In 2083, over 70 years from now, we will be looking at reducing benefits by 20 percent, unless, of course, we wisely decide to raise the salary ceiling on Social Security taxes.
To fund Social Security, employers pay a 6.2% tax while employees pay the other 6.2% -- up to $107,000 in salary. If a CEO of a health insurance giant makes $20-million in salary, bonuses, and stock options, that CEO still only gets taxed on the first $107,000.
Could anyone seriously be worrying about a small tax increase 30-70 years from now?
The real enemies of government, those masquerading as free-marketers, insist Social Security and Medicare are to blame for our deficit, now estimated at $1.4 trillion. Not true. In fact, it's the other way around. The federal government borrows from Peter to pay Paul, gobbling up special Social Security trust fund bonds to cover the costs of the Bush tax cuts and the trillion dollar occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan, not to mention the bloated military budget and ever-expanding bases.
Social Security is in danger, but not because money is running out. No, Social Security is in jeopardy because Republicans, with the help of Blue Dog Democrats, the same big business shills thwarting the public option, are building their case against our treasured old-age safety net in order to undermine our belief that government is the commons, here for the common good, to protect and provide - with fire departments, libraries, police, national parks and public schools. Should the Right succeed in stigmatizing big government as creeping socialism, publicly-funded institutions will be up for grabs, for privatization, for profit, and for greed.
If we accept the 2010 COLA freeze, if seniors fail to loudly protest, both with their feet and their votes, then we may be looking at another freeze in 2012, 2013 and beyond, while the Right continues to hammer away at the big lie " that we cannot afford Social Security, that this entitlement program must be "re-adjusted until we adjust ourselves right out of this safety net.
Safety nets are as old as time. The Greeks had olive oil, which they stockpiled for old age, when they could trade it for desired goods. The Old English set up poor houses to feed and clothe not just the poor, but the old. Reactionary forces, also as old as time, wanted to discourage the poor and the old from taking advantage of this safety net, so they required Poor House participants to wear a huge P on their chests.
In America, we must be ever vigilant about protecting Social Security, which means that the question of solvency must be addressed now, urgently, before the insolvency meme spirals out of control.
If it hadn't been for the people raising alarm, jamming phone lines to their congressional reps, President Bush " roaming the countryside with his free market blather - might have succeeded in privatizing our retirement money in a collapsing stock market, replete with auction rated securities frozen at auction and real estate mutual funds buried by toxic mortgages in Las Vegas.
But the beat goes on " Senator George Voinovich, (R-Ohio), the guy who literally turned the lights off to shut down a committee hearing on constitutional rights violations, teamed up with Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Conn), the once-Democrat who introduced John McCain as the Republican Presidential nominee, to push legislation appointing a study commission reminiscent of the 1981 Greenspan Commission to overhaul Social Security. From Voinovich's press release " "The proposal, dubbed the SAFE (Securing America's Future Economy) Commission Act, seeks to establish a commission that will examine our tax and entitlement programs. The hope is that the commission will offer recommendations on how to reform a system the senators deemed unsustainable and irresponsible.
The senators say they reserve the right to attach the "study commission proposal as an amendment to a relevant bill.
Trouble in River City.
Under the proposal, an 18-member bipartisan committee, four lay people, and two members of the executive branch, will study the situation for one year before making recommendations that Congress will then accept or reject as a package deal " an up or down vote, take it or leave it. Lieberman said "a special commission with fast track procedures is needed in this case because of the political difficulty of making such sweeping changes.
With enough fear-mongering, you might convince congress members who went along with the Iraq invasion and overnight bank bail-outs to approve a study commission's recommendation phasing in social security cuts over a ten year period -- until suddenly the country wakes up, opens its eyes and finds the entitlement program is at best an anemic image of its former self.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
