Question about Bush/SS

[FreedomAngel82]

I was listening to a news report on Bernie Ward's show and they were talking about Bush stops and said he was going to half privitize SS. I thought they were wanting to privitize it all?? :shrug:

[unblock]

1. kinda like the guy who says he'll only put it in half way...

we're all still gonna get screwed if he has his way with it.

[Enquiringkitty]

7. LMAO!!!

[wtmusic]

2. They're backing off the original proposal

to privatize SS completely because it's doomed.

Given the time and the opportunity the neocons would wipe SS off the face of the earth.

[FreedomAngel82]

6. I thought so too

That's why I was wondering about that. Cause I thought the orginial plan was to do away with SS all together and have these "private accounts" and then I heard this in the news report. So he's changing again. *sigh* And here I thought Bush's camp said only John Kerry did policies based on polls. :eyes:

[laugle]

3. Social Security

Bush seeks to destroy social security. Privatizing is his first step but this will go down to defeat. People are waking up to Bush's lies..... Social Security can last 100 years or more if they just raise the $90,000 cap and make the whealthy pay a fare share. But we all know that bastard Bush doesn't want to raise taxes on the fat cats. It should be interesting to see what the moron does. Fortunately, my husband and I won't need it to live on but many people will. It is a safety net not a fricking 401K.

[Jim Lane]

4. What Bush says, what Bush believes

You may well be right that what Bush wants is to privatize it all. At least for the moment, however, he's not admitting that. The plan that he's pushing would give workers the option of diverting only some money into a private account. Most of the Social Security taxes paid on a worker's earnings would still be administered within the current (public) system.

Even this limited privatization has generated little enthusiasm. Gettign full privatization this year would be a political impossibility. If Bush gets through the partial privatization, though, then you could look for it to be expanded in future years. (On this theory, the current proposal, which is bad enough in its own right, is also the camel's nose inside the tent for something even worse.)

[subterranean]

5. Who knows?

In most places I've read that 4% would initially be privatized. But in a Bloomberg article I read today, it said one-third. Now you're saying you heard one-half. Who knows which one is right? :shrug:

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. Remember back in 2000 when Bush didn't even know

that Social Security was a federal program? How the heck does he expect anyone to think he knows how to fix SS now?



You know what else has changed on this issue? There are thousands of younger workers who understand that if our government does not think differently, they either are going to have to pay huge payroll tax increases or have major reductions in benefits. It doesn’t have to be that way. We trust individual workers, and so our plan says we’re going to keep the promise to our seniors. But we’ll allow younger workers at their choice to invest some of their own money in the private markets to get a better rate of return so that the Social Security promise will be kept.

And this frightens some in Washington. Because they want the federal government controlling the Social Security like it’s some kind of federal program. We understand differently though. You see, it’s your money not the government’s money.

Source: Speech in St. Charles, MO Nov 2, 2000

http://archives.ontheissues.org/2004/George_W__Bush_Social_Security.htm