HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Entitlement reform - is t...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:22 AM

Entitlement reform - is this a back door attempt to privatize Social Security?

12 replies, 905 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 12 replies Author Time Post
Reply Entitlement reform - is this a back door attempt to privatize Social Security? (Original post)
hedgehog Nov 2012 OP
ProSense Nov 2012 #1
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #3
ProSense Nov 2012 #4
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #5
ProSense Nov 2012 #6
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #11
leveymg Nov 2012 #10
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #2
Turbineguy Nov 2012 #7
Aerows Nov 2012 #8
ProSense Nov 2012 #9
AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2012 #12

Response to hedgehog (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:26 AM

1. Social Security is not going to be privatized.

There is no need to push strawmen arguments that empower Republicans.

Durbin takes Social Security off the table
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/25/1164526/-Durbin-takes-Social-Security-off-the-table

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #1)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:34 AM

3. I used to have confidence in Durbin. Not any more.

 

As he rightfully said, "The bankers own this place." If this is true, the bankers decide the extent that Social Security will be on the table, not Durbin.

When Social Security is privatized, it will be done so after we've been told - with confidence - that Social Security is off the table.

Some of us have been tricked too many times to now suspend what we already know about the greed of the banksters and how Durbin and others have given in to them.

Investigate and put some banksters in prison, and then maybe I'll believe that they will have no influcence over whether Social Security is off the table.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #3)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:40 AM

4. Oh brother.

"When Social Security is privatized, it will be done so after we've been told - with confidence - that Social Security is off the table. "

Durbin is still looking at Medicare, but please spare me the notion that it will be done in secret.

I mean, if that's the case let's just give up, they're going to do it anyway, right?

Even if you seriously believe that, do you really think no one will notice the President signing it or 67 Senators (a super majority) voting for it? There are more than 30 Senators (not including Elizabeth Warren and other newly-elected Senators) joined with Senator Sanders against any cuts to Social Security.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:42 AM

5. No Grand Bargain? Whew, that's a relief.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #5)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:45 AM

6. Democratic Senator Introduces Bill To Lift Social Security’s Tax Cap, Extend Solvency For Decades

Democratic Senator Introduces Bill To Lift Social Security’s Tax Cap, Extend Solvency For Decades
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021834952

Do Not Cut Social Security

September 20, 2012

A major bloc of 29 senators took a strong stand today against any cuts to Social Security as part of a deficit reduction deal. "We will oppose including Social Security cuts for future or current beneficiaries in any deficit reduction package," the senators said in a letter circulated by Sen. Bernie Sanders, the founder of the Senate Defending Social Security Caucus. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Charles Schumer, the Senate's No. 3 leader, signed the letter. So did Sens. Mark Begich, Sheldon Whitehouse and Al Franken, who joined Sanders at a Capitol news conference.

Social Security has not contributed to the deficit or to the national debt, the senators said. The program that benefits more than 50 million retirees, widows, widowers, orphans and disabled Americans has a $2.7 trillion surplus and, according to actuaries, will be able to pay every benefit owed to every eligible recipient for the next 21 years.

"Contrary to some claims, Social Security is not the cause of our nation's deficit problem. Not only does the program operate independently, but it is prohibited from borrowing," the letter said. "Even though Social Security operates in a fiscally responsible manner, some still advocate deep benefit cuts and seem convinced that Social Security hands out lavish welfare checks. But Social Security is not welfare. Seniors earned their benefits by working and paying into the system," the letter added.

Social Security has not contributed to deficits because it has a dedicated funding stream. Workers and employers each pay half of a 12.4 percent payroll tax on the first $110,100 of a worker's wages. The tax rate for employees was reduced to 4.2 percent in 2011 and 2012, but is scheduled to return to 6.2 percent in January.

To read the letter, click here »

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=066FB085-5798-4E6C-ABA2-85549D84DFA6


Other signatories:

Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Tim Johnson (D-S.D.), John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Robert Menendez (D-N.J.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.)

This doesn't include Elizabeth Warren and other new Senators.

These are the people who should be empowered, not straw men and Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #6)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 11:39 AM

11. Thanks, but I alread read and rec'd the post. Did you notice that Durbin's name is not included?

 

Could it be that he has such a solid reputation amongst the Senators for protecting Social Security that the Senators who wrote the letter didn't find a need to ask him to also sign it?

Or maybe he was out of town and the Senators who wrote and signed the letter, in their haste to get it signed, didn't have time to wait for him although he really wants to protect Social Security?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #4)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 11:08 AM

10. So, something else (Medicare) will get traded away for the sake of The Grand Bargain.

We'll be assured that another artificial catastrophe has been avoided. Business as usual. Why should anything change this time, when that's the pattern going back through the last Administration, and the one before it, right back to Reagan-Bush I?

Are we all supposed to have amnesia, or is that just the cost of loyalty? If the netroots shut up every time for the sake of The Deal, why are we supposed to expect anything else will happen?

No, we should continue screaming bloody murder from our little corner, and hope that they may pause to hear us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hedgehog (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:27 AM

2. The Grand Bargain is a step towards privatization.

 

Horay, we're all going to be rich stockholders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hedgehog (Original post)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:49 AM

7. Actually, privatization of Social Security isn't such a bad idea if done right.

If people have a choice, GOP voters can do what they've always wanted to do and that is give their retirements to wall street tyccons, while the rest of us get by.

On edit:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turbineguy (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:51 AM

8. I doubt

that there is a single GOP voter that would do that though, because in their opinion, it's always cuts for thee, not for me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Turbineguy (Reply #7)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 10:54 AM

9. Good grief!

Global warming deniers and Social Security privatizers unite!

When the hell did these RW arguments gain traction on the left?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #9)

Mon Nov 26, 2012, 11:43 AM

12. When? When it became more profitable for them than to do their jobs and protect our interests.

 

Every one of the Senators who approved of the let's-send-American-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreements has betrayed us.

Every one of the Senators who is going to approve of the Administration's pending let's-send-even-more-American-jobs-to-foreign-countries "free-trade" agreements is going to betrayed us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread