Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
And the idea of adding trillions to the deficit to "save" Social Security from running deficits decades in the future would be comical if not for the fact that so many conservatives seem to be suspending cognitive functioning to line up behind it.
|
Be fair. Depending on who wants to make the specific adjustments under discussion, both Repubs and Dems have been scare-mongering SS for decades. Each side takes its turn arguing that the system is just fine, or that the scare is, at least, overblown. Fact is, old farts scare easily, and they vote massively, so you can make virtually any systemic change you want if you can tie it in somehow to "saving SS." This isn't about saving SS - it's simply a way to make government less meaningful.
Having said that, I'm curious what new system is going to replace the safety net of SS for the twenty percent who lose their whole discretionary portion. We're obviously not going to let them starve, so are we simply making the investment portion risk-free?
