Pres. Bush deserves thanks and credit on S.S.

from JoeUser Forums
There's plenty of Bush bashin' threads up again, declaring that Pres. Bush's plan is the wrong one, looking at the wrong problem for Social Security, taking us in the wrong direction in general, and attacking anything and everything that Pres. Bush is doing and has done. That's fine for folks that want to be negative Nellys, and who want to look at the glass as half- (or more) empty. Those pessimists can talk until their doom-and-gloom statements become self-fulfilling prophecies if they want, or they can come here and trash talk and bash in this thread where myself and maybe a few others might throw out some different words on Pres. Bush. Words like "congratulations," "courageous," "inspired," and more.

There are still miles to go before we see what really emerges from Congress in the form of Social Security reform. Everything could fall apart completely when things advance into the Senate, or a bunch of gut-less wonders in the House may start freaking over their own impending re-election campaigns and they may walk away completely before anything is done.

But, regardless, President George W. Bush has stepped to the plate and is following through on his original campaign promises to work on Social Security. Most politicians have avoided Social Security completely. They fear for their political lives, and thanks to lobbying efforts by the AARP, political maneuvering by obstructionist Democrats that want to deny President Bush a victory at all costs, and even the constant bleeting and bashin' that takes place here at JoeUser.com and PoliticalMachine.com, many people have thought that Social Security would never be addressed.

Well, it is being addressed. It's being looked at on multiple fronts. Rather than leaving a dysfunctional program in place that robs from today's employees to pay back yesterday's workers, efforts are being made to provide for the security of everyone. Existing retirees and soon to be retirees are being assured that their benefits will be paid, and future employees as well as younger current employees are being dealt with in the fairest possible methods which insure that everyone can benefit from the programs they have and will pay into.

Take a few minutes and realize what it is to live in a time when a politician makes a promise to solve a problem, and actually works on delivering a solution to the problem. Rather than times of failed politicians that have run from problems, and left them for someone else to solve, we live in a time where our leader is not afraid to do the right thing and deliver upon his promises. Give the man credit and show some appreciation. He deserves it.
politics
5,469 views 18 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
If the way the Military retirement was restructured is any indicator...
I guess people should plan on saving and investing more for their retirement.
Something people never really have done anyway.
For the past 40 years they've always said that people don't save enough. Looks like they are going to be forced to save.
Because of the changes in the retirement for the military, they made up for the decrease with a TSP system.
Right now TSP is voluntary, but I do see the day when the military will make TSP masndatory.
I know there is alot of people in the military getting up around 20 years, wished they had TSP when they first enlisted.
I can see some form of modeling after the military TSP.
Umm, SS supplemented by TSP for those just entering into the work force.
Oh well, there are a lot of things that can be done, I'm just glad it is no longer seen as political suicide to talk about changing SS.

And yes Bush does deserve credit and thanks.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Prs. Clinton spoke of a Social Securit crisis.. but did nothing about it.

Al Gore made "the Social Security Lock Box" a central part of his campaign for president.

Now, Prs. Bush utters the words "Social Security crisis" and the braindead in Congress say.. "What, there's no crisis".

Congressional democrats and many republicans need to quit playing infantile games. Their immature stupidity is doing nothing but preventing real progress from happening.

Something tells me that if the next president is democrat, he or she could use the exact words that Prs. Bush has been using, and the slime in Congress would say, "Genius! It's about time we had a president who cared!"

Pathetic!

Yes, Prs. Bush and those in Congress supporting Social Security reform shoud be commended.
CursorFX - Customize your Windows cursor
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Spoken by the democrats:


"What should we do with this projected surplus? I have a simple four-word answer: Save Social Security first." PRESIDENT CLINTON, COINING THE FAMOUS DEMOCRATIC SLOGAN, STATE OF THE UNION, JAN. 27,1998

"f you don't do anything, one of two things will happen. Either it will go broke and you won't ever get it, or if we wait too long to fix it, the burden on society...of taking care of our generation's Social Security obligations will lower your income and lower your ability to take care of your children...[It] would be horribly wrong and unfair to you and unfair to the future prospects of the United States." PRESIDENT CLINTON, GEORGETOWN, FEB. 9, 1998

"Perhaps our greatest opportunity and our greatest obligation at this moment is to save Social Security...It would be unconscionable if we failed to act, and act now..." PRESIDENT CLINTON, TOWN HALL MEETING, KANSAS CITY, APRIL 7, 1998

