Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite Save As Favorite View Article Stats
11 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

The Drive to Eliminate Social Security Accelerates

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; , Add Tags  (less...) Add to My Group(s)

Must Read 4   Well Said 4   Valuable 3  
View Ratings | Rate It

Headlined to H2 2/23/10

opednews.com

Each new day in Washington brings a fresh call to "reform entitlement programs" -- Social Security, Medicare, etc. (in Congress, the word "reform" now means to eliminate, or drastically reduce). Tackling Social Security has been on the to-do list of the corporate elite for years, and they're not waiting any longer. After years of promoting this cause, conservative think tanks have now garnered solid support from the political establishment as a whole, which includes the Republican and Democratic parties.

The newest liberal recruit to the destruction of Social Security is Thomas Friedman, the influential columnist for The New York Times, who wrote recently:

"The president needs to persuade the country to invest in the future and pay for the past... We have to pay for more new schools and infrastructure than ever, while accepting more entitlement cuts than ever [Social Security, Medicare, etc.] when public trust in government is lower than ever." (February 20, 2010).

The nonchalance which Friedman calls for cutting Social Security is indicative of the climate in Washington, where the last remnants of liberalism have been suffocated under the heavy demands of profit-hungry corporations, especially financial institutions and big banks. For political hacks like Friedman -- and there are thousands of them -- the ONLY solution to curing the U.S. deficit is cutting social services in general, while specifically targeting Social Security and Medicare.

But President Obama revealed these assertions to be lies, when he recently announced, "fixing Social Security would be simple." The Associated Press explains:

"The system is funded with a tax on earnings, up to $109,000 a year. Obama says lifting that cap to tax a larger share of income would be one way to extend the system of monthly payments for retirees. It also would be unpopular with some." (February 19, 2010).

This idea is indeed very unpopular with the very rich, who enjoy the privilege of paying no Social Security tax after the $109,000 threshold. Obama let an unpopular truth out of the bag when he brought up this fact; but conveniently for him, many mainstream news outlets decided not to amplify the President's voice.

Obama, however, is unlikely to promote this "radical" idea much further, since he's already decided on a method to undermine Social Security. Obama's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform is a bi-partisan group that is set to attack Social Security in a way where, in the end, both political parties will be blamed, so that neither party is overburdened with guilt. The Republicans -- having made their contempt for Obama more than known -- are salivating at the chance to cooperate.

The Washington Post recently announced that Republican leaders have agreed to Obama's commission, while making no secret about the motive behind the grouping:

"Obama's commission may lack the power to force the parties to reach consensus on a plan that is almost certain to require deep cuts to the popular entitlement programs -- Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid -- as well as significant tax increases. Building bipartisan consensus for such a plan would be particularly difficult in the run-up to the fall elections" (February 19, 2010).

Since the foregone conclusions of Obama's panel will be so unpopular, the Washington Post explains that they will be announced after the fall elections, in December 2010.

There will be little room in Obama's commission for his above-mentioned tax increase on the rich. The Republicans have already announced that they will be solidly focusing on reducing services for the working class, not taxing the wealthy.

What will the "reformed" Social Security look like? Again, the Conservative think tanks have an idea waiting in the wings: personal savings accounts. In the same way that 401(k)s killed the pension, Social Security is set to be privatized for the mighty benefit of Wall Street.

Just last week, Republican Rep. Paul Ryan of Wisconsin announced a privatization plan that just happened to coincide with the creation of Obama's commission. Michael Hiltzik of The Los Angles Times called Ryan's plan "a roadmap for killing Social Security." He writes:

"His [Ryan's] privatization scheme would allow workers under 55 to place more than one-third of their current Social Security taxes into personal retirement accounts, with the ultimate goal of shifting most of that money into the stock market." (February 17, 2010).

By creating individual accounts, Wall Street is bolstered while the public nature of Social Security is undermined, since Social Security is a "pay as you go" program: if workers under 55 decide to invest in Wall Street, and not to pay into the Social Security fund, older workers don't receive benefits. Social Security is thus dismantled.

Next Page  1  |  2

 

Shamus Cooke is a social service worker and activist living in Portland Oregon.
Add this Page to Facebook!   Submit to Twitter   Submit to Reddit   Submit to Stumble Upon   Pin It!   Fark It!   Tell A Friend
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The Devastating Consequences of a Corporate Health Care Bill

The Drive to Eliminate Social Security Accelerates

Global Warming Accelerating While the U.S. Backpedals

The Death of Liberalism in the United States

Why Are Corporate Groups Funding the Tea Party?

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
9 people are discussing this page, with 11 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
I think the health care bill obama is sponsering w... by liberalsrock on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 10:28:07 AM
Whether or not Obama is truly dangerous remains to... by William Cormier on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 11:57:53 AM
supposed to be 2 trillion dollars in the social se... by sommers on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 12:39:38 PM
SS as currently designed is a ponzi scheme. There ... by Jim Bednarek on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:24:24 PM
I am disabled, on a ventilator and in a wheelchair... by Ginger Hastings Chapman on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:07:13 PM
To begin with I do not know what you are going thr... by Jim Bednarek on Thursday, Feb 25, 2010 at 1:36:31 PM
Yes, we know that the government stole our retirem... by William Cormier on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:58:05 PM
When all the undesirables are dead. It boggles my... by daveys on Tuesday, Feb 23, 2010 at 4:18:30 PM
During thepresidential campaign I posted opinions ... by Progessive 1 on Wednesday, Feb 24, 2010 at 3:52:19 AM
It's a total myth that SS can't be saved (it CERTA... by Scott Baker on Wednesday, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:06:51 AM
When can We march on Washington and the corporate ... by Daniel Penisten on Wednesday, Feb 24, 2010 at 4:49:03 PM