Budget: Bush revives call for private Social Security accounts

[Robbien]

This proposed budget deal flew by so fast with so little discussion and hidden away in it is

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush's proposed budget for 2008 repeats his call for establishing private Social Security accounts . . . Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday that the inclusion of private accounts should surprise no one, since Bush "has been very clear" about his goals.

Paulson said the administration is willing to consider any idea to keep the nearly 72-year-old system solvent. "That's his idea, and a lot of people share that idea, and there are different views on that and on taxes," Paulson said. "But everything's on the table."

. . .

The $2.9 trillion budget Bush presented to Congress on Monday envisions the accounts being set up in 2012, with workers eventually being able to invest up to $1,800 in exchange for less in guaranteed benefits. An additional $29 billion would be required to pay for the program in its first year, according to an analysis of Bush's budget by Senate Republicans.

Advocates say that letting younger workers invest a portion of their payroll taxes in exchange for a smaller guaranteed benefit would help keep the Social Security program from bankrupting the government. Bush said the accounts would not save Social Security by themselves but would give workers "a better deal" for their tax money.

and here's the kicker

The reference to "personal accounts" -- the administration's preferred term -- appears on page 1,434 of the thick stack of budget documents the White House presented Monday, said Louisiana Rep. Jim McCrery, the ranking Republican on the Ways and Means Committee.

But he said administration officials have encouraged lawmakers to present their own ideas "and come up with bipartisan solution that we can all embrace and finally fix that problem for the American people."

Just as in 2004, GOPers are demanding Democrats come up with their own solution if they don't like privatization.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/02/06/bush.budget/

[BOSSHOG]

1. There is no problem with SS, therefore there is no need for a solution

Baby boomers are already dying off and as each day goes by we are closer to the old point where more put in then take out. The social security will not bankrupt the government. Allowing "conservatives" to run rough shod over the budget will.

[Robbien]

4. But Paulson said no one should be surprised it is in this budget

Such faulty logic.

Back when Bush was a popular president, support for privatization of SS was low in the thirties.

It was burnt toast back then.

I am afraid of all this bi-partisan talk coming out of DC. In their efforts to be bi-partisan Dems may fall all over themselves giving away the treasury.

[underpants]

7. I'm not surprised-they pulled it back before it could be voted down

In fact they had some outlay for it even in the last budget.

This is no surprise.


Hell even Eisenhower knew about it

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt (you possibly know his background), a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas.5 Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

http://www.eisenhowermemorial.org/presidential-papers/first-term/documents/1147.cfm

[antigop]

2. We already have private accounts -- they're called IRAs n/t

[indepat]

3. Give W credit for single-minded persistence, even to the point of ruin,

calamity, disaster, or catastrophe as his single-minded minions and supporterd continue to march in mindless lockstep to the beat of their drummer.

[Bandit]

5. "But everything's on the table."

If that is the case let's start the Impeachment Hearings ASAP....

[ClintonTyree]

6. Bush is still spemding all of that political capital.....

he amassed during his landslide victory over John Kerry on '04. :rofl: The terrible thing about this is that Bush STILL THINKS he has political capital to spend. Talk about being delusional? :eyes: Our pResident is nucking futz. :silly:

[hfojvt]

8. here's a solution

since Bush is willing to "consider any idea". I propose this:

1) undo the Bush tax cuts for the top 20% and use that money to make Social Security solvent.

2) If that is not enough money, then tack on another 5%, raise the top bracket to 45%, and add another bracket after $1,000,000 of 60%.

There. Problem solved. Oh, here's another one:

3) End the Iraq war within the next 6 months and use that savings to keep the system solvent.

I hope Republicans are very clear about their goals on this, because privatised accounts are a screw job for millions of registered voters. I saw we say this loud and clear - "Republicans want to kill social security!"