"Durbin said due to the increasing number of bbaby boomers' reaching retirement age, Social Security will be unable to pay out full benefits...but the sooner Congress acts to avert this crisis the easier and less painful it will be." - SEN. DICK DURBIN (D, IL), "REFORMING SOCIAL SECURITY," PRESS RELEASE, SEPT. 15, 1998

"Social Security faces a serious fiscal crisis...Save Social Security first!" - VICE PRESIDENT GORE, WITH DICK GEPHARDT, TED KENNEDY, BARBARA BOXER, AND OTHER DEMOCRATS AT SOCIAL SECURITY (AND ANTI-TAX-CUT) RALLY ON CAPITOL STEPS, SEPT. 25, 1998

"Fixing Social Security is an urgent priority." - SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D, ND), QUOTED IN ROLL CALL, DEC 6, 1999
Reply #4 from PolMach Forums Top
It seems as if SS has become almost Taboo....that those who should try anything would have their political career come to a sudden halt...hmmm,thank god i won't have to worry about it once i get outta the usa and move elsewhere....still a little humorous....i kinda wonder what the next president will do about it...[BTW, has anyone noticed that there's a pattern when it comes to presidents for the last few decades...is been R-president,D-President.....back and forth....strange....]
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
President Bush deserves credit for energizing the discussion about Social Security. However his suggested solutions are nothing of the kind. The chief actuary for the Social Security Administration has admitted the creation of individual accounts, which is the fundamental suggestion of George Bush, will not in anyway resolved funding problem to pay benefits at 100% promised amounts to the Baby boomers. Therefore, since the individual accounts do not fix the funding problem of Social Security, we need to stop talking about them and get to the issue at hand. To do that we MUST do one or more of the following:

Increase the retirement age for full retirement -- which amounts to a lifetime reduction in benefits.

Cut benefits to future retirees which is the George Bush solution.

Increase the amount of money going into the Social Security trust fund so it can meet the obligations to the baby boomer generation.

The most likely answer is a combination of all three but in no event creating individual accounts as part of Social Security. That suggestion compounds the problem because in addition to funding the existing system you also need the trillions of dollars to be replaced that will be going into the individual accounts. Finally the vast majority of Americans do not want Social Security changed the way George Bush is suggesting.

After we have solved the Social Security problem, we need to address the much bigger and more urgent matter of Medicare and Medicaid. It is strange that President Bush chose to concentrate on a smaller problem that is 40 years in the future and ignores a much bigger problem it is in the face of the American people today at least so far as Medicaid is concerned.
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Cut benefits to future retirees which is the George Bush solution.


Why do you keep spouting this garbage? Fact check.org has already *proven* this to be false!

After we have solved the Social Security problem, we need to address the much bigger and more urgent matter of Medicare and Medicaid. It is strange that President Bush chose to concentrate on a smaller problem that is 40 years in the future and ignores a much bigger problem it is in the face of the American people today at least so far as Medicaid is concerned.


See reply #3. If you think Bush was the only one looking at it this way, your wrong.
Reply #7 from PolMach Forums Top
Terp - this is such crap. Bush has offered no plan. All he has done has heightened the "crisis" aspect of social security (which there would be none if those in congress would stop looting the program) and suggested private accounts.

I would commend Bush for "energizing" "discussion" on this topic but it's such a red herring. Instead of decaring "emergency!" why doesn't he use his bully pulpit or get a congressional point man to discuss balancing the budget and stop stealing from s.s. funds so that no "crisis" will occur?

Any answers?
Reply #8 from PolMach Forums Top
Terp - this is such crap. Bush has offered no plan. All he has done has heightened the "crisis" aspect of social security (which there would be none if those in congress would stop looting the program) and suggested private accounts.

I would commend Bush for "energizing" "discussion" on this topic but it's such a red herring. Instead of decaring "emergency!" why doesn't he use his bully pulpit or get a congressional point man to discuss balancing the budget and stop stealing from s.s. funds so that no "crisis" will occur?

Any answers?


