My Theory On Why Bush wants to Ruin Social Security
POSTED BY: piratejenny
UPDATED: Wednesday, February 8, 2006 17:07
VIEWED: 13307
PAGE 2 of 11
Uh yeah Piratejenny! It's a theory. Completely devoid of common sense and rationality, but a theory none the less. Are you purposely trying to come off as a left wing extemeist consiracy nut, or is it completely unintentional?
How about some facts on this "most successful social program in the (history) of the (U)nited States" The experts ALL agree this successful program needs help! The question really is, how?
BTW: This process is how our Democracy works! If you actually believe our country is turning into a fasist nation, you obviously wouldn't know what true a facist is, if it bit you in the ass!
Here's an article covering the "offical" non-partisan review of Socal Security. Yes, it states clearly that Bush's Privatization plan isn't the answer, but it also points fingers at the Democrats for their plan to cut benefits.
If those were the only choices, I'd take Privatization over cuts to benefits. Fortunately, those aren't the only choices out there, and now that the issue is being discussed (Bush's real plan all along, IMHO), hopefully a better solution will come from all of this.
Read it, educate yourself on the facts, and make an informed decision. Don't be swayed by extremist wackos! Then, instead of more impotent ranting here, write your reps in Washington for a change, and tell them what you think.
GAO Official: No Crisis in Social Security - AP
By GLEN JOHNSON, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Social Security "does not face an immediate crisis," the head of the Government Accountability Office said Wednesday, but it does face a long-term financing problem "and it would be prudent to address it sooner rather than later."
David M. Walker, who heads the nonpartisan Office of Comptroller General, also criticized President Bush for undertaking an aggressive two-month tour to try to sell his plan for allowing younger workers to divert a portion of their Social Security payroll taxes into private investment accounts. Walker suggested that Bush and members of Congress focus on improving financing for the program, which would not be significantly affected by establishment of personal accounts.
The testimony launched formal debate, before the House Ways and Means Committee, on Capitol Hill over Bush's plan to overhaul the federal retirement plan that began as part of President Franklin D. Roosevelt's post-Depression era "New Deal."
"I would have done it differently, I would have done it differently," Walker said, under aggressive questioning by Rep. Charles B. Rangel of New York, the top Democrat on the panel. In his opening statement, Rangel declared, "Private accounts will not be on the table if you are looking for bipartisanship."
The panel's chairman, Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Calif., said in his opening remarks, "Clearly, the current program, because the American population has changed, is not sustainable based on the old method of financing."
Noting that Congress has not changed the program since 1983, the chairman also chided Democrats for opposing any potential cut in retiree benefits.
"In 1983, under the Democrat leadership, the solution included cutting benefits," Thomas said, adding that tax increases were also part of the 1980s remedy.
With polls showing that people are nervous about future financial shortfalls in the program, House Republicans intended to devote their first hearing to that rather than Bush's less popular idea of private accounts. Nonetheless, the partisan views surfaced in the hearing's opening minutes.
The trustees for the Social Security and Medicare trust funds are expected to release their 2005 report on the long-term financial outlook of government programs later this month. Two trustees who appeared at the hearing, Thomas R. Saving of Texas and John L. Palmer of New York, said there have been no major changes in the program's demographics or financial outlook during the past year, but they joined Walker in urging immediate action on long-term program financing.
"We believe that action on it should not be deferred any longer tha
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Piratejenny- Don't let these right-wing goofballs intimidate you with their moronic name-calling.
(Let's see if they can figure this out on their own... heh heh heh.)
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:piratejenny, let me help you out with something.
Originally posted by piratejenny:
[BBush and his administration is turning this country into a facist nation, Corporations are pretty much running things at least thats the road that we are already traveling on, and with the Bush admistration taking this country into economic failer due to war mongering and giving tax breaks to the wealthy and big Corporation while constantly making laws to screw us common folk...just one example of this is getting rid of the bankruptcy laws
This is what fascism means:
Fascism.
1 often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
2 : a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control < early instances of army fascism and brutality -- J. W. Aldridge>
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=fascism
Now setting aside the questionable accuracy of some of your accusations, what you are describing here is not a fascist state, but actually a capitalist state. You seem to disagree with privatizing Social Security. You seem to disagree with capitalism in general, and that’s your prerogative. Whatever your problem is with the Bush Administration or capitalism in general, Fascism is not what you’re describing here. I think you should back off on this fascist stuff, and examine what it actually is that you disapprove of, because whatever it is, it’s not Fascism.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
An extreme form of nationalism that played on fears of communism and rejected individual freedom, liberal individualism, democracy, and limitations on the state.
http://www.nelson.com/nelson/polisci/glossary.html
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
First of all, Social Security isin't all that great. It's nothing more than a Gov't mandated, over glorified ponzi scheme.
social security maynot be great in your opinion , but it's the best that we have..and it sure is great to those in need of it. Its a far cry better for it being here then when there was no no social security.
did I say he was trying to privativze it all?..no I did not, but the fact is he is trying to privitize some of it which would be a diseaster
so one has to ask why?....because its obvious to anyone with half a brain that privatization even part of it isn't the answer
Social security isn't your money or my money and it isn't meant to be privitzed its a government run insurnace program, Is it perfect?..NO it isn't!! But again its the best we have and Bush and his corrupt administration is trying to ruin it.
