When will the liberals open their eyes?

[Anewman]

That may be a valid point, but it still does not solve the fundamental problem. There's a leak in the bucket. You can either be responsible and fix the leak now, or you can just keep pouring more water into it and leave the problem for later generations to fix.

There are plenty of leaky buckets, IMO this is not the biggest one.

Nobody wants this bucket to continue to leak, but some are not willing to sell their sole to the devil to stop the leaking(if it would even do that).

You can call any plan "reform" and imply that those against it are blind, kinda like the "WAR ON TERROR".

 

[Captain Capslock]

Exactly.

And if we had done nothing in the war on terror, we would have a lot fewer people in this country to eventaully draw on social security, as the terorists became more emboldened and continued the attacks on Americans, on American soil.

This is so simple it's incredible. Take the money we spend in the war on terror, prop up social security and allow the mass murder of tens of thousands who will then never draw from the fund. Brilliant....

TERMINATE YOUR FEEBLE WHIMPERING IMMEDIATELY. AS EVER, YOU ARE MAKING NO SENSE WHATSOEVER AND PERSIST IN CAUSING A BUILD UP OF GREENHOUSE GASSES.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

Washington needs to step up and do the right thing, not whatevers popular with the folks that vote in November..

Yup. In that vein, they should also do the right thing and grant equal marriage rights to same-sex couples, regardless of the distaste many Americans have for the idea.

 

[lindalinda]

I believe Al Gore was the only one with a plan to address the issue. I certainly dont think the liberals are to blame for this.

 

[JamesMom]

Because billions (not millions) of dollars are being spent on a monthly basis and the reprucussions have yet to be felt.

Dems would find a 100 other things to spend the Iraq money on BESIDES fixing social security. This is a moot point. The true issue is actually dealing with problem at hand and not making hypotheticals that have no basis in reality.

 

[JamesMom]

Exactly.

And if we had done nothing in the war on terror, we would have a lot fewer people in this country to eventaully draw on social security, as the terorists became more emboldened and continued the attacks on Americans, on American soil.

This is so simple it's incredible. Take the money we spend in the war on terror, prop up social security and allow the mass murder of tens of thousands who will then never draw from the fund. Brilliant....

 

[Anewman]

Dems would find a 100 other things to spend the Iraq money on BESIDES fixing social security. This is a moot point. The true issue is actually dealing with problem at hand and not making hypotheticals that have no basis in reality.

IRAQ is a the "problem at hand"

Talk about "reality"

 

[JamesMom]

IRAQ is a the "problem at hand"

Talk about "reality"

I meant in terms of this thread topic (social security reform), but to give credit, Iraq is a problem. We need to support our president, win this darn war and move on with our lives! We are there and we need to finish the job to preserve our national security. Backing down now would send a terrible message to terrorists that USA is free for attack. I, for one, don't want to see another 9/11 on TV.
As for Iraq not part of the war on terror, the thousands and thousands of victims of Sadaam would disagree with you.
Hope I don't offend anyone here. I am just tired of the bickering while I contribute to it (LOL!). Said my peace. I am done. Have a great evening. God Bless America.
*off soapbox*

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

Trust me, Liberals have their eyes WIDE open...we see MANY things.

What's great is that it's not just liberals who have their eyes wide open now. Centrists from both the Left and Right, as well and a few hard core Republicans do too. You only have to look back to last November's Right wing massacre for proof.

 

[salmoneous]

We need to support our president, win this darn war and move on with our lives! We are there and we need to finish the job to preserve our national security. Backing down now would send a terrible message to terrorists that USA is free for attack. I, for one, don't want to see another 9/11 on TV.

Let's see

1) The president hasn't earned our support

2) We won the war and finished the job years ago

3) What we are doing in Iraq today does nothing to improve our national security

4) Leaving now would do nothing to leave the US free for attack

5) Nobody wants to see another 9/11 on TV - what we do in Iraq has nothing to do with whether or not we see another

6) Speaking of 9/11, I wouldn't mind seeing us taking the troops that aren't making us safer in Iraq and send them to hunt down the guy behind 9/11 - wouldn't you?

 

[LakeAriel]

I meant in terms of this thread topic (social security reform), but to give credit, Iraq is a problem. We need to support our president, win this darn war and move on with our lives! We are there and we need to finish the job to preserve our national security. Backing down now would send a terrible message to terrorists that USA is free for attack. I, for one, don't want to see another 9/11 on TV. As for Iraq not part of the war on terror, the thousands and thousands of victims of Sadaam would disagree with you.
Hope I don't offend anyone here. I am just tired of the bickering while I contribute to it (LOL!). Said my peace. I am done. Have a great evening. God Bless America.
*off soapbox*

You don't want to see another 9/11 on TV? How about in person as many thousands of us did? It was hard on you seeing it on TV?
We should have went looking for the person responsible, Bin Laden, a Saudi..You know the Saudi's right? Our good buddy's?

