Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: OZkansas on October 05, 2002, 08:51:24 AM
-
I can't find what the democrat plan is regarding Social Security? Anyone know where I can read about the democrat plan?
Thanks
-
Originally posted by OZkansas
I can't find what the democrat plan is regarding Social Security? Anyone know where I can read about the democrat plan?
Thanks
spend it faster than it comes in, same as it always has been.
-
Am serious. Really want to know just what their proposal is regarding Social Security!
-
You won't, but you can be sure they have sorts of little skits, catch phrases and scare tactics about how the other guys plan will ruin the country.
-
Am aware of that. But surely there must be some kind of proposal to keep Social Security afloat that the dems have in mind.
-
none.... just critisism that's the ONLY thing they have too offer...
-
actually back during the campaign Gores proposal was his 'lock box' plan. basicly hands off of social security. no low interest loans from social security for your freind to default on.
btw- if you'r planing on social security for your survival after retirement. you're screwed. doesn't matter who gets elected they will eventually bleed it dry.
-
Originally posted by OZkansas
Am aware of that. But surely there must be some kind of proposal to keep Social Security afloat that the dems have in mind.
raise taxes on those of us who work to cover those who don't .. same ole same ole
-
Originally posted by Udie
spend it faster than it comes in, same as it always has been.
I thought that this was Dubya's plan.
-
Isn't Dubya planning a war that will cost over $50 billion? A war that, unlike the Gulf War of 1991, won't be subsidised by the Middle Eastern oil producers? A war that is very likely to be only fought by the UK and US?
-
But Dowding... The danger from the Iraqi regime is grave and growing!
The terror!
Oh my gawd! The terror!
:rolleyes:
-
Isn't Dubya planning a war that will cost over $50 billion? A war that, unlike the Gulf War of 1991, won't be subsidised by the Middle Eastern oil producers? A war that is very likely to be only fought by the UK and US?
But Dowding... The danger from the Iraqi regime is grave and growing!
Hey did y'all just try to divert our attention from the problems at home to the troubles in the middle east?
-
Methinks the libs just answered OZkansas question.
When in doubt go with fud.
-
Well, I see there is no response. So I can only agree that the individual that earns the money paid to Social Security should have control for his or her own benefit over part of it. It's the only fair thing to do. Just think of the weath that could be created by a minimum wage earner that could be passed on to his family at his death. As it is now the poor have no chance to obtain wealth of any kind due to taxation!
As the length of life varies according to race perhaps the current Social Security system is a racist program!
-
Originally posted by OZkansas
As it is now the poor have no chance to obtain wealth of any kind due to taxation!
If by that you mean that the poor will never obtain wealth because they pay high taxes then I disagree. The poor pay very little in taxes, even percentage wise. It is the middle class that are bearing the heaviest tax burden and these that are unlikely to obtain wealth because of it.
-
OZKansas,
Most democratic plans for "fixing" Social Security in recent years combine tax increases with raising the age at which recipients may begin to draw their benefits.
Gore's "lock box" proposal wasn't taken seriously by any politician in Washington, least of all him. Originally, the Social Security fund was "locked away" so that the tax money taken in to support it could grow and earn interest to keep it solvent. Congress found the key to that "locked box" back in 1974, I believe it was, and began to draw the funds out of it to support other social spending programs. THAT is why Social Security is in the financial trouble it is in today.
Regards, Shuckins
-
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:hU9m1HBEICoC:democraticleader.house.gov/sp/issues/policy_updates/readPolicyUpdate.asp%3FID%3D18+Democratic+plan+for+social+security&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
-
http://216.239.33.100/search?q=cache:Gmk40cJcaS4C:http://www.truthout.org/mm_01/4.DPC.demplan.pdf+Democratic+plan+for+social+security&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
Those 2 sites were found in about 10 seconds with a Google search.
-
I believe that Pres Bush has gotten a report from a bipartisian group that recomended the partial privatization of SSA since the above positions were taken.
Justt what is the current position the dems are running on this cycle? What is their plan to extend Social Security? In other words why would one vote for the dems on this issue.
-
the excess SS taxes are invested in govt bonds, which means the govt borrows the money to pay it's bills, i have no idea how much the govt owes SS , but when SS taxes fall short of SS payments , SS can start cashing in the govt bonds and when the bonds run out SS can borrow money from the govt. so all the talk about SS going broke is BS to scare the old people.
-
Investing the excess SS taxes in government bonds is a shell game designed to hide the fact that SS taxes are being shifted to the general fund. When the bonds are redeemed to pay for SS shortfalls, guess where the money comes from -- the general fund -- paid for by the poor shmucks unlucky enough to be taxpayers when the bill comes due.