OK, the healthcare article from CLB has evolved into a Social Security one, and the righties are spinning lies faster than Ol’ Doc Moron can refute them. Here are the facts on Social Security and what FDR intended.

1.       Before Social Security, all of Hunter’s, Winger’s and TomCat’s assertions about free markets and individual liberty were the norm. That laissez faire free market thinking brought us the Great Depression.

2.       At that time, people worked until they died, or until they got sick, and then they lost their job. Then they died. Every county in America had a Public Sanitation Department whose job it was to go out and pick up dead bodies, usually the elderly, in parks, or quiet shady places near rivers, streams. That was the free market in action.

3.       Then FDR realized that by instituting a social insurance program that everyone paid into, and everyone received some benefits, that most of the worst poverty associated with Old Age and disability could be overcome.

4.       Social Security went into effect, and amazingly, even according to Hunter, Winger  and Tommy Boy, people began to live longer lives?!? Wait, could there be a correlation? Wait, so when you 62, you can retire, and not need to go to the meat packing plant every day, or the steel mill, and try to keep up with the 20 year olds? And then people started living longer!?!? OH – MY – GAWD. Cause and effect?

5.       This had 2 immediate effects, it opened up jobs for young people, and it allowed older people to retire, and live out their last years with a little bit of comfort. Now, I know for Republicans old people who aren’t afraid of destitution, and young people with jobs are both bad things, but it is actually good for both them and the USA as a whole. Trust me on this, jobs give the young man dignity, and a comfortable old age lets people grow old with a little comfort.

6.       Fast forward to 1946, and the USA crazy sex and cranking out babies a thon that lasts for 15 years. This leads to the Baby Boomers. In the 80’s the US Congress, Ronnie Reagan and the Federal Reserve saw the statistical train wreck that this huge population boom was going to inflict upon S.S. so they had a Blue Ribbon Commission, and they put in place a few fixes, including another of Reagan’s tax increases. This was all to cover the Boomers.

Then in the 90’s, the Clinton – Rubin Team saw that things were still in trouble for our future, and Rubin decided that we needed to “”save” our way out of the mess of the solvency issue, and they started cutting the growth of spending and raised taxes. This lead to a surplus, and that lead to the govt paying off some bond holders, at 16 -20% and making the solvency issue go away.

The other way out of the solvency issue is to “grow” out of it,

  1. by increasing the average wages paid to Americans, and
  2. increasing the number of Americans paying in and
  3. growing the total economy so that the percentage of the shortfall relative to our Gross Domestic Product is so small, that it wouldn’t be a big deal.
Now, under Clinton all 3 of these conditions were taking place as well, wages were rising, the number of jobs was growing - 22 million in 8 years, and the economy grew. This pushed back the date for insolvency by 12 years. In 8 years the doomsday was pushed back 12 years.

Then came Chuckle Nuts. He put in new people at the Social Security Admin. They came up with a new model for Social Security. In the new model, the new Administration used new assumptions. They are as follows.

  1. Economic growth will slow after 2012 to 1.2% to 1.5% of GDP, for the next 80 years. For perspective, that is a worse growth rate than any time in US history, including the Great Depression.
  2. Wages will stagnate for Americans, and begin falling for 60% of the US workers. It sounds like Bush was planning on staying President forever.
  3. Immigration will slow to less than the legal limit today, and by 2012 less than 100,000 people will come to the US per year, forever. Now, granted if the rest of our economy is doing as badly as Bush is predicting, then yes immigration will slow down. But the first 2 conditions are unlikely to be true of the future, so the 3rd one is unlikely as well.

Now, assuming Bush’s ridiculous assumptions turn out true, how bad is Social Security going to be?

·         With no changes to the current system, through out the entire future of the USA, Social Security will still be able to cover 80% of all future payments, for eternity. Now, 80% is less than 100%, but hardly dire.

·         If we only assume growth rates closer to 2% per year (which is the worst ten year average in US history) we still get 100% of solvency. Raise it up to 2.5%, and the troubles are all gone.

·         Add in immigration and the problem is solved.

·         Add in increasing wages, and the problem is gone.

Comparing Social Security to Medicare? Well kiddies, here is the real trouble. Medicare is going to be a much bigger problem, a shortfall of $40 trillion or more over the next 50 years, vs $2-$3 trillion for Social Security getting back all the bonds they have bought from the General Budget, and the 20% shortfall if you take Chuckle Nuts’ numbers as accurate and honest.  And yes that number above is trillions, $40 of them for Medicare, and that was before the Part D drug plan went into effect.  So Social Security ain’t the big problem. This is like watching your house burning in flames, firefighters all over the place and you go rushing back in, to turn off your thermostat. But Republotards want to tackle Social Security? Why, because they can privatize it, place all the risk on Grand Mom, and get all the profits for Dick Cheney.

How about the “fixes”?

·         Private accounts that take money out of the current system only make Social Security’s problems bigger, faster. Imagine worrying about retirement, so you decide to take money out of your retirement account, and give that money to your grandkids. That is what the Republicans want to do.

·         Also, private accounts also wind up with free market controllers. Look at the Uk and Chile. Both countries trusted their retirement investment banking industries, only to watch the industry get fat off Grampa’s fees, penalties, and poor trade timing (of course the banks always seemed to be right ahead of the serfs/drones on their trades), while Grampa’s returns have been negative during the greatest economic boom in world history.

·         Raising payroll taxes is a non starter. We need to stop punishing employment, we need more jobs, and employers not getting hit for more taxes on workers.

·         Raising the retirement age is no good. People who have put in their time deserve a little dignity at the end.

·         Mandatory Add On accounts where people are compelled to invest in a Roth IRA aren’t necessarily bad, it’s just unreasonable to expect a country where half of the working people make less than $30,000 a year to then have to “save” for the future when their today is awfully frigging bleak.