Why do Republicans Hate Social Security?

[Tinker]

Republicans hate Social Security because it has been an extraordinary success and has done exactly what it was designed to do. It is the most successful government program in our nation's history and is enormously popular.

When Social Security was developed, 50 percent of seniors lived in poverty. Today, that number is 10 percent -- still too high, but a testament to the success of Social Security.

Republicans have spent years demonizing Social Security and spreading lies about its sustainability. They want to scare Americans and build support for making drastic cuts to the program or privatizing it entirely. Their long-term goal is to end Social Security as we know it, and convert it into a private account system which will enable Wall Street to make hundreds of billions in profits.

The truth is that, today, according to the Social Security Administration, Social Security has a $2.7 trillion surplus and can pay out every benefit owed to every eligible American for the next 25 years.

Further, because it is funded by the payroll tax and not the U.S. Treasury, Social Security has not contributed one nickel to our deficit.

Now -- in a prolonged recession that has decimated the poor and middle class and pushed more Americans into poverty than at any point in modern history -- we need to strengthen Social Security. That's why I, along with nine co-sponsors, have introduced the "Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act." This legislation would lift the Social Security Payroll tax cap on all income over $250,000 a year, would require millionaires and billionaires to pay their fair share into the Social Security Trust Fund, and would extend the program for the next 75 years.

Join me now as a citizen co-sponsor of the Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act.

For 76 years, through good times and bad, Social Security has paid out every benefit owed to every eligible American. The most effective way to strengthen Social Security for the next 76 years is to scrap the payroll tax cap for those earning $250,000 a year or more.

Right now, someone who earns $106,800 pays the same amount of money into Social Security as billionaires like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. That is because today, all income above $106,800 is exempt from the Social Security tax. As a result, 94% of Americans pay Social Security tax on all of their income, but the wealthiest 6% do not.

That makes no sense.

The "Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act" will ensure the long-term solvency of Social Security without cutting benefits, raising the retirement age or raising taxes on the middle class.

Join me and Democracy for America in fighting to strengthen Social Security -- Sign on as a citizen co-sponsor of the Keeping Our Social Security Promises Act.

Social Security is keeping tens of millions of seniors out of poverty today. I can think of no more important issue facing our country today than making sure that Social Security remains strong for generations to come.

Thank you.

-Bernie

Senator Bernie Sanders
U.S. Senator from Vermont

[Mr. Perfect]

First, do you really think Republicans hate Social Security? You so often say the GOP is no different than the Democrats and they are the party of big government, and when they cut things they really don't cut them. So let's start there.

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

I only give substance when there is substance in the starting point. Nothing to see here yet.

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

But the question is, do Republicans really hate SS? That would go against an ocean of your earlier material. As you have contradicted yourself so many times, how you I know you are being genuine now?

[Mr. Perfect]

Ok, since we knocked that bird down will try to get a few more with the same stone.

Why I hate SS

1) It artificially transfers some 15% of income from what could and probably would be savings into consumption, eating our own seed capital, making us dramatically poorer and more reliant on foreign credit, which we did rely on.

2) It lowers the return on investment for participants to somewhere between 0 and 4% when thanks to the the power of investing in private markets and experiencing the wealth created by the compounding returns in private markets most people could experience between 6-10% compounded returns. SS is the most penal for the poor as they can never afford to pay 15% in ss taxes and then save in the private markets. If you really hate poor people you should support SS. I have never seen a group of people despise the poor like the Democrats.

SS significantly lowers the retirement income for all Americans, but the it hurts the poor the worst. It is a really disgusting and immoral thing.

3) If you die the day after you retire all of your contributions are flushed into cyberspace, whereas if your lifelong ss taxes had gone into investments you could endow your life savings to your family, church, charity, college or even a state or local government if you want. This makes people less able to help their kids and grandkids through college, getting into a home, etc, in addition to the damage done to private charities. A very destructive program.

And a couple egregious errors in the article:

1) Saying that tweaking one part of SS will create x dollars is laughable, because all those projections are based on things like future GDP and future levels of employment. The reality is that when the system started there was a retiree/worker ratio of some 30:1, and we are looking levels of 3:1 in the near future. Ponzi schemes all end this way don't they.

2) To pick a number for retiree poverty from the middle of the depression and comparing it to current poverty levels is laughably dishonest. It's sort of like saying George Bush was able to prevent all terrorist attacks after 9-11. It leaves a whole lot out.

Comparing benefits based on lifelong 0-4% returns vs 6-10% compounded returns is more honest

3) To suggest that SS has never missed a payment or whatever is deeply misleading. The Democrats cut Medicare spending in the HC deform bill without blinking. They laid out the precedent for SS cuts when it suits them. It's sort of like saying the Hindenburg had a perfect service record before it blew up, or that real estate prices always go up. Same kind of thinking. The danger of SS over private retirement systems is the possibility of default, which means a whole generation will be subject to massive benefit cuts and nobody will be able to do anything about them. Private retirement schemes do not have this exposure.

[Demon of Undoing]

What about the criticism that it is jacked because ( and only because) the USG has raided the trust fund?

[Mr. Perfect]

It doesn't have any bearing on 1 2 or 3 in my first section at all, and only bears on 1 in my second section. And overall, at retirees/worker ratio of 3:1 it is largely hair splitting because bankruptcy is a matter of when not if at that point.

[monster_gardener]

I suspect that many ReThuglicans do hate Social Security if for no other reason than that the DemonRats have been able to beat ReThuglican politicians about the head and shoulders for so long with this electric third rail of politics.

As Mr. Perfect notes elsewhere, Sal the Senior Citizen VOTES.

I know for sure that sure that Rethuglicans have long hated Social Security's "founder": FDR........................

FWIW, I hope Social Security survives given that we/US are told to put our wages into 401Ks that the Banksters and bureaucrats crash and burn in the FIRE economy .

And we don't get even the satisfaction of seeing the Economy Killing Klowns jump out Wall Street windows* like they did in 1929 ...........

Though I would be satisfied with seeing them go bankrupt and be barred from trading ever again with maybe some jail time like with Enron.............

My solution:

Put Congresspersons and their spouses on Social Security & Medicare when they retire with all other income and gifts taxed at 100%

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

I did, I wrote a long post, which you ignored. As usually you do with my long posts (because they are so devastating to liberalism), so I stopped writing them (no point).

[Tinker]

[Mr. Perfect]

I don't think you have me on ignore, you comment on many of my posts. I think my long posts are so devastating that you pretend you didn't see them and hope it all blows over.

[Ibrahim]

Troll garbage aside, the reason it gets raised is because certain party intellectuals are influenced by Objectivism, and raise it for ideological reasons. I doubt a majority of GOP party members care about it, and the smarter political operators know to avoid it as a political third rail.

[Mr. Perfect]

Third rail status is ancient history, Bush touched the rail twice and survived, Perry is doing the same. The New Deal is coming to an end. And the Democrats are the ones doing it. Could not be happier.