The GOP counter: You don't have to participate in private accounts. They're optional. If you like the existing system, by all means, stay in the existing system.

The GOP counter: You don't have to participate in private accounts.

When they roll that out, let us know.

The only people who will fall for this are the uneducated white crackers who think they get some magic investment potential. Even the evangelicals can see through this one. Most people would only get to invest $200 a year. And for that they lose 28% of their benefit. A good deal if you're stupid and don't understand the market.

The idiot George is leaving a great legacy for his name. Incompetent.

The GOP counter: You don't have to participate in private accounts. They're optional. If you like the existing system, by all means, stay in the existing system.

That's all well and fine except for the benefit cuts that Georgie's plan is going to necessitate.

Not to mention the cost of all the debt he's piling up.

" You don't have to participate in private accounts. They're optional." muckdog

Yes, and I don't have to work, it's optional. But if I don't want to end up homeless my employment is not optional. The benefit cuts Bush is proposing make staying in Social Security unrealistic unless you want to work until your death.

What's more, the benefit cuts he is proposing NOW are greater than what would be needed in 40 years if the low range projections really are correct. Even worse, if the low range for economic growth is correct MOST of the private accounts aren't going to do that well.

One doesn't have to have a driver's licence, but the conscequences of getting caught driving without one are severe. Simularily, the conscequences of not going into a private account
under the Bush plan make the choice more theoretical than real. People WILL understand this. The town meetings are a good thing.

" You don't have to participate in private accounts. They're optional."

Yup and I suppose the next thing you're gonna tell us, the government costs for setting up these carve out private accounts is "optional" too. Apparently because Mr. Bush has not included the cost of government borrowing that will be needed to piratize social security in his budget, muck thinks it will be free..........

Muck you are a fool, you keep forgetting we actually read the fine print and details on these sites unlike your friends over at LGF.

"The GOP counter: You don't have to participate in private accounts. They're optional. If you like the existing system, by all means, stay in the existing system."

And see your benefits cut in half.

Please, let's forget Lieberman -- he's a Republcan now. I saw the "kiss."

He screwed Gore during the recount process in 2000 with a carefully planned subterfuge and he's been on the Bush payroll (in spirit, if not with actual cash) since then.

Lieberman. Zeller. A few others. Figure the count at 59 to 41 and go from there.

Just remember to use the phrase: "They are trying to take the 'security' out of Social Security, and that's just not RIGHT."

Charlie L
Portland, Oregon

Remember the mantra... repeat it to everyone you know:

Republicans lie and people die.
Republicans steal and give to their rich friends.
Republicans cheat honest Americans and get away with it.
All the Republicans have to be flushed away in 2006.

It's simple. It's to-the-point. It's true. It's our only hope.

Americans must "scream for Democracy."

...unless you want to work until your death... Go to Wall Mart and see what is happening. They are working until their death. Because pensions and SS are not enough anymore.
This morning on C-span I saw "Contracting practices in Iraq" If you have a chance to see or read it this week, I advice it. When you thought that bush administration could not get worst that what we have seen in the last 4 years! Think again.

No, you can remain in the existing system. Excerpt:

* President Bush will not change benefits for today's retirees or near-retirees.

* The President wants to see Social Security permanently strengthened for our children and grandchildren, without raising payroll taxes.

* The President favors voluntary personal accounts as part of a comprehensive solution to give younger workers the option to save some of these payroll taxes. Personal accounts give younger workers the opportunity to receive higher benefits than the current system can afford to pay, and provide ownership, choice, and the opportunity for workers to build a nest egg for their retirement and to pass it on to their spouse or their children.

* Those who do not choose to have a personal account would continue to draw benefits as Americans have long done from the Social Security program.

* Personal accounts will provide Americans who choose to participate with an opportunity to share in the benefits of economic growth by participating in markets through sound investments. Any proposal will include limitations on the risk of investments permitted in personal accounts and will include low-risk, low-cost options like broad index funds similar to those currently available to Federal employees.

link

Muck, It doesn't say the benefits won't be reduced, just they they will still get benefits.

