3.16.2005

dinos

The argument over Social Security privatization isn't about rival views on how to secure the program's future - even the administration admits that private accounts would do nothing to help the system's finances. It's a debate about what kind of society America should be.

And it's a debate Republicans appear to be losing, because the public doesn't share their view that it's a good idea to expose middle-class families, whose lives have become steadily riskier over the past few decades, to even more risk. As soon as voters started to realize that private accounts would replace traditional Social Security benefits, not add to them, support for privatization collapsed.

But the Republicans' loss may not be the Democrats' gain, for two reasons...
Don't miss yesterday's Paul Krugman column, not least because he continues to expose Joe Lieberman for the Republican that he really is.

W & Co are throwing about this "$600 billion" figure - according to them, that's what it costs each year we wait to "fix" Social Security. "Fix" is to privatization what "liberating" is to blowing Iraqi people to bits.

The $600 billion figure is bullshit. "So," Krugman writes, "anyone who repeats the $600 billion line is helping to spread a lie." And that includes several so-called Democratic leaders. Read more, or go straight to the source.

6 comments:

B. W. Ventril said...

I highly recommend Heeb Magazine ("The New Jew Review") and the 'cut out and dress up' Joe Lieberman doll they had a couple of issues back. There was a really good leatherman get-up. Because, you know, he's the bitch of the Connecticut arms industry. They also had an article called simply "Joe Lieberman is a Dickhead."

Sass said...

Some time ago I was told that for people in their twenties, like myself, there is absolutely no hope for social security surviving until we're old. That too many people will try to fuck with it before then. That same person also told me to get accustomed to the idea that I won't be able to retire until I'm 80. None of this would surprise me much. And really, the asshole college students who don't vote and don't care are going to ruin it all for the rest of us one of these times.

Anonymous said...

L-girl here, posting anonymously from an internet cafe (can't log in w/ my iPAQ).

Sassy: that may or may not be true, but we've got to base our decisions on more than "someone told me". When I was a teenager, people said the system would be bakrupt vy 2003. People love to make pronouncements, but where are they getting their numbers?

BWV: I know someone who works at that mag - one of my Havenettes. I'll check it out. You should hear my mother on Joe L: it's a personal affront to her that a Jew would shill for those liars - or support this war.

Anonymous said...

I wish there was spellcheck on comments... especially using my little keyboard...

L.

B. W. Ventril said...

Wait, what's a Havenette? Is this some sort of new Jewish subculture of which I was previously unaware? Tell your friend her magazine rules! Though Heeb should stick its head of out New York once in a while and maybe write something about Southern Jews... there are some of us down here, you know.

L-girl said...

Sorry about that! Havenette is my facetious expression for members of the Haven Coalition, an abortion-access group I help run. I wrote about it in this old post. Also, in this post (which I turned into an essay published on CommonDreams.org), I explain why Haven is needed and link to articles about us (at the very end).

So it's not specifically Jewish, but it is a subculture. And we happen to have many members who are observant Jews, including at least one rabbi.

And I'll definitely pass your feedback onto this particular Haveny person.