BUSH - CUT Social Security Benefits to 70% of Americans!

from JoeUser Forums




George W. Bush finally came out of the closet on how he wants to fund his private accounts within Social Security. He wants to cut the benefits for 70% of Social Security recipients! It is one thing to consider cutting Social Security benefits for the wealthiest 5 or 10% of retirees but it is quite another matter to propose cutting benefits to 70% of retirees. This revelation should be the last nail in the private account coffin of George W. Bush.

Although Bush does not have to worry about being reelected, picture ANY congressman or senator up for reelection explaining that they voted to cut benefits for 70% of American retirees. The president’s plan to create private accounts not only doesn’t solve the existing funding problem with Social Security, it makes the problem worse. This is because it would remove trillions of dollars from the trust fund which is needed to pay for the baby boomer retirement. In other words Bush’s solution to a system that does not have enough money is to take even more money from the system. President Bush just doesn’t get IT- the vast majority of Americans do not want what he is selling. If he strong arms the Republicans in Congress to vote for his plan and cuts benefits for 70% of future retirees, we are going to see a power shift in Congress very very soon.
politics
13,176 views 48 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
As usual you post no sources, just your usual anti-Bush bs.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
There is No hypocrisy too ourtrageous for you to vomit, is there Colon Gene!

For as long as I've been blogging here at JU, you have been singing the praises of the graduated tax system; Pointing out that, for the budget to be solvent, taxes must be raised, and that raise should come from the highest percentage income earners because they can afford it more than anyone else.

Ok, now Prs. Bush offers a comprimise, and all of the sudden you are against means testing? Is this a knee jerk reaction, or are you merely trying your hand at political satire??

For the record, Yes, I have always been against the graduated tax system, and I don't agree with means testing for Social Security either, but since the lies and propaganda that the press and people such as yourself are apparently working, means testing might just be the bone Prs. Bush has to throw out to sell the plan. Isn't "comprimise" wonderful??

I thought your "Jawboning" article was a new low for you, but this one smells worse than last years compost pile!

Your chiropractor and accupucturist will have their work cut out for them after this bout of whiplash!!! ;~D
TouchTasks - Access tasks with ease on Windows touchscreens.
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sourses- EVERY NEWS PROGRAM. It is the CNN question of the day. My specific source is The News-Press wire service.

The Bush plan is no Compermise - He wants his Individual accounts and plans to have 70% of American retirees pay the cost!

It is time for the Democrats or the Moderate Republicans to offer an alternative to this idiocy of Bush!
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
Sourses- EVERY NEWS PROGRAM. It is the CNN question of the day. My specific source is The News-Press wire service.



Sorry, I haven't seen anything that resembles this mornings bs by you.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
April 29, 2005 -- President Bush last night sought to jump-start his push for Social Security reform by proposing that future benefits grow faster for poor retirees than for the rich.

Bush also offered a passionate defense of his call for personal retirement accounts as he looked to rebound from a second- term slump and take charge of the national agenda with a prime-time press conference.

"I propose a Social Security system in the future where benefits for low-income workers will grow faster than benefits for people who are better off," Bush told the nation.


But Bush stressed that that there won't be actual cuts: "As a matter of fairness, I propose that future generations receive benefits equal to or greater than the benefits today's seniors get."


Link
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
IslandDog You are either blind or not looking. This IS the BUSH PLAN! It was just covered at 9:00 am on CNN Morning and it is on the News-Press wire service. Denying that it does not exists will not work this time! Bush has stuck his foot in his mouth, as usual.
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
IslandDog You are either blind or not looking. This IS the BUSH PLAN! It was just covered at 9:00 am on CNN Morning and it is on the News-Press wire service. Denying that it does not exists will not work this time! Bush has stuck his foot in his mouth, as usual.



I have done a google news search and found nothing of what you claim.

The only thing thing close is Pelosi's response, which is probably where you get your information.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Island Dog-- I told you CNN and News-Press wire service. It may not be on Google yet. It is true. I want to see which Congressmen and Senators put their name on a Bill to cut 70% of retirees Social Security benefits! FLASH- I just went to Google, Type in, " Bush Social Security benefit cuts" and you will find the story!
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Island Dog-- I told you CNN and News-Press wire service. It may not be on Google yet. It is true. I want to see which Congressmen and Senators put their name on a Bill to cut 70% of retirees Social Security benefits! FLASH- I just went to Google, Type in, " Bush Social Security benefit cuts" and you will find the story!


Well, I'll tell you what. I just did what you suggested and used what you typed for search parameters. And guess what? I could find NOTHING from either source you posted. Why don't you just post a link to the story, or could it be that it just doesn't exsist?
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well drmiler, you must need remedial training. As I dictate this response I am looking at the article in today's paper and I just closed Google after a search using, " Bush social security benefit cuts". It was not the very first reference but about six or eight it that begins with newspaper accounts of exactly what I have reported. The story is true. it documents the idiocy of George W. Bush and I want to see which congressmen and senators stick their neck out and propose cutting the benefits for 70% of American retirees so that we can get individual accounts that the majority of Americans do not want in the first place. When you take your head out of the sand you will be in for a big surprise!
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
Well drmiler, you must needs remedial training. As I dictate this response I am looking at the article in today's paper and I just closed Google after a search using, " Bush social security benefit cuts". It was not the very first reference but about six or eight it that begins with newspaper accounts of exactly what I have reported. The story is true. it documents the idiocy of George W. Bush and I want to see which congressmen and senators stick their neck out and propose cutting the benefits for 70% of American retirees so that we can get individual accounts that the majority of Americans do not want in the first place. When you take your head out of the sand you will be in for a big surprise!


