Glenn Beck: Touching the Third Rail

[tsiguy96]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-16u9x3tfE

[Rohirrim]

First, the GOP robs the SS fund, then when it goes broke, they blame it on the American people. What's new? You want to know where all that SS money is? It's in Iraq. Ask Bush.

[Bronco Bob]

First, the GOP robs the SS fund, then when it goes broke, they blame it on the American people. What's new? You want to know where all that SS money is? It's in Iraq. Ask Bush.

Add to the fact that the GOP wants to privatize SS as a means of enriching
the Wall Street brokerage houses. What better way to scare people into
falling for that scheme than to try to claim SS is running out of money?
Sadly even all the Democrats except for Hillary seem to have fallen for
it and recite the same Republican talking points.

[baja]

What is Hillary saying about SS that is different than any one else Bob?

[Bronco Bob]

She's advocating a balanced budget and this would provide the
money to fund SS. The claim is that Bill Clinton's budget surplus
would have kept SS solvent until at least 2055. But that the
Bush deficit have chopped 14 years of of this. Getting back
to a balanced budget would reverse that.
Obama's position is to raise taxes to cover the cost of SS.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Hillary_Clinton_Social_Security.htm

[Bob]

I dont blame the Dems, I dont blame the Repubs -- I blame both for teh ebt we are in. I freely admit that Bush has spent like a drunken sailor -- but what do we do from here. SS money is not put into a seperate account, "just waiting for us and building interest, until we retire." The math is not working for many reasons, and people having less kids is not something that will help the system moving foward. The nation is bankrupt -- complain all you want about more $ that you want for your programs -- soon it will not be there, or the money that you use to pay for it, will be worth much less.

[Kaylore]

Add to the fact that the GOP wants to privatize SS as a means of enriching
the Wall Street brokerage houses. What better way to scare people into
falling for that scheme than to try to claim SS is running out of money?
Sadly even all the Democrats except for Hillary seem to have fallen for
it and recite the same Republican talking points.

SS is running out of money and it was never in any kind of fund devoted exclusively to SS returns. I would like to see what I put into my SS go into a fund for me and only me so that each person was earning savings toward their own retirement. Then if people wanted to, they could invest it or just keep it in the fund. Bottom line is that would ensure each person saw a retirement check and that the working population would be able work towards something.

Ultimately everyone around the world is going to need to have more babies or this is all going to come crashing down on us. China will be especially screwed when in thirty years they will have one working person for every 5 retirees. That's going to be interesting.

[Taco John]

Add to the fact that the GOP wants to privatize SS as a means of enriching
the Wall Street brokerage houses.


Well, I don't know about that. I want to privatize SS as a means of enriching myself. I could care less about wall street brokerage houses.

[Taco John]

Also to be clear: Social security isn't RUNNING out of money. Social security is OUT of money. We are borrowing from China to meet the needs of the program. The money is gone. Dried up. The system is bankrupt.

[TheDave]

Considering Social Security was set up to be a pay as you go system... how exacticaly can it be out of money?

[MplsBronco]

Tj is wrong about this one. SS is constantly taking in money. The funds may not be there only because the gov't has spent it on other things. Borrowing against SS has gone on for a long time but the IOUs have always been honored. It is only now that they don't want to honor the IOUs.

In essence, the money has been stolen from the people. It is our money. The problem isn't with SS, it's with the spending. It's really quite simple. And we can get through the baby boomer issue by simply raising the cap that people pay SS on from the current $90,000 something dollars where it currently is.

Doing away with SS is a scam upon the American people as it is perhaps the single greatest social program devised.

[MplsBronco]

Well, I don't know about that. I want to privatize SS as a means of enriching myself. I could care less about wall street brokerage houses.

And what happens to all those people that play the market and lose their funds? Who will end up taking care of them? You got it, the people. The program should stay as designed because it is guaranteed.

[Bronco Bob]

Also to be clear: Social security isn't RUNNING out of money. Social security is OUT of money. We are borrowing from China to meet the needs of the program. The money is gone. Dried up. The system is bankrupt.

So let's see. Social Security was solvent to at least 2055 when Clinton
was president. And around four years later under Bush it was OUT of
money under Bush and needed to be privatized? I don't think so. I doubt that
someone as incompetent as Bush could have blown through that much money.

[Bronco Bob]

And what happens to all those people that play the market and lose their funds? Who will end up taking care of them? You got it, the people. The program should stay as designed because it is guaranteed.