I do believe that this nation is turning Facist..is it facist now? ..NO it isn't, but it is becoming that way and I predict in the future based on whats happening now that it will be that way, that is my belife and I think there are plently of events pointing in that direction that is my opinion
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
...[/What are you, somewhere around 18 years old? You need to stop believing whatever the extreme left tells you to believe and actually think things through on your own. ]...
1st off my age doesn't concern you and I don't have to believe anybody about anything unlike some I can come up with my own thoughts , try it sometime!!
Quote:
...[/Is Bush a perfect President? No. Is he ineffective? Possibly. Is he leading the country in a bad direction? Again, possibly. Is he the anti-Christ, corrupting everything he touches as he leads America down the path of fascism, while simultaneously eating little babies and whistling dixie? Not anymore than Bill Clinton was to the radical right that hated him.]...
I beg to diffrer, Bill Clinton wasn't perfect nobody is including Bush, but the road Bush and his corrupt administration is leading us down could possibly even be worse then facism
Quote:
...[/Depending on your values, Bush may be a pretty poor president. But it's just silly to say that everything he says, does or even thinks is pure evil. Get over the fact that Kerry lost and actually think about the issues for 20 minutes.]...
I have many opinions about Bush, I wouldn't exactly call him evil, sometimes I look at him and actually feel sorry for him, Bush himself could very well just be a puppet with his strings being pulled, People hold Hitler up as the the poster child of nazism..but Hitler could not have done any of the the things he did by himself!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
...[/The involuntary Social Security that the Demoncrats believe in is SOCIALISM plain and simple!]...
why do you want to make this about Demcrates vs Reps or whatever
and Socialism happens to have some good aspects about it
look at a country like Sweeden which blends Social programs and Capitalism very nicely
you talk about Socialism as if its a bad thing both socialism and Capitalism have some good things and bad things
Socialism taken to an extreme is bad
Capitalism taken to an extreme is bad!!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
BTW... In science, a 'theory' attempts to explain something using known facts. Since you did not offer any 'facts' which support the claim that Bush is indeed trying to ruin social security, I'd suggest you rename this post. Why 'I think' Bush wants...,(or) MY VIEW on why Bush wants....etc. Just my $ 0.02.
" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "
Thank you your Correctness
I know what a theory is and I think mines has enough facts in it to make it a theory!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by ByteTheBullet:
I usually don't post on political threads, and I rarely post anyway, but I feel compelled to. This is not directed at anyone in particular...
President Bush is the leader of our country. He was voted into office. There are means to have him removed if necessary. No one seems to be trying to do that, but the Democrats sure like to talk about how the election was rigged. Why aren't they doing something about it. Prove it or shut up. President Bush, NOT Mr. Bush, doesn't run the country, there is a group in Washington that does that. Again, elected officals. I guess all those elections were rigged too, well, except the ones the Democrats won(I couldn't resist). Our country has been run this way for quite some time and it will be for, well, forever as far as we are concerned. The group in Washington does all the leg work and then they advise President Bush, that is how a Republic works.
Republic -
Definition: [n] a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
[n] a form of government whose head of state is not a monarch; "the head of state in a republic is usually a president"
President Bush does not pass laws, change policy, or declare war on his own(by himself) there is a little more to it. President Bush is not killing innocent soldiers. Thank God we have a volunteer military that protects us and our freedoms. Our swarn enemy, that declared war on ALL Americans, is killing our solders and citizens and we should pray for them every chance we get. I hate that Americans and our Allies are dying, but they are giving their life to protect you, me, President Bush, and all those people in Washington that sent them to war, where ever that may be, and our way of life. Our enemy wants to destroy our country because we have freedoms and beliefs they do not want to allow in their countries. Yes there is more to it, but it all boils down to the fact that Freedom isn't free kiddies. Infighting will only weaken our country and that is what our enemies want.
I am done. I prolly won't open this thread again so don't bother flaming me.
ByteTheBullet (-:
I don't even know where to begin responding to this post
This poster obviously isn't up on current event
maybe this poster doesn't know that there is one politcal party in the Majority right now and holds much of the power. something the founding fathers warned against
Maybe this poster doesn't know that Iraq was a defenseless Country and that you can't go to war on terrorist they aren't a country
and I guess this poster has no clue about the changes to the constitution since the so called terror threat!!
there is so much stuff going on in this country right now, but I guess judging from this post this person isn't aware!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Piratejenny- Don't let these right-wing goofballs intimidate you with their moronic name-calling.
(Let's see if they can figure this out on their own... heh heh heh.)
LOL Never!!
thats all they can do is name call..obviouly they are afraid , they just don't want anyone to poke a hole in there bubble of denial!!!
they might actually have to muster up some courage and do something if that happened!!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME