• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Social Security - I don't understand

Jack Dawson

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
:eek: I am listening to the debate on social security and stand in wonderment. Let me explain. I am 62, when my son (now 34) was in school both Republicans and Democrats had him scared to death that there would be no social security when he got old enough to get it. For years and years and years both parties have said it was 'doomed'. Now we get a President in office that wants to FIX it for people like my son and all of a SUDDEN Social Security is stable, doesn't need fixing is fine. Well then how come every campaign it becomes a 'scare tactic' to get votes?

Can any of you conservatives explain to me why it is in such great shape after years of saying it wasn't?

Can any of you liberals explain to me why it is in such great shape after years of saying it wasn't?
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
THANK YOU. I wrote a thread entitled social security about a month ago and no one has responeded. I think that it is under off topic discussion.

I feel the same way you do. Dems were saying social security was a big issue before the election. Now it is not a problem? People need to put their strong "Bush hatred" behind them. Or else we will all suffer.
 

jcueckert13

Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2004
Messages
79
Reaction score
0
Location
edgewood nm
the problem is that it is george w bush that wants to fix the problems with social security and the democrats know that after going to war with iraq bush has proven that he has the balls to do what he promised to do. the democrats use the issue of social security to scare their supporters into getting out to vote but dont actually plan to fix the problems.
 
J

Jufarius87

its very simple really social security needed to be fixed both parties realized that and they both pushed for a solution now that a right winger (president bush) has a somewhat libertarian solution to fix it (by privitising it and putting it in investments) the big govt liberals are tearing their hair out in private and trying to down play the problem in public simply because even though bush's solution would work it doesnt fit into their big govt policies
 

pwo

Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
205
Reaction score
1
Location
Illinois
Then we sould all be mad at the Democrats. I can't believe that they would put our futures on the line, just to play politics.
 
J

Jufarius87

why do you think democrat power has declined in both houses? they are basically selling their souls at this point their have no foundation and they will say anything whether true or not to hinder the right

onbviously there are some good democrats but as a whole people are getting sick of this kind of bull bush has a perfectly good solution to a dire problem you would think both parties would be behind fixing social security but no the dems cant support something right wing , even if it works

further more here is an interesting idea liberals blame corperate america for the problems of the middle-lower classes bush wants to relocate 1000 dollars a yr per person for their own private investments and stocks...... essentially bush is allowing each american worker to own a piece of corperate america i would thinks dems would be behind that......
 

KBeta

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
36
Reaction score
1
Location
Seattle, WA
Jack Dawson said:
Can any of you liberals explain to me why it is in such great shape after years of saying it wasn't?
Scare tactics. To be perfectly honest, both sides use horror stories about the social security to spook the voters. I freely admit that the Dems have done it in the past, and now Bush is doing it.

This so-called crisis is a scam. Social Security is easily one of the most successful programs in the history of this country. If NOTHING is done, even the most conservative estimates indicate it will continue to pay 100% of benefits for the next 30-40 years. At that point, again if NOTHING is done, it will BEGIN to dip into the Social Security Trust Fund and will probably only be able to pay about 80% of the benefits promised.

Bush is proposing a total overhaul of the system which it completely unnecessary and reckless. The feds will have to borrow trillions just to set up these personal accounts which will be administered by the Wall Street crowd. It will be the largest infusion of public money into the private section EVER. Small wonder the WSJ endorses the idea.

The problem lies in the administration of the accounts. Currently, there is one big-ass account (the Social Security Trust Fund) and its administrative overhead costs are very small (around 3% of the total amount paid in). If every man, woman, and child in the US gets their very own individual account, the overhead costs for administration of those accounts balloons to 25-30% of the total amount paid in. The increased cost is an unavoidable consequence of handling millions of accounts instead of just one account, and that cost will easily offset any alleged benefits gained from being able to choose from a handful of mutual funds.

In short, Bush is proposing to remove a solid investment (albeit a modest one) in exchange for your choice of a less solid (but POSSIBLY more lucrative) investment. The catch is that regardless of which plan you take, the overhead costs (which go to Wall Street profits) will eat up even more of your investment than if we had left everything in one big, boring, account.

The best description I've heard of the current 'crisis' is to think of social security as car. Currently, it has a flat tire. Bush wants us to buy a new car. The Dems are recommending inflating the tire.

Social Security could use a tweak, but it does need an overhaul.
 

KBeta

New member
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
36
Reaction score
1
Location
Seattle, WA
KBeta said:
Social Security could use a tweak, but it does need an overhaul.
D'oh!

