Obama signed the tax bill already. What is the point in arguing it will kill social security?

[dkf]

By that standard we might as well plan for its demise and play right into the Republicans hands.

[elleng]

1. Correct. Fear-mongering comes from many quarters, unfortunately.

[DJ13]

2. If the possibility isnt kept out in the sunshine

it WILL happen in the dead of night.

They want you to forget about it being a possibility, just like they werent happy that several websites kept us appraised of the plans by the deficit commission.

[Raine]

39. Yup the best disinfectant is sunlight

we can't let them get away with doing this behind our backs in the dark. :mad:

[rocktivity]

3. It IS pointless to argue that the tax deal will kill social security

Arguing that it is now mortally wounded is reasonable enough.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[Safetykitten]

20. Agree

[pscot]

4. Definitely. Let's just ignore that

and pretend that everything is hunky dory.

[dkf]

8. The funding has always been an issue. It's just degrees of the same problem.

[Xicano]

5. Bush already committed troops to war. What is the point in arguing the consequences?

Because burying our heads in the sand isn't going to bring about change.

[dkf]

9. Since when was the funding argument to tax the middle class anyway?

What happened to the assertion that raising the cap to infinity will fix everything?

[myrna minx]

6. So by ignoring a potentially serious problem, it will go away?

:shrug:

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. +1

[leftstreet]

28. +1

[Edweird]

7. Republicans weren't in charge. They didn't pass this.

[dkf]

10. They were equal partners.

It was bipartisan.

[Edweird]

18. No they were NOT 'equal partners'. We controlled both houses of congress and the white house.

[Go2Peace]

11. We should just stop reacting strongly to threats to social security

:shrug:

I hate it when people suggest that we stop doing things that are essentially normal DEMOCRATIC activities. I know you likely don't mean it that way, but that is what essentially you are calling for....

[dkf]

12. Frankly I see a self fulfilling prophecy here.

I'm just saying if your goal is to preserve Social Security you shouldn't promote the idea of it's demise. Talking about the death of social security is the one way you will make it impossible to raise it back again because you will have put the idea of social security as the black hole of no return into the American psyche.

[Go2Peace]

19. I think that has already happened, and with the help of the catfood commission

unfortunately.

[dkf]

22. But when we say with such certainty that this cut has killed Social Security it is the strongest

language I have seen. It's the first time I've seen the left say social security is dead.

[Go2Peace]

36. I understand your point

I am just not sure that "letting it go" is going to help. Maybe a change in terminology. I agree with you when you say it is not "dead", but a knife was just put to it's throat, so to speak, and we just cannot "let it go". We have to respond and make sure that it doesn't get near again. And how do you do that?

[dkf]

46. Nobody wants to invest in something that looks like a complete and total loss.

I don't think some realize the damage this type of language could produce in the willingness of the people to pay into social security. This is playing with fire and must be dealt with in a temperate manner that is realistic yet expains the shortfalls in ways that are doable.

Personally I have never counted on Social Security because I don't trust the fiscal soundness of the Federal Government. But I don't think people here understand the harm they are doing to their own cause when they try to make sure SS stays viable.

[freshwest]

33. That's a good point

[Kaleva]

23. But its no longer just a threat, it's a done deed.

Kinda like someone trying to explain that Custer's plans at Little Big Horn will lead to disaster about a week or so after the battle was fought.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TBF]

15. +1 nt

[TBF]

14. You can lay down and die if you want to but don't expect the rest of us not to fight back. nt

[dkf]

25. What are you going to do now? The bill is signed.

[Skittles]

27. according to you, we should just request some vaseline

[dkf]

30. So you complain and tell everyone social security has been killed...then what?

What is the fight? It's temporary. Are you going to fight to reinstate it and make it retroactive? What do you want?

[Skittles]

31. you are not worth my time and effort

you're ridiculous - it's like talking to a child

[TBF]

47. What is the fight? It's clearly class warfare and yes your side is winning at the moment,

but don't expect that to continue. Eventually people will tire of being robbed blind. There are many more of us than you.

[pacalo]

16. Ranting is different than arguing. Denial & putdown of another's anger turns it into an argument.

[doc03]

17. Who is arguing? The door is open to destroy

SS it's a fact.

[dkf]

24. We open the door by saying it's demise is possible.

[Go2Peace]

37. Just when I was thinking we had some common ground on this lol

No, the door was opened by the legislation. Blame the freaking victim why don't you?

