I forget - - what did this guy Robert J. Samuelson have to say about George Bush's attempt to introduce a bona fide fix for siocial security wherein people get to invest their social security "contribution" so they could take control of it and watch it grow? You know - - the proposal the scumbag Democrats demogogued into oblivion?
Did Robert J. Samuelson have any opinion about that?
Gosh, RIGHT ON TARGET Lancey Howard...Right On Target.
I'd know any specifics, but Samuelson has been pretty solid. He tends to be a straight shooter, he's definitely not a mouthpiece for the DNC.
Did Robert J. Samuelson have any opinion about that?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I believe this is the same man whose writings were once boldly quoted by some young Freeper who wanted to put me in my place when I disagreed with his assertion that "there has been virtually no inflation in this country since 1982". It would be funny if it weren't so tragic to think that someone actually believed that.
GWB also attempted to cut the growth rate by tying the yearly Social Security increases to the CPI rate rather than the inflation rate, or something like that.
The DemoCraps screamed bloody murder, accusing GWB of "cutting" the life out of seniors, or some such baloney rhetoric.
If you read the full article and pursued any of the 4 links Samuelson provided in that article to op-eds written in late 2004 and early 2005, you'll see that he has written on this subject in great depth and passion before. This is the "good" Samuelson -- one of the best writers on economic and political economics out there. And he did give Bush credit for trying to reform Social Security, but he ultimately cast criticism at Bush for the huge entitlement expansion in Medicare which has a worse problem than Social Security. And he was also critical of the President's shielding most Baby Boomers from any potential benefit cut (I'm sure the President viewed that as the only way, politically, that this could be pursued).
I agree: the talking heads and Samuelson should heep most of their disdain on the Dems who never offered to even join the debate. And I don't see enough criticism of Clinton who had the best opportunity to address entitlement reform (this was Clinton's "Bridge to the 21st Century" built by the "cans kicked down the road" for following administrations). I also agree that Bush's private accounts and transition plan is the right way to permanently fix Social Security -- and I wish Samuelson would give Bush some credit for that. But I think he's stuck on the refusal of these political "leaders" to do the responsible thing which is to make the case for benefit cuts for all coming into Social Security benefit season.
What I saw was no fix. It simply took the bogus T-bills and transferred them from the government to private accounts. They're still bogus at the end of the day because the government would still be spending the surplus.