"Those who do not choose to have a personal account would continue to draw benefits as Americans have long done from the Social Security program."

And have their benefits cut in half, whether by a switch from a wage to a price-based benefit determination, or as punishment for staying in the system, or both.

Muckdog:

Can any sane person believe anything the Chickenhawk-in-Chief says? Look at his statements and how they tally up against facts:
- There are WMDs in Iraq
- Saddam is in cahoots with Al-Qaeda
- Saddam is an imminent threat to the US;
- I will not touch Social Security
- Healthy Forests
- Clean Skies
- I am fiscally responsible
- Etc., etc. etc.

Jonathan

Muckdog,

You're a fucking idiot. If everyone isn't involved in Social Security it will eventually collapse, which is Bush's goal. The provision you cite is in there only to get this passed, not because Bush really believes that SS can be sustained with 2 trillion in revenue being diverted into private accounts.

SS has a small problem. Raise the caps and that problem goes away.

If everyone isn't involved in Social Security it will eventually collapse, which is Bush's goal.

ding ding ding! we have a winner, and it sure as f*ck isn't the american people.

Uh, Cupcake, not all of social security taxes will be privatized. Only a small percentage from those who choose private accounts. You should try reading and comprehending the details BEFORE you reach an opinion.

Many financial folks who were against social security private accounts came out for them, now that they're optional. You don't have to have a private account. That's the deal maker.

Optional.

Regarding Iraq, pretty much everyone agrees (except you folks), that Bush didn't LIE about it. He acted on bad information. Heads rolled at the CIA. The "Bush lied" argument fails. Move on.

Muck

Uh, muck, so the argument now is that Jr. is too stupid to know good information from bad information. Other than Tenet, (who was given a medal for his bad information), only a few peons were let go at the CIA. If he really wanted to punish those responsible-he should have fired Condi Rice first.

Muck, Bush Said "we found WMD" That is a lie. He was given conflicting info and ignore part of it just like he ignored over 50 warning of possible terrorist attacks before 911.

Try again Muck.

According to the CBS News/New York Times poll from mid-January, 59% of those polled thought that Bush was either hiding what he knew about Iraq, or flat-out lying about Iraq before the war. That was up from 55% who thought that a year ago. 55% of those polled also thought that Bush was making things sound better than they really were in Iraq, and there was a 7% drop from a year ago in those who thought that Bush was describing accurately what was happening in Iraq.

In other words, his credibility on Iraq is declining.

"Many financial folks who were against social security private accounts came out for them, now that they're optional. You don't have to have a private account. That's the deal maker." muck

Again, once people understand that the 'optional' part of this option is more theroretical than real this deal will be no deal.

On the CIA:
From what I've seen of credentials of the people who left the CIA after Goss took over, it wasn't a few hacks who left, it was competent careerists like McLaughlin. In my previous job, I worked for an organization where a new guy came in to shake things up. That organization is in chaos now and 'the grapevine' tells me the new guy is in the hot seat. The brownnoses near the top and others who couldn't find other work stayed on. The truly talented found other workplaces that valued their talents. I fear a simular fate for the CIA.

Muckdog:

Bu$h is a f*** liar, and you know it!!!

Jonathan

Hey people, Go look at SCOTUS's finding in "Flemming v. Nestor" from 1960. You'll find some interesting items there.

"Hey people, Go look at SCOTUS's finding in "Flemming v. Nestor" from 1960. You'll find some interesting items there."

Peter.
Are you trying to say that law abiding people in or near retirement age should be treated like deported Communist party members?
That's going to be a REAL popular position with the public and one I'm sure no lawyer will be able to distinguish from any case involving a future client.

Bringing up this dusty old case just shows the desperation of the anti-Social Security side.

