SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Road Walker who wrote (212636)12/6/2004 8:27:21 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 1572969
 
re: To the extent that the fund has any meaning at all it was "raided" by every president since social security started.

Then you are in agreement that Bush lied.


The situation is a little complex to grab a statement and call it a lie. Its one of those situations where there is more then one way of looking at things. Bush (like most other politicians) took an interpretation that was both simple and politically useful. I happen to think its a less accurate one.

You would have to increase FICA by 50% to avoid a $1Trillion to $2Trillion deficit. Is that simple enough?

The basic idea is simple but it seems to imply that FICA would have to be increased 50% because of Bush's plan. Apparently the current estimates are for about a 40% change without any change. The statement makes its seem that 1 - The 50% estimate is really solid, and 2 - That the 50% estimate, or most of it is due to the change. Neither of those are true.

We simply can't afford it. Get it through your think libertarian skull.

If we can't afford it its only because we can't afford social security without the change. Bush's plan is a change at the margin, most of social security taxes and benefits will operate just like they do now.

Tim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext