Social Security: Help Me Understand, Liberals.

Social Security, known as the third rail in American politics, is front and center as not only a campaign issue but for being a culprit in the growing long-term deficit problem in the country. I am not going to “rail” against Social Security but I need some help in understanding it deity-like status.

 Liberals hold Social Security dear and untouchable. It is indeed a scared idol. I am not sure I fully get it. President Obama this past summer seem to be amenable to some minor adjustments in the indexes that increase benefits and maybe to increasing the eligibility age. I think he has always supported lifting the wage base. He has backed off those notions saying yesterday he will not support any changes to Social Security and does not view it as contributing to the deficit. A person could almost be blown over by the collective sighs of relief from the left.

 The program does contribute to the deficit now and it only becomes a bigger drain as more people enter the program in the coming years. Yes, there is mythical Trust Fund but it holds Federal paper and it needs cash to pay out so the government must pay off its obligations from one side of the Government to the other. I know, strange but the reality is the Federal Government must borrow from other sources-like China-to cut those monthly SS checks.

Republican Presidential candidates seem to be all over this issue with varying degrees to attention. Clearly, Texas Governor Rick Perry has stirred the pot by calling the program a “ Ponzi scheme”, a characterization I understand but goes a bit far and is not productive. Social Security is not going away! No reason to demonize it, but fix it.

 Social Security has been a successful program. It makes people pay taxes now to transfer money to people who paid before. Taxes are actually quite high on both the worker and the employer and for most working Americans; the FICA tax exceeds their income tax. The problem arises in the demographics. Too many beneficiaries have to get their dough from too few workers. There are solutions to this situation-increase the taxes, cut the benefits, use general revenues, change eligibility requirements, and install a means test. Probably other useful suggestions or combinations thereof out there.

What I find interesting is that even a discussion, much less consideration, of changes to it, the fair level of taxes or its effect on the deficits are off limits to most Democrats. I do not understand it. What are they afraid of? What are they protecting? What do they know that i do not know? Is it just politics? Perhaps there is a real reason the Republic would fall if Social Security were tweaked. I do not even remotely buy the President’s rhetoric that Social Security is not a problem. Of course, it is. With unsustainable mammoth deficits almost forever, it is myopic, disingenuous, negligent, and intellectually dishonest to think otherwise.

I would also like to understand from the Democrat’s view why cuts in Medicare and Medicaid seem to be more acceptable? So, is it deny health coverage or make the sick pay more as long as everyone gets their Social Security? I have to confess, I really do not have a handle on health care but I thought the Administration solved all that in the so-called health care reform, promising the reforms actually saved money.

I understand the political angle for the Democrats, like I understand the political angle that Republican tarred Democrats for years on national security. However, it seems like the stakes are fairly high these days. The Federal deficit increases at roughly $4 billion per day. Maybe this issue is like tax increases for Republicans? They just do not want to discuss the possibility. Politics is one thing, doing the right thing is another. I am interested, however, about the reasons without the politics. If you know, drop me a line! 

 

Comments

[writing job]

yah! I understand that if no security system no power.