BTW-talk radio callers already have their Soc.Sec. talking points

[underpants]

Flipping around the stations over the last few days I have heard several people call in to voice "their" opinions about privatization, they ALL go something like this:

"It's voluntary"
"It's ONLY a smalll portion of Social Security"
and , of course, the slam dunk of all talking points

"It's MY MONEY!!!!!" (it's not dipweed)

Red herrings are in season.

[RoeBear]

1. "It's MY MONEY!!!!!" (it's not dipweed)

Who's is it?

[underpants]

3. The debt that will have to be absorbed makes it the next generation's

Advocates of privatization almost always pretend that all we have to do is borrow a bit of money up front, and then the system will become self-sustaining. The Wehner memo talks of borrowing $1 trillion to $2 trillion “to cover transition costs.” Similar numbers have been widely reported in the news media.


But that’s just the borrowing over the next decade. Privatization would cost an additional $3 trillion in its second decade, $5 trillion in the decade after that and another $5 trillion in the decade after that. By the time privatization started to save money, if it ever did, the federal government would have run up around $15 trillion in extra debt.


These numbers are based on a Congressional Budget Office analysis of Plan 2, which was devised by a special presidential commission in 2001 and is widely expected to be the basis for President Bush’s plan.

Under Plan 2, payroll taxes would be diverted into private accounts, while future benefits would be cut. In the short run, this would worsen the budget deficit. In the long run, if all went well, cutting benefit payments would reduce the deficit.

http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?section=Opinion&OID=66620

[BlueEyedSon]

6. Technically, I suppose it belongs to the US Treasury. 8^)

But this BS about "it's your money" is divisive fiction when you consider taxation. Consider the average CEO (who is earning 500 times his average employee). Is that HIS money?

Maybe his trade secrets, brand copyrights and other intellectual property are protected by an enormous structure of law & courts.

Maybe he is in the oil or other extractive industry overseas, in which case his income is the result of treaties, foreign service personnel and US military presence (actual or potential).

Maybe his company's products are shipped around this country on the government funded interstate highway system.

Maybe his company received some fat no-bid gov't contracts.

This exec is not drawing his 7-figure salary in a vacuum, and neither is any one else in the US.

[cornermouse]

2. The real talking point.

Can you afford to lose part or all of your retirement funds?

This is a scheme based on what is essentially gambling on your ability to pick (usually with limited knowledge and time) the stocks which will rise in value instead of the stocks that lose money. It is also dependent on the honesty and integrity of the brokers and the companies whose stock you choose.

Once you understand that, the choice should be easy.

[bluedonkey]

4. what I heard

you can't invest this money by yourself they will tell you where you can invest it.
So it's not really your money!
Or maybe it is and 'Papa B' just doesn't trust you to do it right!
Take your pick!

[underpants]

7. That's true you wouldn't be able to invest in ANYTHING you want

only certain stocks/mutual funds will be an option. Boy you think lobbying on issues and policies is bad wait until we see the "entertaining" that goes on when direct cash money is on the table.

[SHRED]

5. And the overall scam talking point is...

that it is a retirement program when it is really an insurance policy.

[snippy]

8. Just part of the strategy Bush has outlined for deceiving and manipulating

the public about his plan for changing Social Security.

Social Security Push to Tap the GOP Faithful
Campaign's Tactics Will Drive Appeal

By Mike Allen and Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, January 14, 2005; Page A06

President Bush plans to reactivate his reelection campaign's network of donors and activists to build pressure on lawmakers to allow workers to invest part of their Social Security taxes in the stock market, according to Republican strategists.

White House allies are launching a market-research project to figure out how to sell the plan in the most comprehensible and appealing way, and Republican marketing and public-relations gurus are building teams of consultants to promote it, the strategists said.

The campaign will use Bush's campaign-honed techniques of mass repetition, never deviating from the script and using the politics of fear to build support -- contending that a Social Security financial crisis is imminent when even Republican figures show it is decades away.

. . .

In addition to their own efforts, White House and RNC officials are working closely with the same outside groups that helped Bush win reelection in 2004, especially Progress for America, a political organization with close ties to Rove. RNC officials have privately told top congressional aides they will work with Progress for America and others to provide political cover through television ads supporting the Bush position and condemning those who oppose it. To coincide with Bush's new drive, Progress for America is running a television ad on Fox and CNN that compares Bush to Franklin Roosevelt, the father of Social Security.

The group also phoned or e-mailed Republicans, culled from its list of more than 1 million supporters, to enlist their help in selling the Bush plan, either by donating money or talking up the plan to neighbors. Brian McCabe, a spokesman for the group, said it is applying the lessons it learned electing a president to selling a public policy.

. . .

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7797-2005Jan13.html


Note that Bushfuck the Liar and his minions now are so arrogant that they are openly boasting of intending to use "the politics of fear" to deceive and manipulate the public.

By the way, the article describes the democratic party as

"scrambling to organize in the face of a multimillion-dollar juggernaut, have yet to settle on any particular counterargument but said they believe Bush's rollout of the idea has been rocky and new details will give them more ammunition."

So while the republican party already has a well developed strategy and is doing market research, building teams of consultants to promote Bush's plan, and contacting Bush followers to help in "selling" the plan the democratic party have yet to develop a strategy. Democrats need to make a much greater effort if they are to have any effect at all on Bush's plan. Democrats need at least a preliminary strategy which can be implemented immediately even if the entire strategy can not be fully developed until later.

At a minimum, Democrats should be educating the public about the actual facts concerning the financial condition of the Social Security program. An astonishing number of people, especially younger people, think that the Social Security program, if left unchanged, will be unable to pay any benefits at all in the future. Democrats need to correct that misimpression. Democrats also should be pointing out that Bush is keeping the details of his plan secret. Finally, democrats should be talking about the fact that the republicans have announced that they intend to use misinformation, campaign style rallies and tactics, and the "politics of fear" to persuade people to support Bush's plan.

Democrats also should be doing some market research, including some focus group research which includes both people who support Bush's plan and people who oppose it. Because Bush is keeping the details of his plan secret, democrats should be polling Bush followers and other supporters of private accounts to learn more about the expectations of those people so that the criticisms of the plan can be tailored to weaken support for Bush's plan. They also should be preparing to talk about the information concerning the performance of the federal government employee Thrift Savings Plan. Many of Bush's followers think that his plan will allow thenm to get rich. Democrats need to be prepared to crush those expectations when Bush finally reveals the details of his secret plan.

[underpants]

9. launching a market-research project ? I thought W didn't care about polls

That is another RW talking point "PRESIDENT Bush does do what is popular he does what is RIGHT!!!"

Good article and great post. The point about keeping the plan secret is key-they are going to wait and pop it onto Congress and try to vote on it before anyone has a chance to read it, claim that it has already been discussed and the Dems are obstructionists for not allowing a vote.......on something no one has read yet. :eyes: as per the gameplan.

ON EDIT-the WHAT isn't important the WHAT WILL THE BUY (misinformation) is. Yes they are blatant about it. The articles I have read actually say that they are going to do this like they sold the war. Seriously.

[snippy]

10. Bush polls on whether to wipe. n/t

[xchrom]

11. conservatives against big government? i think not!

wait til there's a scandal -- a mismanagement of these funds -- or just plain dunderheads making dunderhead decisions.

oh the congressional hearings, the new rules and regulations -- the laws passed to protect investors -- watch dog agency that will be needed...

sounds big and expensive, doesn't it?

[iamjoy]

12. That's Why I Wish I Could Draw

I have an idea for a political cartoon, but I can't draw.
I'd love to see it in the papers.