[JVS]

40. screams do not make the rape

[msongs]

26. gee didnt Obama once say he would not extend bush tax cuts? we know how that turned out nt

[mmonk]

29. To get through to you.

[dkf]

32. The funding has always been suspect going out 30 years.

I don't see this makes much of a difference. So we move it forward a year. We keep saying it's so easy to solve that all we need to do is raise the cap

[freshwest]

34. But if there is not payroll tax

What difference does the amount of the cap make? How do you cap zero coming in?

It was Bernie Sander's take on this that got people going in this direction and I don't believe he's a fearmonger. Just logical. Nothing going in combined with the prediction that any call to restore the payroll tax will be called an increase so it won't happen. Just like sunsetting the Bush tax cuts didn't happen.

The refusal of taxes in any form won't allow revenue from another source, unless we're missing something really big here. While it's true another revenue stream could be found, who would pay it?

All the western countries are leaving this form of taking care of the old, infirm and orphans. We see it in the states here already, so this isn't a fantasy.

I'd just like to see how they are going to fund it. They just cut the funds, didn't make any alternative scheme to do in the future.

I don't think we're being hysterical. Another way could be found to fund it and we can't give it up. If we do, we have to figure out another way to get it down, or give up a lot of the freedoms we came to expect.

Because when people are that desperate, freedom of speech, religion, worker or environmental justice mean nothing. They'll do whatever they're told to do in order to eat, they'll have no security.

[dkf]

35. Huh? They cut it by 2%pts from 8% or whatever to 6%.

They didn't get rid of the whole thing.

[Go2Peace]

38. a 25% cut is quite a bit?

[dkf]

43. It's a part of it, not the whole thing. We didn't get rid of the payroll tax.

[Caretha]

48. You can't even get the figures right

Why should anyone listen to you? You show that you have no clue as to what you are talking about. FYI - The cut is from 6.2% to 4.2%. When you can't get the smallest details correct, it proves that you have no concept of the big picture and cannot be trusted to even be included in the discussion. It also makes me wonder if you draw a paycheck - so why should you be concerned about it?

[dkf]

50. Yeah I was too lazy to look it up just now.

But I knew it wasn't the whole thing which was my point. And I was counting the Medicare tax of 1.45% which I probably shouldn't have but they are payroll taxes.

[freshwest]

54. Thanks

It wasn't clear to me. From the source Sanders quoted, the intent is to destroy the system. The GOP has often claimed the social safety net is immoral and unproductive. There are calls by the Tea Party to end it, so these concerns aren't coming out of a vacuum.

Below is the DU link on what Sanders said. I went to other websites to see the full transcript and he seemed to make a compelling case that this is the beginning of the end of the system:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9745863

[harun]

41. The point is that most people are delusional to the real cost of this compromise.

[dkf]

44. I agree in that people may take a look at the FICA tax and notice how significant it really is.

And then they will wonder what they will be getting for it, especially now that we are shouting it is dead.

[Lasher]

42. Silence is consent

There was a contingent around here who insisted the tax cut deal would not endanger Social Security. Now that the deal has gone through, we're supposed to shut up while the meme changes to 'we are where we are' and 'resistance is futile'. But that's not what you're saying, are you?

[me b zola]

45. Well, I just read a post here @ DU arguing for cutting social security:

dkf (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-20-10 04:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. When you look at the budget that is where most of our spendng will be.
Edited on Mon Dec-20-10 04:17 AM by dkf
It doesn't really matter if it funds itself or not, the fact is that the majority of the taxes we need to collect will go towards our elderly and the majority of the effort our Government focuses on will be on people who are finished working.

It is nice to be able to provide for your elderly, but that isn't money invested in the future of this country, not on educating the scientists of the future, nor in building the infrastructure...nothing that helps us keep up with the rest of the world.

It's not even focused on helping the poor working class.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=43359&mesg_id=43370

[Caretha]

49. Frightening, huh?

That a Duer has such disdain for the elderly - after all they are finished working, ie being a productive drone, so what's the big deal, right? Let's just invest in ice flows and put anyone labeled elderly on them. :banghead:

[WinkyDink]

52. Interesting find.

[WinkyDink]

51. What is the point of your query? And I'm serious.

[Motown_Johnny]

53. or argue that it requires another source of funding