--Err, show me where bush has been stealing from SS,when congress has been doing it for years... he hasn't been the one with a ticker above his head saying: "SOCIAL SECURITY EMERGENCY!!!!!" from what i've been seeing in the media its been the democrats...and yes he has offered a plan, WTF do you thin he's been doing lately...travalling around the us trying to promote a Fucking album....[yes this is sarcasm to those who don't know that] honestly...why do the democrats call themselves the smarter party....
Reply #9 from PolMach Forums Top
why do the democrats call themselves the smarter party....


Because they are arrogant. And not smart enough to know they know not.
Reply #10 from PolMach Forums Top
Err, show me where bush has been stealing from SS,when congress has been doing it for years... - Lucas Bailey

The blame stands with Congress - as I mentioned in post # 7. That said, any president with a budget proposal shoulders some of the blame for each budget by failing to hammer on Congress to ensure fiscal soundness.

The truth is, Bush has said three things when it comes to social security:

1. There's a crisis!

2. Private accounts for the people!

3. The Democrats have no plan! *implying that he has a plan without saying so*

 and yes he has offered a plan, WTF do you thin he's been doing lately...travalling around the us trying to promote a Fucking album....[

He has not stated that he has a plan, though that has been implied, how the non-existent plan would be implemented has failed to surface thus far. I welcome any evidence you have of this "plan" - I'd like to see it. I don't know if you've actually bothered hearing any of the town hall speeches he's been giving, you should tune in for details ( there haven't been any so far - just the three things above I mentioned ).

One last thing - there seems to be an unwritten rule here at JU that anyone attacking current administration policies is automatically a Democrat, or worse yet, a "liberal". Let's dispose of this on all sides. Name calling is name calling.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
nice to see someone else singing the praises of this man, george. he is couragous, smart and strong. something the democraps ain't.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Err, show me where bush has been stealing from SS,when congress has been doing it for years... - Lucas Bailey

The blame stands with Congress - as I mentioned in post # 7. That said, any president with a budget proposal shoulders some of the blame for each budget by failing to hammer on Congress to ensure fiscal soundness.

The truth is, Bush has said three things when it comes to social security:

1. There's a crisis!

2. Private accounts for the people!

3. The Democrats have no plan! *implying that he has a plan without saying so*

and yes he has offered a plan, WTF do you thin he's been doing lately...travalling around the us trying to promote a Fucking album....[

He has not stated that he has a plan, though that has been implied, how the non-existent plan would be implemented has failed to surface thus far. I welcome any evidence you have of this "plan" - I'd like to see it. I don't know if you've actually bothered hearing any of the town hall speeches he's been giving, you should tune in for details ( there haven't been any so far - just the three things above I mentioned ).

One last thing - there seems to be an unwritten rule here at JU that anyone attacking current administration policies is automatically a Democrat, or worse yet, a "liberal". Let's dispose of this on all sides. Name calling is name calling.


Try again oh foolish one:

"What should we do with this projected surplus? I have a simple four-word answer: Save Social Security first." PRESIDENT CLINTON, COINING THE FAMOUS DEMOCRATIC SLOGAN, STATE OF THE UNION, JAN. 27,1998

"f you don't do anything, one of two things will happen. Either it will go broke and you won't ever get it, or if we wait too long to fix it, the burden on society...of taking care of our generation's Social Security obligations will lower your income and lower your ability to take care of your children...[It] would be horribly wrong and unfair to you and unfair to the future prospects of the United States." PRESIDENT CLINTON, GEORGETOWN, FEB. 9, 1998

"Perhaps our greatest opportunity and our greatest obligation at this moment is to save Social Security...It would be unconscionable if we failed to act, and act now..." PRESIDENT CLINTON, TOWN HALL MEETING, KANSAS CITY, APRIL 7, 1998

"Durbin said due to the increasing number of bbaby boomers' reaching retirement age, Social Security will be unable to pay out full benefits...but the sooner Congress acts to avert this crisis the easier and less painful it will be." - SEN. DICK DURBIN (D, IL), "REFORMING SOCIAL SECURITY," PRESS RELEASE, SEPT. 15, 1998

"Social Security faces a serious fiscal crisis...Save Social Security first!" - VICE PRESIDENT GORE, WITH DICK GEPHARDT, TED KENNEDY, BARBARA BOXER, AND OTHER DEMOCRATS AT SOCIAL SECURITY (AND ANTI-TAX-CUT) RALLY ON CAPITOL STEPS, SEPT. 25, 1998

"Fixing Social Security is an urgent priority." - SEN. BYRON DORGAN (D, ND), QUOTED IN ROLL CALL, DEC 6, 1999


And just an FYI Mr. Pozen (D) has come with a plan. And since he's part of President Bush's cabinet I would say that GW HAS put forth a plan.
Link


Or try this one:
Link

Or this one:
Link
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
When you rip Van Winkle Bushies wake up from your sleep, you will find a country in debt, without jobs and hopelessly divided. This will be the legacy of George W. Bush!
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
When you rip Van Winkle Bushies wake up from your sleep, you will find a country in debt, without jobs and hopelessly divided. This will be the legacy of George W. Bush!


