Join the Discussion
USA Today editorial suggested Bush's Social Security plan would have defused "underfunding time bomb"
Summary: In an editorial, USA Today suggested that President Bush's proposal to "partially privatize Social Security" would have addressed the program's "underfunding time bomb, set to detonate in about a decade." But as Media Matters for America has repeatedly noted, even the administration has acknowledged that its plan for private Social Security accounts -- on their own -- will do nothing to address the "time bomb."
Read more
Threaded Comments: on / off
Posted by CaseySpring
Bushs social security plan was a time bomb.
Posted Tuesday August 14, 2007 6:48:43 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by bittermarv in reply to CaseySpring
More like a string of firecrackers, set to go off randomly. And if you happened to get caught in a downturn when you retired, tough noogies.
On the other hand, all those investment brokers who would have had a piece of all those nice fees for managing those "private accounts" probably think Bush's plan was Da Bomb.
Posted Tuesday August 14, 2007 8:45:54 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by eweston8542983
With a short fuse.
Posted Tuesday August 14, 2007 7:19:43 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by snoopy
The lending issue was the pin.
Posted Tuesday August 14, 2007 8:44:57 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by HuntingtonBeachLefty in reply to snoopy
And I want to work in the long term effects as the debtonator, but I'm punned out.
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 3:08:00 AM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by eweston8542983
Tough it out HBL, all our disturbed posters are accounting their limbs and it won't add up without youse.
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 9:42:50 AM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by wolf kotenberg
Social Security is funded by american workers paying taxes on their income. Not by chinese workers busting their a$$ for their fatherland.
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 1:31:33 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by funnyguy45
I am hoping this get is a fluke. Hasn't the editorial page of USA Today been good lately?
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 2:31:12 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by Jim Nauseam
If you raise the top rate of social security payments from $90,000 (where its been for almost 15 years) to $100,000, guess what? S.S. would be solvent until around 2147 (according to one estimate). There is no crisis, just a long overdue adjustment. Next?
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 2:51:50 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by Jim Nauseam
Sorry, 2047.
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 3:52:21 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by Pithaughn in reply to Jim Nauseam
Darn, that 2147 was sure looking good. Adjustments are in order. I had an employer once who was worth many millions of dollars (one of her ex's was the Lynch in Merrill Lynch). She would often point out how much medicaid paid for her prescriptions and doctor visits. Her rationale was that "we" paid in for so many years and now "we" deserve to get some back. I guess Americans have no idea how these social welfare programs started, as a way to keep people from dying of starvation. I am totally with the conservatives when they harp on the culture of entitlement in this country. I don't think FDR imagined the SS checks would go to payments on $250k motorhomes.
Posted Wednesday August 15, 2007 6:15:46 PM EDT / Flag this comment
Posted by redking75687 in reply to Jim Nauseam
By 2047, the Baby Boomers would all be gone. Crisis over. Bush never mentions this in his speeches. I think it's just plain low to go after the only thing a lot of little old grannies live on. It's all my mom has and here he wants to steal it. Just like Enron, robbing them gray-haired old ladies and laughing about it. No wonder he partied with Kenny and the lads. he's their kind of people.
Posted Thursday August 16, 2007 4:31:45 PM EDT / Flag this comment