A good deal if you're stupid and don't understand the market. by phidipides/Ali

Hey Ali!! Must I remind you of your pathetic post to Sharon on investing? You made a complete ass of yourself.
King

Anyone against private accounts is an asshole and don't understand compound int over a period of years. Even if it's only CD's or money markets. it beats what you chumps offer today. My God you DEMS are idiots.
Harry the LIAR Reid said under Clinton we need to privitize SS. Harry the Liar suggested following Chile's example. And my mom wonders why I hate DEMS. They stand for nothing, just a bunch of lying pigs. Kerry still hasn't signed the form to release his service records although he told Russert he would 2 weeks ago and PROMISED Don Imus last week.

I just got this response on a different Dem blog, so rlprather obviously did read the case.

"I just recently did a report on this issue. From what little knowledge I am humble to possess, Flemming's holding is obviously the correct one given everything we know about the construction of statutes. If we construed every government benefit to confer a non-defeasable vested property right, it'd be very problematic any time you wanted to reform the system, because you'd have a taking.

The alternative, of course, (and the one posited by the holding) being that Social Security exists at the whim of Congress. That's a little scary, but that's democracy, man.

(Property, of course, is going to be a social construct anyway you slice it, so it's really the difference between an "entitlement" and something-we-presume-to-be-inviolable, property. Or to put it more simply, varying degrees of seriousness in promise-keeping.)

That said, having some investments in addition to Social Security as it is would be a wonderful thing."

What a red herring your post was rlprather.

Chevy, When will Bush release his? Kerry is no longer running, Bush is still president. Also You have no clue as to what will happen is we go with Bushes plas for SS or you would be againist it.

"I just got this response on a different Dem blog, so rlprather obviously did read the case."
Peter

What other Dem. blog? Lf you can't give a link at least give a web address. Right now you have nothing but a 'quote' without any reference.

"The alternative, of course, (and the one posited by the holding) being that Social Security exists at the whim of Congress. That's a little scary, but that's democracy, man."

There's an old saying Peter that 'no one's life, liberty or property is safe as long as the legislature is in session.' Using that line of thinking NOTHING you have is safe from state confiscation. If everyone lived their life in fear that things they have or expect to have will disappear at any time without redress you have not civilization, but a state of banditry.

"That said, having some investments in addition to Social Security as it is would be a wonderful thing."

NO KIDDING! And that is already available. I own stocks and some of them are in areas with some risk. I'm young enough currently to ride out a few years of risk before my retirement planning needs to turn more risk adverse. (Yikes I'm starting to sound like Muckdog!)

If you think that these 'private accounts' are going to be yours free and clear think again. Administration officals have not contradicted what Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND) said about the proposal over the weekend:"Not only is your name on the account but Uncle Sam's is too." You will not see ANY money from a private account until after the Social Security trust fund is paid off. Estimates differ but the worse case number I've heard is that up to 80% of that average account would be deducted before dispersial. And BYW even at an unusually high 10% rate of return that would be less than the 3% most statisticians credit to Social Security.

Finally, your 'ad hominium' attack. How would you know what I read? Maybe I made a one liner comment because I thought (and still do) that your case is weak. And you have not provided enough infomation to determine if my comment was a 'red herring' or not. Case law is subject to intrepration, that's why we have courts. Even if you document the quote you have the courts would still have to determine if the law and facts of a future case are complementary to Fleming or can be distinguished from it.

...tick, toc, tick, toc...

Twelve hours and no return of Peter.
I guess that 'different Dem. blog' has vanished.
Sometimes silence says alot doesn't it?

...tick, toc, tick, toc...

Burntorangereport.com

Hey I've got teenagers, you get the drift.

Apologies for the lack of reference.

Peter,

Thanks for the web address. I hit their search button for the fleming case, it's not in there yet but I will try again later. They did have some interesting articles on other subjects.
Best wishes with the teen agers.