everyonce in awhile i run up on a piece
that says it so much better than i ever could
that i feel moved to just post the whole thing
my apologies for that, not comfortable w/it
i should just link to it
and might take this piece down later, ive only
done it twice i think but this one moved me
arf
friday, February 25, 2005
Bush spreads lies about Social Security
For the first decade or so of my working life, I hardly thought about Social Security, other than as an annoying deduction from my always-inadequate paycheck.
At some point in my early 30s, it began to dawn on me that the annoying deduction was actually something I was slowly but steadily accumulating toward retirement -- a destiny that seemed, at the time, eons away. I was almost 40 when my parents retired and I began to realize how Social Security actually works -- that my payroll deductions helped pay for the Social Security checks my mom and dad received each month.
From that point on, until their deaths, I looked at my Social Security deductions with considerable pride -- feeling that I was, in a tangible way, helping to take care of my parents in much the same way that now one of my daughters (and the other when she finishes school and gets a job) contributes, through payroll deductions, to the Social Security checks I now receive.
My maternal grandmother, who worked her entire life as a domestic, lived with our family until her death. That was the way our society took care of its aged before Social Security. In my family's case, during the Depression, it meant a divided household for a number of months -- my grandmother, mom and I living in a rented room while my father slept on the sofa in his older brother's home. It was the only financial arrangement my dad could afford.
For most Americans, such experiences are now part of the past, thanks to a system put in place in the early years of the New Deal. It has served the nation and its citizens well for almost 70 years. But now comes a president with a penchant for lying to the American public who tells us this system is on the verge of bankruptcy. He proposes that citizens invest in the stock market as an alternative way to save for their retirement.
President Bush's party has savaged the Social Security system since its inception. Alf Landon, the Republican who ran against Roosevelt in 1936, called Social Security "a cruel hoax" on the American people. Barry Goldwater wanted to repeal the legislation that created the system while Ronald Reagan called Social Security a program that is a "sure loser" and one that would worsen, rather than lessen, the hazards of age.
Social Security was devised as a program that calls on Americans to take care of one another; each generation of workers pays taxes that support an earlier generation of retirees. The very idea of people taking care of one another -- and of taxing citizens in order to do so -- is what the free-market, self-reliant throng detests; it smacks to them of socialism.
And that's why they -- led by Bush -- blatantly spread falsehoods about a program that marks the difference between sustenance and abject poverty for millions of elderly Americans.
The facts are that, for at least another decade, Social Security will continue to take in far more money than it pays out. After that, it will have to draw on its reserves of more than one and a half trillion dollars. If nothing is done, these reserves -- the Social Security trust fund -- will be exhausted somewhere between 2042 and 2050. After that, the system would be able to pay out about 70 percent of scheduled benefits.
This is not a system that is either "in crisis" or bankrupt. It is a system that needs adjusting by any one of -- or a combination -- of several, relatively painless alternatives: raising the ceiling on income taxed for Social Security (currently set at $90,000) or a slight increase in the retirement age that takes into account the much greater longevity rate that Americans now enjoy and can be expected to, in the future.
One thing is for certain. The battle over Social Security is where the Democratic Party better draw a clear line in the political sand. It had best be prepared to obstruct, filibuster and do everything else within reach to drive a stake through the heart of the obscene White House plan to "privatize" Social Security.
If the Democrats muff this one, the party can forget about its future -- it will neither have nor deserve one.
Recent Comments