Still confused about Social Security
Noam Scheiber notes this amusing exchange between Karl Rove and Fox News’ Chris Wallace.
WALLACE: But, Mr. Rove, there was tremendous opposition from your own party on immigration reform and, frankly, not much support on Social Security reform.
ROVE: Well, look. On Social Security it’s a tough issue. This president campaigned, talked about it in 2000, talked about it in 2004. But it’s a difficult issue. I understand that. But again, inexplicable opposition from Democrats [made it impossible].
First, notice how Rove seemed to claim a mandate to privatize Social Security based on the fact that Bush “talked about it” during his two campaigns. In other words, as Rove sees it, Bush mentioned privatization, people voted for him, therefore the nation endorsed privatization. The talking point was a White House favorite for a while, despite being demonstrably false.
Second, the fact that Rove considers Democratic opposition to gutting a popular, successful Social Security system “inexplicable” is hilarious. All Bush tried to do was eliminate a bedrock Democratic issue with a reckless plan that the nation hated and couldn’t afford. And yet, it’s “inexplicable” that Dems would oppose it. They’re obviously history’s greatest monsters.
Rove is inexplicable. A conundrum. Always wrong. Not the brain he is made out to be. Just a mean, petty, vindictive schooyard bully.
Rove and Fox..made for each other
Jo @ 1:
Schoolyard. Duh
That's it, KKKarl.
Keep accusing the Democrats of saving Social Security.
I love it.
Q: How can you tell if Karl Rove is lying?
A: His lips are moving.
"First, notice how Rove seemed to claim a mandate to privatize Social Security based on the fact that Bush “talked about it” during his two campaigns. In other words, as Rove sees it, Bush mentioned privatization, people voted for him, therefore the nation endorsed privatization. The talking point was a White House favorite for a while, despite being demonstrably false."
They used the same fallacious logic to justify the "Surge". Democrats voted to confirm David Petraeus, therefore they endorsed the "Surge". Of course, Congress confirmed the man because he was qualified, not the policy or tactic.
"We wanted to cash out Social Security so our buddies in the Financial Services industry could rake in the big commissions and leave nothing left for the poor saps who turned their money over to them, but the Democrats fought against it. Go figure."
Leahy talks tough. He ain't got no ballz, nobody got no ballz to go after the Bush crime family.
Well, after all, Rove is entitled to "the" math.
Carmikl @ 6:
Betrayus is qualified? If the criteria is sycophant and boosh arse-kisser then, yeah, I suppose so. Congress confirmed him 'cause who the hell is left?
Thank you, Mr. Benen. Perfectly stated!
Betrayus is qualified, to kiss Bushco's azz. Bwahaha!
Look for Rove to be the new Ann Coulter.
Peter Feldstein @ 13:
He will haveto lose some tonnage.
Jo @ 10:
The point is that there is a curious logic out there that is only used by Republicans and apparently believed by the media.
When the electorate realizes the fiscal mismanagement and frat boy cronyism of the BA (all signs point to a looming economic meltdown) Bush and Rove, along with the Republican party will be lower than Benedict Arnold in the public opinion polls. Invest your retirement in the Stock Market? Can you imagine the fallout if we had let that happen?
Keep talkin, Rove - unless you're planning on moving to paraguay, you will have to live the rest of your life among people who revile you and everything you stand for.
Good luck wit dat.
If you think privatizing Social Security is about benefiting the American people,then I'd like to ask you how we've made out with privatizing or at least , changing our healthcare model to for profit under the Reagan administration.The fact is Wall St. is licking it's chops over the windfall that would fall into it's lap if Social Security were privatized and if a significant number of Americans go bust the Wallstreeters know the inefficient,bureaucratic government they hate so much would bail out older,retired people who lost their life savings privately.I know I'm preaching to the choir but exactly whom is the magnanimous Mr. Rove representing when he pushes his privatization scheme?
"popular, successful Social Security system"
You sir, astound me.
Rove is a jerk, privitization may be the wrong fix, but it's a bit absurd to think that the pyramid scheme is either working, or well loved.
Marcus Aurelius @ 16:
I wouldn't be surprised if Bush's escape ranch in Paraguay has an extra bunk set up for turd blossom.
but they look for the checks every month.Not to mention how it helps the disabled..What would happen to the disabled?The people who can't contribute to a private fund because of a disability.
