Powered by TypePad

« Let's Help Paul Krugman With An Economic Forecast | Main | Who Would Like To Bet On Paul Krugman? »

February 07, 2005



If you read the Imus transcript, Kerry says he'll release the records after he reviews the records, so as to ascertain what's on the record and what's off the record. Sounds like there's something to hide. It certainly wasn't an unqualified response.

creepy dude

Could you point me to the section of the plan where Bush swears off shifting from wage-indexing to inflation-indexing for calculating future benefits of anyone over 55?

(the over 55 thing is a little vague as well-over 55 starting when?-the day of the SOTU, when the bill is signed into law, what?)

Otherwise, Kerry is correct. That's a benefit cut.


Creepy - as you well know, there is no formal legislation. All we have is this, from the SOTU:

I have a message for every American who is 55 or older: Do not let anyone mislead you; for you, the Social Security system will not change in any way. (Applause.)

Now, does that mean Congress will ignore that, and Bush forget it, and the AARP overlook it? I suppose it is possible, but changing the indexing of benefits for current seniors would be a "change". It is the opposite of what Bush promised.

Now, if Kerry had sad, "Regardless of the President's promise, he is going to cut your benefits", at least we would know where he stands - "Bush is lying".

Instead, he is simply mischaracterizing the proposal. Classic "scare the seniors".

creepy dude

That's why Kerry lost. He thinks small, i.e. Kerry's gonna mischaracterize something, so he picks a nonexistent proposal just to scare some seniors.

You gotta dream big Texas dreams. Like Bush in the 2003 SOTU. Why not mischaracterize American intelligence, history and reality and do some classic "scare the American people".



And you trust Bush on this? I don't.

For decades the GOP has complained that the Dems were lying about their plans for SS and that they nebver wanted to reduce benefits. Now we know tha the Dems were right all along.

IMO it's a question of time before Bush proposes to cut payments for seniors.


Technically, Kerry is right. Someday, today's 15 year old will be a "senior." When he or she reaches 67, he or she will find benefits smaller (on a real basis) than someone who is 67 today. Of course, Kerry is also
trying to mislead those who are actually seniors today.
Just back from D.C., I heard and read plenty of stuff from the Gingrich faction that they agree there is no way in hell votes could be cobbled together to take even a dime from those 55 and over. There will be no reform until the boomers' children rise up and demand a change to the payroll taxes they will be paying in the near future. It is sad that a generation that was going to save the world is now greedily concerned only with themselves - we failed to, or refused to, save so let's burden our kids and grandkids. Inter generational warfare anyone?

Jack Tanner

Read thesequotes from Kerry. Yikes!

creepy dude

Actually TM-you'll have to update your propaganda machine-benefit cuts are indeed on the table-true Bush doesn't explicitly say there on the table for folks over 55-but it's clear from the whole transcript Bush has no idea what he's talking about-

anyway here's Bush in Tampa on 2/4/05 as transcribed by the White House:

"Because the -- all which is on the table begins to address the big cost drivers. For example, how benefits are calculate, for example, is on the table; whether or not benefits rise based upon wage increases or price increases. There's a series of parts of the formula that are being considered. And when you couple that, those different cost drivers, affecting those -- changing those with personal accounts, the idea is to get what has been promised more likely to be -- or closer delivered to what has been promised.

Does that make any sense to you? It's kind of muddled.

creepy dude

the "muddled" part of that quote is also Bush btw

The comments to this entry are closed.