General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOCTOBER 26, 2012 Bill Clinton on cutting Social Security and the Cat food commission..
Fortune Magazine
Oh........ and BTW... Bill isn't running for president
"While everyone can find things to disagree with in the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles commission, I believe it got some big things right: The debt will become a much bigger problem when normal economic growth returns and causes interest rates to rise; passing a credible 10-year plan now will keep the governments borrowing costs much lower than they will be without one; its important not to impose austerity now before a growth trend is clearly established, because as the austerity policies in the eurozone and the U.S. show, that will slow the economy, cut jobs, and increase deficits; and any credible deficit-reduction plan requires three things spending reductions, revenue increases, and economic growth.
[Article author continues...]
As for our entitlements, the situation is equally dire. As the law is currently written, the Social Security trust fund will run dry in 2033. If nothing changes before then, Social Security recipients will have their benefits cut by 25%. Simpson-Bowles tries to keep the program solvent by putting in modest steps to raise the retirement age gradually far into the future by one year in 2050 and another in 2075 so as not to change the social promises made to people who are nearing retirement age now. But the longer we wait to discuss the real problems in entitlement programs and enact changes like this, the more draconian the fix will need to be.
Thats why Krugmans claim that there is no fiscal crisis isnt just laughable, its downright dangerous. Krugman throws down the gauntlet when he calls Simpson-Bowles a really bad plan. As President Clinton notes, nearly every constituency will find some part of it hard to swallow. But the beauty of the plan is that it attempts to unify the country through shared sacrifice that is also grounded in some form of fiscal reality. And theres nothing really bad about that.
http://fortune.com/2012/10/26/a-call-for-frank-talk-about-our-debt-from-bill-clinton-and-me/
How come all this 'shared' sacrifice' is not really shared by anyone but the 99%, Bill Clinton have zero to lose in this deal just like Simpson and Bowles.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)It's so nice, Buy-Partisanship.
http://financialservicesinc.ubs.com/revitalizingamerica/SenatorPhilGramm.html
nashville_brook
(20,958 posts)Social Security has to be protected. it's beyond disgusting that anyone calling themselves a Dem would get on the Wall Street bandwagon to kick seniors to the curb.
djean111
(14,255 posts)All the so-called "charisma" in the universe can't make that stop stinking.
marle35
(172 posts)In 1983, 90% of all earnings were subject to SS payroll tax. That amount has decreased to 82.5% today.
Raise the taxable income gradually so that once again 90% of income is subject to payroll tax. 71% of Americans are in favor of this.
It's not rocket science.