Democratic bedrock issue..
Could someone name me a bedrock republican issue?
Imagine how many people would be "inexplicably opposed" to Bush's privatization (aka elimination) of Social Security had it gone through with the volatility in the market's these few weeks?
It's just the typical bourgeois attitude of sociopaths and bratty trust fund babies. They simply can't understand why the rest of us don't just submit to their "superior" will and give up fighting for equality and survival. They hate Social Security because it makes us all less vulnerable to their capricious whims and able participants in the democratic system.
It never ceases to amaze me how so many criminal acts go unpunished. How can a people be so brainwashed? Time after time after time the bullies push sand in our faces and we just spit it out and pretend that next time for sure we'll stand up to them. The Democratic party and the Republican party are one and the same. Party 1a and 1b. That's why nothing ever gets done to help the average person. If you're rich then they care about you. But the poor? Let them rot. Who cares about the poor, they aren't making those big political contributions are they? They don't have the ear of those corporate big-wigs do they? They mock us openly and we just sit here and take it. They feed us some more bread and circuses and we swallow it and ask for more. I was going to say that it's time we stood up and fought back, but that will never happen. George Orwell said it best. "The future is a boot stomping on a human face forever". They stomp and we suffer. They get richer and we get poorer. They hold all the power and we hold none of it. For ever and ever amen.
Anybody else notice how quiet the Libertarian and Ron Paul trolls have been since the stock market has been floundering?
Democratic bedrock issue..
Could someone name me a bedrock republican issue?
Gay bashing...
mudshark @ 20:
We either feed the poor, a la Soylent Green, or we become the candles for the poor, a la Vivoleum.
I have never met a republican thats grandparents or parents were not on social security and Medicare. They love the entitlements for theirselves but not for those who need them.
Ed @ 18:
If you want to see a true pyramid scheme at work, simply look at the sub-prime, overleveraged, hedge fund fiasco. SS is by far the lesser of those two evils.
Most republicans despise Social Security. They will say and do anything to privatize it and make it go away. They will lie until the end of time about it just as they do about socialized medicine in other countries. Why? Because they know if this country gets single payer national health care like every other advanced country then we are never, ever going to get rid of Social Security. They hate any kind of government program that actually helps regular, average citizens. Now if you have a program that helps the wealthy get wealthier...that's a whole different kind of help and they like it a lot.
Ed @ 18:
Nobody likes paying into it,But they sure as hell like it when they need it....don't they?
Snowball, you're right, SS is bedrock. Investment is the stock market is a 'risky scheme'. In 9 years, who knows where the stock market will be? But in 9 years I can guarantee you SS will be gone.
You like those sure deals, right? New Deals. Trust socialists, none of them has a 401k. : )
speaking of disabled....what about the people coming back from Iraq missing an arm or two...leg or two.....those folks deserve more.
If they would have gotten their nasty hands on social security, we would be in an even more of a mess then they now have us in
I do give thanks to the Democrats for standing firm on this one, and it was truely at a bad time when much of the country still believed this lying bastard
A freind of mine told me saturday that he lost 50 grand in the last 2 weeks in the market....putting peoples SS in the stock market is insane.I have a 401k.....it's not going anywhere...but thats ok...as long as the market doesn't crash..........but what happens if it does?......bummer huh?
Cato @ 32:
Your 401k will be worthless in a year. Get your money out now (pay the penalty and taxes). There are two reasons for this unsolicited advice: 1) The stockmarket (actually, the global market) is overleveraged - if you don't understand this, look it up, and; 2) You obviously don't understand what you've invested in, because you're boasting about getting screwed.
Marcus Aurelius @ 37:
I will look into this...I've already pulled some out......I think right after The preznit leaves we will see a drastic drop...when the last crash happened....the banks closed their doors....Out of Biz
So many of the arguments just don't hold up under scrutiny.
First: Stop spending the money on other stuff! That's so obvious that nobody seems to want to bother mentioning it.
Second: SS is solvent to 2048 at current levels. The baby boomer generation will be 100 years old by then. Them that are still alive, that is - and that means that the crisis will die with them. Doh!
Third: Everybody with a 401K will have to start taking payouts at a certain age. It's the law. That means they will be selling their stocks. So let's take a wild guess what will happen to the stock market when 75 million baby boomers all start selling their stocks. Let's just say, I want to get out before the big crash. Youngsters who agree to put their senior security funds into a market set up to crash deserve to lose it.
Finally, I remember the Reagan administration telling us that we had to start paying more into the system, so that it would be there for us when we retired. It used to be a Pay-as-you-go plan, but now we are forced to pay in more than pay-as-you-go. But they have been stealing it to pay for other stuff.
I wonder what would happen to Uncle Louie if we had been giving him an extra hundred dollars a week to save for us when we retired. And now it's time to retire and we go over to Uncle Louie's house to get our money. He says, sorry bub. I spent it on a bunch of other stuff ad I don't have it. I think Louie will have a very short and painful future.
But Uncle Sam? or shouldn't that be Uncle Scam?
Scott @ 30:
repigs dont like anything that helps out poor people or old folks they were against ss and unions the new deal republicans are such god damned idiots and even the poor repigs vote against thier own interests , the world will be well rid of these dimwhits when they die off, praise de lard!
Most of the Rove,Bush,Cheney talking points throughout the last 6.5 years are and have been pure invalid blather.Iraq comes to mind,but what they effectively do is the repetition
thing like the WMD lies over and oner and over until it becomes "fact"--and I use the term loosely.Then, when the lies are exposed the excuses,blame etc. is repeated oven and over and over and over until it once again either becomes "fact" or is mercifully forgotten by the press and the Congress.
Social Security is such a adequate bedrock program that the Congress would not fall for the lies,the repetition,and the blather.Both sides knocked the BS investment scheme OUT.We need more cohesion like that to get rid of the Bush criminal troupe,but unfortunately either some of the Repubs are in on it with him,or they`re just too dumb to get it.
There`s still time. Pelosi ~07
I'M not saying Social Security is the be all and end all for retirement income.401k's,private investments and anything else you can scrounge up is very important to supplement your standard of living in the golden years.However Social Security is an extremely vital part of ensuring we can survive as we most likely have passed our most productive,prime wage earning years.Remember,pensions have all but disappeared for most people.Social Security is a winner. It's worth saving.
"Times up."
Is this Leahy's version of the Friedman unit?
Monday: "Okay, times up."
Next Monday: "I mean it now, times up!"
Next Monday after that: "Yoo-hoo! Oh, Georgie! Hurry up, please, it's time!"
Monday, Monday, da-da, da-da-da-da: "Okay, maybe if we synchronize watches. What time do you all have over there in the White House?"
Get a backbone, Leahy!
Oops, that belonged on the Leahy thread.
If you ever listened to Rove, how could anyone conclude he was a brain. You've got to blame the Mainstream Media for all this BS.
Bush has wanted to privatize since his 78 congressional run but the media let him pretend there was a "crisis"
Ed @ 18:
It figures you are using the Republican frame. Social Security isn't an investment scheme. If it were you might try comparing it to check kiting. It is an insurance scheme, and you pay premiums.
The Republicans WANT you to think it is an investment scheme. It is NOT. There is nothing wrong with it that a modest rate increase wouldn't fix. If we were to privatize it you would see private insurance companies doing to it what they are doing to healthcare: Denying coverage and wasting 30% on overhead.
Rove is either an idiot or a genius posing as an idiot.
Cato @ 32:
OK, shithead. What is the wager?
Snowball @ 23:
You said a mouthful there. My sentiments exactly.
401ks ARE A JOKE. The average person invests them stock-related funds, and when Wall Street decides it wants your money, it's going to take it. You got a taste of it last week.
Most of your 401ks are not insured by anyone. If you lose, you lose it all, with nothing to fall back upon when you reach retirement age. You can look forward to welfare, because the greedy sons-of-bitches are going to find a way to steal your money.
Why republican bastards hate SS so much is simply inexplicable. Don't ever allow them to discontinue SS. The United States can well afford it. All we have to do is remove the cap that the richest 2% have in place right now (thanks, republicans!), and SS is fully funded.
Never let Social Security die or be "privatized". Privatization of SS will benefit the rich, and will create a welfare state for the elderly.
mudshark @ 31:
I'm not sure if they like it then either. From what I'm told, it's a tiny amount of money to live on. Kinda screws ya both ways.