 

[reeeoga]

Why is this a Liberal thing? Both sides need to fix things.

 

[DawnCt1]

It's not just liberals who need to open their eyes - it's all of us. The AARP is a very formidable organization with a lot of congressional clout. No one wants to tick off the "old" people. Those who do wrangle with them often find themselves short a job the next election cycle. So, what to do? Get rid of a system that never should have been there in the first place. Figure out what everyone paid in and give it back to them. Yes, it will hurt but it's like pulling off a bandaid - the quicker the better.

The AARP fosters the stereotype of the "greedy geezer". "As long as I get mine, I don't care who pays". The increase in entitlements are taking more and more dollars out of working Americans. The democrats idea will be to raise SS taxes. That is always their solution. Right now we have 50% of Americans paying the bills for the other 50%. Thats an untenable situation for any economy to survive. BTW, I enjoyed the discounts that I have received from AARP but I have not renewed my membership. They are NOT good for America.

 

[Bobbles]

Benefits or "entitlements" are part of our culture in America.

Nearly every one of us have received some form of entitlement, whether they be job-related or just something we get when we are down on our luck (unemployment, WIC, etc.).

If we are an elected official (Congressman, Senator, etc) we can collect all kinds of "perks" and a nice retirement after only a few short years of service.

If we are retired military, (anywhere from 15 - 30 or more years service) we can count on our retirement pay and medical benefits to be there for us forever.

We all as tax payers fund those benefits.

But if we just worked in the corporate world, we can count on SS only. Certainly not the 401's. (Ask Enron and Worldcom employees.)

Not everyone has company medical coverage and must pay a hefty monthly fee to provide their families with modest coverage.

There are some folks out there who are not quite as fortunate as the rest of us to have been fully vested in or could have contributed to 401 as well as the "fortunate sons" of America have.

MMM. Then again, perhaps we can simply stop SS and the old folks can rely on their children to support them in their old age! Yeah! That's the answer!

 

[honeymom]

How will the federal government insure that the privatized accounts will go up in value, not down? Many people's 401 K pensions went down in value, not up depending on how they were invested. What will the nation's responsibility to its seniors be if their privatized accounts go down the tubes?

What will you do to protect people like me - 45? I've paid into SS my whole working life (plus since I am self-employed for many of them, I don't have any employee funds contributed and pay more than many of you.) I don't have time to build up much funds before retirement through privatized accounts, yet Bush's cutoff was 50, I believe?

Bushes plan just doesn't cut it imho. Plus, I have a hard time accepting that social security is so broken. The only thing really broken about it is the "social security lockbox." The money sitting in social security wasn't supposed to be tapped for anything besides social security, but it was. And, despite all of Bushes talks about our responsibility at a time of war, he is the only president in history to cut taxes during a time of war. Yes, I know that some will argue the necessity of that following 9/11 and the dot.com bust, but he has not tightened the purse strings anywhere. There is a lot of fault to go around and it is not just the liberals at fault.

Instead, or right/left bashing, we can accomplish a lot more by urging our congress to work together in a bipartisan manner. At the beginning of my post, I have given several questions that have been asked in regards to privatization. Why can't our government work together to see if those questions can be answered in a way that solves the issues? Then if the issues can't be solved with the privatization route, perhaps there will be some other ideas that progress.

 

[Pigeon]

I recall Clinton on many occasions advocating using what at that time was a large budget surplus to shore up social security. Since he had a republican congress, that went nowhere. It was more important to squander the money on tax cuts for the wealthy.

 

[LuvDuke]

Why does everything need to be tied back to Iraq? Whether there is a war or not, SS is a disaster and needs to be scrapped..

Do you think money grows on trees? You think taking a half-trillion dollars and counting out of a country is something you just gloss over as "just one of those things".

 

[LuvDuke]

Yet another lovely post that ends in eye rolling and lots of chuckles. I read this out loud to some co-workers and the laughter was deafening.

Bush's base and it ain't pretty.

 

[LuvDuke]

That may be a valid point, but it still does not solve the fundamental problem. There's a leak in the bucket. You can either be responsible and fix the leak now, or you can just keep pouring more water into it and leave the problem for later generations to fix.

You can start paying for the war too instead of shoving the cost onto the next generations. Oh, pardon me, then you'd have to jeopardize Paris Hilton's tax cut.

 

[LuvDuke]

What did I hear yesterday....20-30 BILLION dollars just "disappeared" in Iraq? Lucrative government contracts were awarded on a "no-bid" basis to strong Republican supporters.

Trust me, Liberals have their eyes WIDE open...we see MANY things.

Paul Bremer misplaced 8.8 billion American tax dollars and instead of getting a subpeona to an investigation, Bush gave him a medal.

But, greedy Grammy and Grampy are the cause of the problems.

The American public failed to support Bush's "social security reform" because they knew a crock of **** when they saw it.