 2:55:21 AM PST by MadAnthony1776 ("liberalism" = "do as I say, not as I do")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ETERNAL WARMING

Not true.


11 posted on 02/03/2005 3:16:10 AM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ETERNAL WARMING

You have to be 68 now to collect instead of 65.

Gee, I'm only 62 and I just started collecting, what's with that?


12 posted on 02/03/2005 3:24:49 AM PST by garylmoore (God Bless you W, you have prevailed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Loan Arranger
Socialist Security = Economic Abortion for the elderly.

One of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on free people.

13 posted on 02/03/2005 3:31:33 AM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard
Bush may have trouble getting elected to a third term.

It's not Bush's next term that's in question. It's the election and reelection of Republicans in states where the Democrats demonize him over this.

14 posted on 02/03/2005 3:33:55 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
That's accurate, IMO.

I was watching the discussion last night, although I decided to do the dishes while the Donks were bloviating. I came back to hear some D holding forth that IF the Donks regained power, Bush would go down in history as a failed POTUS. The man, whose name I didn't catch, was breathless at the possibility.

They have learned nothing. They still think they have control of a constituency that will follow them blindly.

BTW, Hillary looked quite ill to me.
15 posted on 02/03/2005 3:43:26 AM PST by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ETERNAL WARMING

well, isn't that too bad....


16 posted on 02/03/2005 3:46:24 AM PST by Banjoguy (The party of Democrats is not democratic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reformedliberal
BTW, Hillary looked quite ill to me.

She always looks a bit under the weather to me.

17 posted on 02/03/2005 3:55:26 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
I have to be honest and give her make-up people credit for her look at the Inaugural Speech. It was the first night of her open campaign for the Presidency and she looked about 35 and very glamorous.

Last night she looked quite ill, all the lines and pouches were showing and whenever the camera caught her, she looked sullen and dull-eyed....much more than usual. Either she is suffering from more than transient food-borne illness or she has realized she is not going to be elected POTUS. Either is sufficient, IMO.
18 posted on 02/03/2005 4:21:32 AM PST by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: reformedliberal

What I do not understand is why this impacts the elderly anyway. They will get their checks regardless. If the Libs say that the system is in ok shape for the next 30-35 years than creating a new busket to put the money in for a new generation is irrelevant.

Bush hit a homerun last night in telling congress that they already have this so why not everyone else. The easist thing to do would be to tell congress that either they make the change or else what government employees have now will go away and they will be put into the present system, with the money they already saved being put into the SS pot.


19 posted on 02/03/2005 4:28:41 AM PST by EQAndyBuzz (60 votes and the world changes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: patton
Well, a ponzi scheme.

It's welfare. Why not call it what it is? If they want to save some money, they should roll Social Security in with the other welfare programs, axe its bureaucracy, and means test it.

20 posted on 02/03/2005 4:31:43 AM PST by mewzilla (Has CBS retracted the story yet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-23 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