FreeDUMB @ something:
Why would it figure? I'm not one of those jerks.
The point of comparing it to a pyramind scheme is that can no longer sustain itself if there isn't more money going into it at any given point then there is money going out. If the pyramind is upside-down, then it falls over. That wouldn't be an issue if the surplus during baby boomer earning years were saved, invested, or even stuck under a mattress instead of being spent on wars and other gov't favourites. Then it could be used when that unusually large group of people finally gets old.
SS is broken. Just admit it. That doesn't mean that you're going to run out and join the republican party or even support their ideas on fixing it. It doesn't mean that you think it will ever run out of money (the SS tax can just be raised again). It just means that it was set up in a very different day and age, and has currently grown up in a very deformed way.
If it's not broken, and it bears no resemblance to an investment scheme, then why are your payouts determined by how much you have paid in, and secondly, why do rich people get paid social security too?
Ed, you are a liar. Why do you spread lies? What possible motivation could you have for wanting to hurt people who depend on Social Security, both now and in the future, by spreading lies?
I suspect that somewhere in your past, if you're not a GD republican (in which case, you are a moron), you or somebody close to you felt that you got screwed out of a SS entitlement. Nobody can spread shit like you do without it being personal.
Social Security is not "broken"; it's being manipulated. Like I said in my other post, the f**king republicans made it possible for the richest people among us to not pay their fair share of SS taxes. When you starve any program, it gets in trouble.
In this case, the republicans intentionally rigged the program, by cutting its funding, by capping the taxes paid by the richest people. Just uncapping the taxes Bill Gates alone should be paying into Social Security would provide stability to the program.
Let me put it another way: If I put a plastic bag over your head for 15 minutes, would you just be "broken" or would it be more pertinent to say that I'm a murderer? The f**king republicans have set out to murder SS, but you sit around describing the would-be crime scene, as if the gasping victim schemed to kill itself.
It really is that simple, but I suspect you're carrying too much baggage to grasp the concept.
Why don't you focus on some other topic, one in which you can demonstrate a scintilla of expertise and wisdom?
Or is it easier to march lockstep with the f**king republican lie about Social Security?
Just Me @ 52:
Wow. I really like C&L. Great stories & intelligent presentation.
But every once in a while something gets slipped in there that's a way out there & I can't help but comment. Yet I regret it every time I do. The readers here tend to be die-hard Democrats at any cost, as opposed to free-thinking political minded people who can join together in hatred and digust of Republicans.
'Just Me' & others who are missing this, please read carefully: I do not want to gut SS. I do not want to kill SS. I do not care if it is restructured under complete gov't control & funding, or if it partially tied into the market, as some countries have done (like NZ recently).
By saying that it is broken (regardless of whether or not it was broken on purpose or not), does not mean that the other guys are right in what they want to do with it. This is not a binary situation. It can be broken, and at the same time(!), the Repubs can be corrupt, poor people hating jerks who want to destroy SS.
What does that mean? You say I'm a moron if I'm not a repub?
Maybe you're a bit too excited to be typing right now. Or you're 12.
And yet the SS tax has more than doubled in the past 50 years. How is that starving it? And if it is being manipulated & broken on purpose, then it needs to be fixed so that opportunistic politicians can not fiddle with it to the point of breaking it.
How about this... There, in that room stands a Life-Time Democrat (the other 23%'ers if you will) with his hands over his ears, singing loudly "It's fine! It's Ok! There's nothing wrong here! Please move along!"
It reminds me of talking to die-hard repubs about Iraq. If you try to get them to acknowledge that the war isn't going well, and the surge won't work, then they immediately think that you're a Al-Qaeda loving, Sadam following 'liberal'.
It's broken. The republicans want to make it worse. It's up to the dems to acknowledge that it's broken & set out to make it better.
Ed, you're still a liar.
But first: You engage in the juvenile practice of taking a sentence at time and dissecting it. This is the approach of those who are young and stupid, or those who have weak arguments. But I digress.
You are a liar because you're still using the tired f**king republican argument that Social Security is broken. It's not broken; it simply needs the funding that only the rich can provide, but don't. Under a Democratic "regime", perhaps we can change that. Get it?