That's basically why Social Security was created under Roosevelt.
People had blown their money in the stock market and were broke.
Apparently those people wanting to privatize Social Security never
heard of the stock market crash of 1929.
If you look into it, Bush got a huge amount of campaign contributions
from Wall Street brokerage houses when he was running for president.
Privatizing Social Security was his payback to them. He created an
artificial emergency to panic the dupes, just like he created an
artificial emergency of Saddam having WMDs to invade Iraq.
And as usual the right wing Bush knobbers ate it up, because hey,
it's anti-government, so it must be a good idea.
What's bizarre is a naive fool like Obama is going along with it
just to score political points in the primaries.

[Rohirrim]

So let's see. Social Security was solvent to at least 2055 when Clinton
was president. And around four years later under Bush it was OUT of
money under Bush and needed to be privatized? I don't think so. I doubt that
someone as incompetent as Bush could have blown through that much money.

What was it Gary Hart said, something about this is what comes from putting people in charge of government who don't believe in government. The American people have been bamboozled by the GOP whose plan since Raygun has been to on the one hand grossly underfund the programs they don't like (ie. anything that's not military or a corporate subsidy) and then on the other hand tell the American people, "See! This program just doesn't work."

[Spider]

Dumb ass Beck , there never was a lock box ... Gore wanted to start one ..... too bad the surgery you had didnt fix stupid

[Spider]

Well, I don't know about that. I want to privatize SS as a means of enriching myself. I could care less about wall street brokerage houses.

Really , how many strike it rich in the stock market ?
how many go broke ? then when you broke in your old age , yo uwill be even more of a burden on society with out SS ........

[Bob]

Also to be clear: Social security isn't RUNNING out of money. Social security is OUT of money. We are borrowing from China to meet the needs of the program. The money is gone. Dried up. The system is bankrupt.

You are right!!! So the solution is to spend more money? We collectively bury our heads in the sand with programs that will make us feel all and warm inside but cant afford.

[Bob]

So let's see. Social Security was solvent to at least 2055 when Clinton
was president. And around four years later under Bush it was OUT of
money under Bush and needed to be privatized? I don't think so. I doubt that
someone as incompetent as Bush could have blown through that much money.

There are three different books that are used that outline our collective debt. We have been lied to for years about what we really owe. You are right Bush has burned through it, but so has just about every president for the past thirty years. The result is an economy that is built on spending -- get abord the crazy train everyone -- when it crashes the small folks will point thier fingers and say look at what the big-spending Dem did to us, and likewise we will hear what the evil war-mongering Repubs did -- and we will all hangout out on the Titanic as it slips into the water and aurgue who is to blame.

[Spider]

You are right!!! So the solution is to spend more money? We collectively bury our heads in the sand with programs that will make us feel all and warm inside but cant afford.

the Solution is to do what Gore suggested ... still cant believe you turds thought Bush being president was a great Idea ........So now how do we fix the trouble you geniuses created for us ?
1. we have to cut spending , Military , foreign aid , Hookers , drugs ......
2. we have to stop outsourcing , no way around it , we have to get back to making machinery , factory job , production jobs , More people working good jobs , the more they spend .....
3. Repeal Boy wonders tax cuts , yes you ****s that means the so called death taxes ( even though if any of you piss heads took a look at that tax , you would see how stupid you was..... boo hoo Paris Hilton has to pay taxes .. poor girl )
4. we have to cut back on free trade , free trade is free for everyone else but us .....
5. we have ot have Universal healthcare and cut out medicade , alot of people wait too long to see a doctor cause they cant afford it , by then it the cost is out of the roof , they cant pay for it , so medicare does .... think of it as like your maintenance on your car , it is cheaper to keep the engine in your car in good condition , then wait and replace the engine ....
6. last but not least , we have to find all the people that voted for Bush and deport their asses ......... ok that maybe extreme , but if we did that in 2000 we would be in this **** hole

[Bob]

Spider I know your mad, and I am evil, stupid or both as I happen to be conservative, but I do try to call out those of my club when they screwup. Bush has spent too much -- way too much, he is not a FISCAL conservative, in a true sense.

I dont belive for one second that Gore would have spent less on healthcare and issues he cares about. He would have spent less on the Military, so can we go back into a time machine and know if he would have turned back over-all spending, to pay down our debt? I personally dont think so -- I dont think that the Dem record is good with reducing spending, nor do I think that the Repub record (for many years) has been good either.

[Spider]

Spider I know your mad, and I am evil, stupid or both as I happen to be conservative, but I do try to call out those of my club when they screwup. Bush has spent too much -- way too much, he is not a FISCAL conservative, in a true sense.

I dont belive for one second that Gore would have spent less on healthcare and issues he cares about. He would have spent less on the Military, so can we go back into a time machine and know if he would have turned back over-all spending, to pay down our debt? I personally dont think so -- I dont think that the Dem record is good with reducing spending, nor do I think that the Repub record (for many years) has been good either.

I am mad , you guys elected a person off of bumper sticker slogans , and whats worse is , you guys refused to see anything bad the first 4 years .. if Bush was a 1 term president , I wouldnt be nowhere near as harsh .. But 2 ****ing terms , and now you say he isnt a conservitive ...... what clued you in ?
as for the record of spending with Dems ? Balanced Budget , SS fixed until2055 ...... This is what pisses me off with you guys , even with everything on record , you still make **** up depending on what Limbaugh says ......

[Spider]

you know alot of you guys on the right need to read Dman more , I dont agree with alot of what he says , but that is from a philosophical , and point of view on Issues , but he doesnt make stuff up , he dislikes Bill clinton for what Clinton did to the military .PS dont tell him I said any of this , it will go to his head , there will be no living with him .....

[Bob]

I am mad , you guys elected a person off of bumper sticker slogans , and whats worse is , you guys refused to see anything bad the first 4 years .. if Bush was a 1 term president , I wouldnt be nowhere near as harsh .. But 2 ****ing terms , and now you say he isnt a conservitive ...... what clued you in ?
as for the record of spending with Dems ? Balanced Budget , SS fixed until2055 ...... This is what pisses me off with you guys , even with everything on record , you still make **** up depending on what Limbaugh says ......

Then block me Spider, if you cant let go of the vitrol. You seem to be getting to the point where you cant talk about ideas...or the good in others.

[Spider]

Then block me Spider, if you cant let go of the vitrol. You seem to be getting to the point where you cant talk about ideas...or the good in others.

Only if it was that easy , actually I am taking it easy on you , I know you never said these things to me , but those thst did stil read my post .......... I have been called a traitor to my country , told to move to france , even given a jihad name , I was told I was stupid for not voting for Bush ........Then when I see you guys post about SS , then just skip or pretend you dont remember that Al gore had a solution to avoid the mess we are in now ,just sends me right up a wall ....... Nope I am goin to keep reminding you people about how you voted , and the damage you have done to our great country ..........

[Rohirrim]

http://www.socsec.org/publications.asp?pubid=507
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3ad398530bf9.htm
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CEFDE1E38F930A15752C0A9639C8B 63

In fact, while the movement for social insurance and old-age pensions had been building for years, it took a depression to overcome resistance to it. ''It's not an accident that only in the context of that protracted trauma did we get such a departure from our notion of laissez-faire, rugged individualism,'' Mr. Kennedy said.

The trauma for the elderly of that era can hardly be overstated. As W. Andrew Achenbaum, a historian at the University of Houston, put it, ''The Depression destroyed every mechanism that had existed for covering the vicissitudes of old-age dependency.''

Before the creation of Social Security, some Americans had private or state pensions, but most supported themselves into old age by working. The 1930 census, for example, found 58 percent of men over 65 still in the workforce; in contrast, by 2002, the figure was 18 percent.

The elderly also relied heavily on their families. ''Children, friends and relatives have borne and still carry the major cost of supporting the aged,'' the Committee on Economic Security, the Roosevelt administration panel that developed Social Security, reported in 1935. ''Several of the state surveys have disclosed that from 30 to 50 percent of the people over 65 years of age were being supported in this way.''

[Bronco Bob]

http://www.socsec.org/publications.asp?pubid=507


Myth #1: Social Security is in crisis and facing bankruptcy.

Even if Congress were to leave Social Security untouched, the program would be able to pay currently guaranteed benefits in full until 2042, according to the program's trustees. Thereafter, about 70 percent of promised benefits could be financed. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is even more optimistic: it projects that, without changes, Social Security will be able to meet its obligations in full until 2053, after which about 80 percent of benefits still could be paid for. Even under those worst-case scenarios, decades from now the system would be far from "bankrupt," "flat-out bust," or "broke," which imply that no resources would be available to pay any benefits. At that time, workers and their employers still will be contributing payroll taxes to finance benefits for retirees.