Then why don't you just leave? This country isn't perfect, but it's not half as bad as you make it. Your endless complaining and exaggerations are so typical of obsessive Bush haters.

Instead of your whiniing, why don't you go to the posts that show how good things really are, and the posts that debunk your bs?
Reply #15 from PolMach Forums Top
When you rip Van Winkle Bushies wake up from your sleep, you will find a country in debt, without jobs and hopelessly divided. This will be the legacy of George W. Bush


--The only time i can think of when the US has been "United" has been right after 9/11...other than that.....we've [as a nation] been divided...yes we've been in debt for years...and as for jobs...corporations are going to export jobs as long as it remains cheaper...

Debt:

National debt
The national debt, more properly known as the federal debt, is one of the most controversial issues in the United States. It is usually expressed as an absolute number, but a more accurate measurement is the ratio of the debt to gross domestic product. Most citizens favor paying off the national debt, though a minority feel this could have negative economic consequences.

[edit]
Modern presidential records
Statistics here are given in both in raw numbers and in relation to the debt ratio, an expression of the federal debt as a percentage of GDP. Due to World War II, the national debt spiked to a historical peak of 121.2% of GDP in 1946.


National Debt Summary President Years Increase
in Debt Annual
Increase Debt as
a % of GDP
Carter 4 42% 9.2% 33.3%
Reagan 8 189% 14.2% 52.6%
Bush 4 55.6% 11.7% 65.9%
Clinton 8 36% 3.9% 57.7%
Bush 4 34% 7.6% 64.8%

Source:

Link
Reply #16 from PolMach Forums Top
Try again oh foolish one

Funny you would say that. Anyhow, as I've mentioned Bush doesn't have a plan. All your links speak about the "Bush Plan" but, in reality, the "plan" is still in the works. You won't see the plan in writing until it is finished being written as legislation. That's one of the reasons you've heard so little actual specific details on how the plan is to be implemented. Not too sporting of Bush to accuse the Dem's of having no plan when he's still trying to figure his out.

I noticed you gave plenty of quotes from Dems remarking about the state of Social Security. I never said Bush was wrong about there being a "crisis". ..but he's heavily overstated that point seeing as how S.S. won't become insolvent until somewhere around 2047 - years after you, drmiler, have shuffled loose the mortal coil. There also wouldn't be an insolvency issue if congress would refrain from looting s.s. to pay for pet pork projects.

And just an FYI Mr. Pozen (D) has come with a plan. And since he's part of President Bush's cabinet I would say that GW HAS put forth a plan.

...following that logic, let's say Mr. Pozen has black hair - since he's a part of President Bush's cabinet does that mean President Bush also has black hair? How about a small penis? ( J / K )
Reply #17 from PolMach Forums Top
...following that logic, let's say Mr. Pozen has black hair - since he's a part of President Bush's cabinet does that mean President Bush also has black hair? How about a small penis? ( J / K )


--Ya know, i heard that a female can tell the size of a guys penis by looking at the size of his thumb...Uh-Oh! I better make my thumb bigger..... [J/K]
Reply #18 from PolMach Forums Top
--Ya know, i heard that a female can tell the size of a guys penis by looking at the size of his thumb...Uh-Oh! I better make my thumb bigger..... [J/K]

Right on bro.

Here at JU, feel free to fuck with partisan lines any time.

*cracks open Nat Light*

"Here's to the Great Discussion!"

Seriously, I think we're all going to have a lot more fun treating each other like real people then mouthpieces for our political interests, so let's not be afraid to mix it up.

(ed. note: deference will continue to serve as the arm, leg, and ass of the democratic party, especially of the hardcore liberals, please ignore any spontaneous attempt by him to treat other bloggers like real people)