I suggest you go to Google and find out what the tax cap is on SS. Get the "broken" word out of your thought process, and focus on "tax cap", as in "for the wealthy".
It's not that hard to figure out. But you and Rove just can't quite get a handle on it. You have to dodge and skirt and bob and weave...do everything except admit that the wealthy people in this country are choking entitlement programs.
I'm through addressing your smart-ass routine here.
I'm sorry "just me" but haven't you ever heard of the phrase "If it aint broke don't fix it"? Well if it's not broke then why are you ranting about tax caps being "broken"?
Indeed Matt.
But he's a bit too out there to pick up on that.
Or to address any of the valid points I made. But I guess doing that would be "stupid" and "weak" of him.
Maybe it's a semantic thing as well. The word 'broken' could just be a hot button that sets some people off. Maybe, "it's not working like it's supposed to" would elicit a more reasonable response.
Yeah, I'm gonna go with that - it's just that word. Maybe english is his second language or something. It's like how he uses the word 'liar'. I do not think it means what he thinks it means.
They are going to love his ass in prison, figuratively and literally.
Ed @ 18:
It is indeed working. Could it be better? Yes. Privatization is exactly the wrong thing to do about it.
And it's not a pyramid scheme. You might first of all try to analyze things better. It would enable to suggest a change rather than parrot something said about it -- by Wall Street types who operate real Ponzi schemes.
Time to Waterboard Karl.
Yes, who am I sending money to, a Social Security account for retirement or theSchutzstaffel?
~sigh~ Seems pretty evident to me that they have been trying to destroy our saftey net; Social Security for a long time. The final proof to me was when they started giving it to Mexican citizens who had no intentions of becoming Americans. I think the people who gave the order for this should be arrested and charged with a felony, including a charge of treason for giving aid and comfort to our enemies.
In-ex-plic-able....Fuck you Karl... I'll tell what the hell is inexplicable to this American citizen.... The last seven goddamned years motherfucker!!!... How the hell did assholes like you manage to crawl out of the woodwork and take control in this country.. Even more inexplicable is just what the hell were you peoples supposed master plan? Because from here, it looks like the plan was to ruin the nation... Further... it looks like you fucks have just about pulled it off....Bastards!!! JD
to the best of my knowledge....the tax cap is at 90 thousand dollars...but please correct me if I'm wrong.........I don't see what the problem is.....oh...I get it now.they don't see why they should have to pay into SS at all........they have enough money to pass on it..........but they look for that check every month.....even though they don't need it....Them Some Real Americans..........America is not FREE...........get used to it.......sheesh.wtf are they thinking?
nuQler ostrich @ 38:
Ah, Social Security as an insurance program. I haven't heard this old chestnut in a while. In 1937 the Supreme Court ruled (Helvering vs. Davis) SS was not a contributory insurance program, indicating "The proceeds of both the employee and employer taxes are to be paid into the Treasury like any other internal revenue generally, and are not earmarked in any way." Then came Fleming vs. Nestor (1960) where an old commie who was about to be deported, demanded his SS payouts (HA HA). Nestor claimed his SS as his right.
What right? The Supreme Court ruled "To engraft upon the Social Security system a concept of 'accrued property rights' would deprive it of the flexibility and boldness in adjustment to ever changing conditions which it demands." Later, it noted: " It is apparent that the non-contractual interest of an employee covered by the Act cannot be soundly analogized to that of the holder of annuity, whose right to benefits is bottomed on his contractual premium payments."
So let's summarize - no social contract, no obligation on the part of the feds to pay you, no lockbox, no earmark, no sequestering. They sprinkle your SS payments in the trough with all the other revenues collected and Congress spends it with abandon and has done so for the last 70 years.
So cut the bedrock investment chatter. What we get back from SS has nothing whatsoever to do with what we paid in. It's up to the politicians to decide if and how much we get back.
I mean, really, why invest your own paycheck when the government can spend it for you? Makes plenty of sense, doesn't it? No risky schemes - just pure certainty. Certainty that SS payouts are keyed to the whims of Washington. No obligations, no social contract, nothing.
It's a beautiful thing. It just needs a couple $ Trillion to get by, sucking money from the poor (who barely make it to retirement) and sprinkling the output on the Warren Buffetts of the world.
That's your certainty.
Comments are closed on this entry