I'll make you a deal. I'll pull my head out of the sand when you pull yours out of your arse.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why don't you provide links col? I still haven't seen anything about cutting 70% of people. As usual you probably just read the headline and nothing more. Also, probably another exaggeration of numbers.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am reading the article from the News-Press Wire Service;

"one proposal he look at would keep benefits rising as promised for the bottom 30% of wage earners while reducing them for the rest (70% )".

Bush is trying to fund both his individual accounts and the existing shortfall in the trust fund to pay the baby boomers by reducing benefits to 70% of retirees.

I want to see the congressman and senator's who have the BALLS to put their name on legislation that would accomplish this end.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
Where is the link?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is my local paper. CNN just announced this story. Turn on your TV It is also on Google
Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
I have already looked. You are still full of bs. If it's on google then put a link up.
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is the lead story in the New York Times top of the fold. It is you that is full of BS. Your Boy screwed up big time! www.newyorktimes.com story by Richard Srevenson and Elizabeth Bumiller It was on CNN at 1:40 PM
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
It is the lead story in the New York Times top of the fold. It is you that is full of BS. Your Boy screwed up big time! www.newyorktimes.com story by Richard Srevenson and Elizabeth Bumiller It was on CNN at 1:40 PM


I haven't seen any evidence that "my boy" screwed up "big time". If you get all your "facts" from CNN and NYT, then that is half of your problem. All I asked is that you provide proof of your accusations. You still haven't.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
continue playing with yourself if that makes you happy. I have provided the stories, sources, the web sites, times the stories were on CNN and you just don't accept what Bush has said and doesn't make any difference. This idiot is not only get his way on Social Security because if he does, Republicans will return to the minority for the next hundred years.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
continue playing with yourself if that makes you happy. I have provided the stories, sources, the web sites, times the stories were on CNN and you just don't accept what Bush has said and doesn't make any difference. This idiot is not only get his way on Social Security because if he does, Republicans will return to the minority for the next hundred years.



You have not provided anything. This is about the third time I asked for a link to the specific story which you are basing your allegations. You haven't done it.

You are really crazy and obsessed. Your hatred for Bush blocks any rational thinking. You are a joke, and I'm glad the democratic party is filled with people like you, because no matter what, liberals will never have power in this country.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top

No one is getting their goodies reduced. 

The benefits get raised for everyone.  The question is how fast benefits get raised.  The poorest Americans get their benefits raised at the same rate as worker pay has been going up.  The richest Americans get their benefits raised at the rate of inflation.  Eveyrone else is somewhere in-between.

What I find hypocritical is that Col Gene spends so much time bitching about deficits and as soon as a Republican tries to make things balance a bit, he screams bloody murder.  It's just mindless partisanship.

Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
I am reading the article from the News-Press Wire Service;

"one proposal he look at would keep benefits rising as promised for the bottom 30% of wage earners while reducing them for the rest (70% )".

Bush is trying to fund both his individual accounts and the existing shortfall in the trust fund to pay the baby boomers by reducing benefits to 70% of retirees.

I want to see the congressman and senator's who have the BALLS to put their name on legislation that would accomplish this end.


As usual your not getting the "full" story from your selected media outlet. In NO way has GW said or will support a 70% reduction in SS. What he HAS proposed is that SS not be allowed to grow any faster than the rate of inflation. And has proposed a 40% cap on SS raises per year.
Reply #23 from PolMach Forums Top
DR. M--

Thats what i was about to say...as i have the articles in another window...
Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
DR. M--

Thats what i was about to say...as i have the articles in another window...


Lucas....go ahead and post the links. Not that it'll make one bit of difference to the originator of this thread. But there are others that might like to know.

Well *col* looks like you've been proven *wrong* yet again. Go figure!
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
Island Dog

www.newyorktimes.com

google Search "Bush Social Sceurity benefit cuts"

These are two sites. The story was on the CNN news all day.

I said Bush was proposing to cut benefits for 70% of Social Security retirees. He is proposing to cut them from what they would be on a sliding scale except for the bottom 30% .Only the bottom 30% would receive the benefit levels that have been promised upon retirement. As I said in my blog, I want to see Congress pass something like this. Because if they do, a lot congressmen and senators will be looking for something to do after their next reelection. We do not need individual retirement accounts for the simple reason they do not provide any solution to the funding issue in Social Security. Today the Social Security Administration admitted that individual accounts do not resolve the funding issue. You cannot fix the shortfall in Social Security by taking money out of the system and put that money into individual accounts. In addition, the majority of Americans DO NOT WANT the structure of Social Security changed. Bush is as far away from where the vast majority of Americans want to be on this issue he could be. It is time for him to understand this is not a dictatorship where what he says goes. It is what the majority want and the vast majority do not want the Bush change to Social Security!