So Social Security is facing a long-term financing problem, but it is far from a "crisis" by any definition of that word. And the problem is much less immediate and threatening now than in the recent past, even though no changes have been made to the program. In 1997, Social Security's trustees had projected that the program's trust funds would last only another thirty-two years and would be depleted in 2029. Those forecasts have improved steadily-largely because of stronger than expected economic growth-so that the trust funds now are expected to remain sufficient for thirty-seven more years.

Like a doctor who recommends "watchful waiting" while a patient becomes healthier, Congress should think twice before performing radical surgery on an enormously successful program that appears to be getting better with age.

Myth #2: Social Security is unsustainable.

Over the course of the next seventy-five years, the gap between promised Social Security benefits and resources available to pay those benefits—the shortfall projected to arise beginning in 2042—is predicted to be about 0.7 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), or $3.7 trillion, according to Social Security's trustees. Without question, that's nothing to sneeze at. But by way of perspective, the tax cuts enacted in 2001 and 2003, if made permanent, would cost nearly three times as much: $11.6 trillion, or 2.0 percent of GDP, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Furthermore, the new prescription drug benefit enacted last year will cost more than twice as much as eliminating the Social Security shortfall.

So saying that Social Security isn't "sustainable" or "affordable" is simply wrong. The program's entire seventy-five-year shortfall could be paid for simply by rescinding just a third of the planned tax cuts, which primarily benefit the highest earners—people who would still be paying substantially less to the government than they did in the prosperous 1990s. A myriad other trade-offs are possible as well. But the long-term challenge confronting Social Security is by no means insurmountable.


Yet when Hillary said basically the same thing in the debates in regards to
points #1 and #2 Obama and Edwards practically laughed her off the stage.
That's why I accuse those two of just basically parroting Republican
talking points.
Hillary's basic position is there is nothing wrong with Social Security.
Leave it to hell alone and concentrate on fiscal responsibility so we
have a balanced budget again. That would go a long way toward
solving our economic problems.

[W*GS]

I've got a bet for the folks here agitating in favor of Social Security.

If you will compensate me for the money taken from me (and my employers) over my working career that has gone to current SS beneficiaries, and continue to compensate me for the future moneys taken from me for SS, when I am due to receive SS benefits, I'll sign them over to you.

Anyone care to take me up on it? Sure, there's a large initial outlay, but given that almost all SS recipients take out far more than they ever put in, you'll do quite well.

Who's willing to back up their talk with cash?

[Spider]

I've got a bet for the folks here agitating in favor of Social Security.

If you will compensate me for the money taken from me (and my employers) over my working career that has gone to current SS beneficiaries, and continue to compensate me for the future moneys taken from me for SS, when I am due to receive SS benefits, I'll sign them over to you.

Anyone care to take me up on it? Sure, there's a large initial outlay, but given that almost all SS recipients take out far more than they ever put in, you'll do quite well.

Who's willing to back up their talk with cash?
LOL hallow bet ....... we have no way to ensure you pay up , you cant sign over your benifits , unless you are found mentaly unfit ...... But maybe you are

[W*GS]

You're just a chicken, Spider.

By the fact that you're trying to skate on my bet tells me that you're just like me in that you don't really believe the BS being written here about SS.

[Spider]

You're just a chicken, Spider.

By the fact that you're trying to skate on my bet tells me that you're just like me in that you don't really believe the BS being written here about SS.

LOL yeah I am just chicken , you want me to send you money every week , in a bet , that in turn relys on me to trust you for a pay back ....... ROFL! well W*GSY better to be thought of as a chicken then a fool ......

[MplsBronco]

Only if it was that easy , actually I am taking it easy on you , I know you never said these things to me , but those thst did stil read my post .......... I have been called a traitor to my country , told to move to france , even given a jihad name , I was told I was stupid for not voting for Bush ........Then when I see you guys post about SS , then just skip or pretend you dont remember that Al gore had a solution to avoid the mess we are in now ,just sends me right up a wall ....... Nope I am goin to keep reminding you people about how you voted , and the damage you have done to our great country ..........

Preach on, Spider. I love how those on the right now claim no responsibility for the state of the country despite their unwavering support for the moron in charge. Should lose their right to vote, imo. There was never anything remotely good about Bush and was obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense.

[Spider]

Preach on, Spider. I love how those on the right now claim no responsibility for the state of the country despite their unwavering support for the moron in charge. Should lose their right to vote, imo. There was never anything remotely good about Bush and was obvious to anyone with an ounce of common sense.

So much for accountability ...i would have had a totaly different attitude if the question was put ........ Ok Folks how do we fix Bush's screw ups .......