"Social Security could use a tweak, but it does NOT need an overhaul."
;)
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Social Security definitely needs to become completely privatized. The US is falling behind in it's quality of life, and we need to catch up. I believe twelve other countries have already privatized their retirement system, and have much better retirements because of it.

I think even Bush realizes we need privatized social security, though his plan is quite decieving.

He plans to allow for your money to be put into a private account, but the government still retains control of the account (for no apparent reason).

The major problem of finally converting over to a better social security is that one generation is going to get screwed out of any retirement money, or the government is going to pay a hefty sum to compensate for it.
 

Truthbetold

New member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
A ton of great points above.

I feel the "great shape" rhetoric is a crock. It is in terrible shape. The average person on SS is in their 30's. Pretty far off from 65.

It is a tough situation. On one hand if we semi privitize it with so many irresponsible people we end up with a bunch of new SUV's on 24's instead of investing. On the other hand if we keep going the way we are people will continue to exploit the loopholes and some of us putting into it won't get our share causing a huge problem in the future.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Truthbetold said:
On one hand if we semi privitize it with so many irresponsible people we end up with a bunch of new SUV's on 24's instead of investing..
1) Partially privatized like Bush wants still leaves the money in the hands of the government, which does a terrible job with it.

2) Why does it matter if people irresponsibly spend? It's their choice to blow all their retirement money. They will discover the consequence for their actions when they are sleeping in a shelter come retirement.
 

Truthbetold

New member
Joined
Jan 19, 2005
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Gabo said:
1) Partially privatized like Bush wants still leaves the money in the hands of the government, which does a terrible job with it.

2) Why does it matter if people irresponsibly spend? It's their choice to blow all their retirement money. They will discover the consequence for their actions when they are sleeping in a shelter come retirement.

I understand that. And agree its not the answer. But personally would like it to be partially privatized because I feel I'm responsible enough to make more money for myself than as you mentioned above the government has. My other half recognizes that if we do partially privatize our SS a certain amount of people are going to squander it awy without considering about the future. Those people will then either continue to work till death, starve to death, have family that can support them, or put that burden on those who were responsible enough to save in the first place. You and I.

That is unfortunately why it is such a tough subject.
 
J

Jufarius87

think a bit deeper about what u are saying since fdr and the big govt programs it has been the govt 's job of taking care of its citizens so when those foolish people are stuck homeless when they retire who will be paying for their soup kitchens and trying to get them back of their feet thats right the taxpayer

although i like nush social security idea medicaid is far more dire of a problem
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Ideally, taxpayers shouldn't be forced to pay for those people.

If you personally feel bad for them making a stupid decision, you can donate to a charity dedicated to helping them.
 

Jack Dawson

Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
62
Reaction score
0
Let me reiterate. For years both parties have said it is broken, now the DEMOCRATS who scare the crap out of old people every four years about social security and some insecure Republicans are saying NOTHING is wrong with it. Wel is it or isn't it broken.. Getting a chance to (a CHOICE) to invest 4% of your social security money YOUR WAY is not that risky. Yes some will win big some will lose big but nobody will be forced to from my understanding.

Conservatives - Is it or is it NOT broken?

Liberals - Is it or is it NOT broken?

If it is, how about some action or is it your purpose to DEFEAT it so it can REMAIN a campaign issue. I suspect just like cancer could be cured at the expense of insurance companies, pharmacuetical houses and the medical profession and therefore will NOT happen, this being a constant campaign issue will prevent it from being fixed.

I hope I am in err about this.
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
I think right now the Republicans and Democrats have finally realized they're wrong and social security really does need to be privatized.

The only problem is moving a program where people support the previous generation to where people support themselves. One generation loses out on their retirement (as pitiful as it may be and is becoming), and that makes people not support it. They don't want to be the ones screwed by the government blockheads.
 

out of the blue

New member
Joined
Jan 16, 2005
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
Truthbetold said:
It is a tough situation. On one hand if we semi privitize it with so many irresponsible people we end up with a bunch of new SUV's on 24's instead of investing. On the other hand if we keep going the way we are people will continue to exploit the loopholes and some of us putting into it won't get our share causing a huge problem in the future.
Here's the solution to that problem: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/12/5/143906.shtml
 

Gabo

Active member
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
336
Reaction score
1
Finally people are realizing privatization > government! :D

Maybe they'll start to realize the same goes for practically everything in life!
 
Top Bottom