Try to picture it...
A circus high wire. On the high wire you have a few (elderly?) people making their way across. Maybe one with one of those long sticks they use for balance, one with no stick and one hanging on to the wire for dear life. On the sides, up high, you have young people throwing money down. Underneath the high wire is a (safety) net, which people are cutting. Somehow we'd have to show that these cutters are privatization advocates. Maybe there are some people already in the safety net. Somewhere in the pic is a happy looking elephant.

What do you think?

[booley]

13. well, it is thier money...

just like it's thier money to invest in pyramid schemes and give to phony charities.

Yet pyramid schemes and phony charities are still illegal.

And of course, the more money taken out of SS, the weaker the system becomes for everybody. Which means everyone will be forced into this scam, even thos eof us who know better.

It's thier money being used for roads. It's my money too. But does that mean that people should only pay for the roads they are driving on?

Why aren't we calling talk radio and explaining what happened when they tried this in Great Britain?

In fact, why aren't we bringing up that the Shrubbery has had to use propaganda and LIES to push privatization? If you have to lie and use propaganda, doesn't that imply you know your position is weak?

It's not "thier money", it's all of OUR MONEY. And we, the people , should ensure that it is invested where it will do the most good.

Privatization won't do that.

[underpants]

14. Frist on ABC "This Week"-"need to do a good job educating on this"

Both the public and lawmakers. See it's not that they are wrong it just that you haven't been told what color the sky is in their world.

To Britain add Argentina and what really is going on in Chile. BTW-Chile is (or was*) a big talking point on this. Krugman wrote that in the end Chile didn't save any money because they had to build a safety net for those who lost everything.

*I say was because I haven't heard about that in a while-probably didn't focus group to well.

[me b zola]

20. While watching CNN earlier today

I saw a great big propaganda advertisement meant to enlighten the sheep--I mean masses--on how privatization is a swell idea.

[TankLV]

15. When all is said and done, & the markets crash & these fools lose it all,

I will walk over them in the streets & laugh at them in their squaler and poverty.

Every fucking idiot one of them.

I will concentrate all my efforts to help the innocent poor who warned against all of this.

Just as the sun rises and falls, the markets WILL crash just as they did a few years ago - and the Enrons & Halliburtons of this world will be laughing at them too for being the suckers they are.

Just like the bushies in the form of Neil and the billions of dollars Savings and Loan scandals of the not so recent past.

[NVMojo]

16. the Repukes have had these talking points for over a decade ...

if not more.

[mikehiggins]

17. Congress will only pass this if they are NOT afraid

it will come back to bite them on the ass. If the Democratic Party had actual leaders in place they would be swearing a blood vendetta against any congresscritter voting for Bush's plan, and raising money NOW to finance campaigns against pro-SSRAPE voices.

After the debacle with medical coverage, AARP is taking the lead with full page ads attacking the whole idea of this SSRAPE on common sense grounds. Every congresscritter KNOWS that old people vote for real, and if you take the money out of their pockets they will not forget. That is why it is important to repeat over and over that Bush is lying when he says his reforms won't affect current retirees.

There is NO reasoning with the Bushoids. They have to be fought at every point, something our Party leadership seems unable to do.

We need new leaders, or we need a new Party.

[BlueEyedSon]

18. "It's your money" is divisive fiction

But this BS about "it's your money" is divisive fiction when you consider taxation. Consider the average CEO (who is earning 500 times his average employee). Is that HIS money?

Maybe his trade secrets, brand copyrights and other intellectual property are protected by an enormous structure of law & courts.

Maybe he is in the oil or other extractive industry overseas, in which case his income is the result of treaties, foreign service personnel and US military presence (actual or potential).

Maybe his company's products are shipped around this country on the government funded interstate highway system.

Maybe his company received some fat no-bid gov't contracts.

This exec is not drawing his 7-figure salary in a vacuum, and neither is any one else in the US.

[crispini]

19. Here are MY talking points:

This is "Piratization" of Social Security to benefit Wall Street fund managers.

And:

"Fuck, I really don't want my parents living with me."

Both pretty hair-raising, eh? :evilgrin: