An Idea Whose Time Is Coming

In the course of proposing the way forward for Obama and the Democrats, Mitt Romney and Evan Bayh both back a re-indexing of Social Security for the well-heeled.  Romney first:

With entitlement spending about half of all federal spending, the president has no choice but to address Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. He should propose less costly progressive indexing for future Social Security beneficiaries - using the consumer price index inflator rather than the wage index for higher-income retirees.

And Bayh:

The most important area for spending restraint is entitlement reform. Democrats should offer changes to the system that would save hundreds of billions of dollars while preserving the safety net for our neediest. For instance, we could introduce “progressive indexation,” which would provide lower cost-of-living increases for more affluent Social Security recipients, or devise a more accurate measure of inflation’s effects on all recipients’ income.

Some sort of means testing for Social Security seems inevitable.  This back-door approach of cleverly cutting benefits to all high recipients, rather than recipients with high income from other sources, doesn't have much social justice behind it but since we are talking about "the rich" we can't expect any rhetorical sympathy from the left.

JUST FOR FUN:  Was this advice to Obama written by Romney or Bayh?

So, in the near term, every policy must be viewed through a single prism: does it help the economy grow?

A good place to start would be tax reform. Get rates down to make American businesses globally competitive. Reward savings and investment. Simplify the code to reduce compliance costs and broaden the base. In 1986, this approach attracted bipartisan support and fostered growth.

If you answered "Bayh on peyote while having a vision of his 2012 Presidential campaign" - YOU WIN!

 

Comments

[Jack is Back!]

Speaking of politics and politicians and what they will say to get elected, a classic is LUN

Some of you are old enough to remember when you stayed up past 11pm to watch Johnny!

[Army of Davids]

I'm most worried about the lame duck session right now.

Unions threw a lot of money and troops at this election. They will want immediate payback while Democrats still have some waning power.

And then what are we looking at on tax increases?

[Rex]

So because I sweated my ass off for years in the Marines and have a military pension that exceeds what I get from Soc Sec, they're going to want to reduce my Soc Sec under means testing?

Look, I know that Soc Sec is in financial trouble, but not only no, but Hell, No!

[jimmyk]

Means testing SS is such a bad idea that it will probably be enacted. People of greater means already get their SS income taxed, despite having paid taxes on the contributions as well. This will be yet another penalty for people who are responsible enough to save for their retirement.

[Tune down, drop in, and turn in.]

Ugly feedback, there, jk, but the great squelch is independence.
=============

[Danube of Thought]

Since its inception it has avoided being a mechanism for redistribution. The armor was cracked when the benefits got disparate tax treatment. It is probably on its way to being an out-and-out welfare program.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--It is probably on its way to being an out-and-out welfare program.--

It's already a welfare program, where present retirees get more than they paid in and the young get to have 15% of their wages garnished at a negative rate of return.

[Kevin B]

So you contribute to SocSec throughout your working life and the government proceed to steal your contributions and use them as pocket money for their pet schemes, instead of investing them to earn money for your retirement.

Then, when it comes time to return your investment, they sudenly find they've got no money.

"Sorry," they say, "You're rich enough already."

Yeah, right.

[Lee A. Arnold]

If you reduce Social Security, then the people should get their payroll taxes back. The government shouldn't keep the payroll tax money. So cutting Social Security doesn't solve the deficit problem -- the deficits stay the same.

[DebinNC]

NYT 12-09 article after Reid successfully bribed Nelson via the Cornhusker Kickback:
.............................................
Faced with Republican resistance that many Democrats saw as driven more by politics than policy disagreements, Senate Democrats in recent days gained new determination to bridge differences among themselves and prevail over the opposition.

Lawmakers who attended a private meeting between Mr. Obama and Senate Democrats at the White House on Tuesday pointed to remarks there by Senator Evan Bayh, Democrat of Indiana, as providing some new inspiration.

Mr. Bayh said that the health care measure was the kind of public policy he had come to Washington to work on, according to officials who attended the session, and that he did not want to see the satisfied looks on the faces of Republican leaders if they succeeded in blocking the measure.
............................................
Not sounding too bipartisan there, Evan. ObamaCare should be tied around Bayh's neck until the death panel tells him it's his time to die.

[Rob Crawford]

People still expect to see a dime from Social Security?

How quaint!

[DebinNC]

A $32B oopsie the SocSec Admin slipped into yesterday's news queue when the focus was elsewhere. The head guy has no idea why the "mistake" wasn't detected earlier.

[peter]

Most Ponzi schemes end up with some unhappy participants.

rot in hell, FDR

[Danube of Thought]

present retirees get more than they paid in

I'm getting roughly a 1% return on my coerced "investment."

[larry]

I'll forego 10-20% of my SS and USAF retirement if every one above a ??? level will, too and that will solve the problem.

Seems I've read somewhere raising the ceiling on wages subject to payroll taxes will solve the problem. Why is there an arbitrary ceiling on wages subject to payroll tax?

[Texas Mom 2010]

If means testing is done, it should be based on total assets. If you have over 5 million In total assets, you probably can survive without social security benefits because even in today's market that will provide enough earnings to live on. We are 48, and have planned that we will not be eligible for soc security benefits if it is even still around. We would prefer NOT to need crumbs from the government!

But of our parents, we lost hubby's parents before they were 65 and mine are actually dependent on social security. They paid all their lives and believed that it would be there for their retirement so they are dependent on the government. If social security fails, they will sell their home and build an apartment over our garage... That is our emergency plan.

Fortunately, we live in Texas so their property value has not been affected by the real estate crisis. We will be able to support them if needed but they would hate to be dependent on us.

[larry]

OT: If Marco Rubio can walk like he talks, he has a very bright future.

Conservatives should at every opportunity demolish the conventional "wisdom" that the Clinton admin balanced the budget. LUN Bureau of the Public Debt shows public debt increased each year 1993 through 2000. This is a major factor in both (budget and Soc Sec) problems and is almost never addressed.

[Army of Davids]

Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Gary Gensler (Goldman Sachs)

Political liabilities?

Absolutely.

[Danube of Thought]

"Why is there an arbitrary ceiling on wages subject to payroll tax?"

Because there's an arbitrary ceiling on the benefits you receive.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--I'm getting roughly a 1% return on my coerced "investment."--

Age has its perks.
If you were thirty imagine your rate of return.

This thread (not referring to DoT's comment but the general resistance to any change in the system) demonstrates the difficulty and inertia of welfare states. Even people who know the math and are predisposed to limited government will not let go of what they were promised even if fulfilling the promise means bankruptcy of the nation or gigantic debt or taxes for following generations or more likely a combination of all three.

[Danube of Thought]

I'd be happy to take a cut in both my SS and VA disability benefits, provided only that everyone takes a cut. I just don't want the cuts to apply only to the "rich" as part of yet another redistributionist scheme.

[Texas Mom 2010]

Although we are near 50, we would be quite happy to opt out of social security if we could put even 1-2% of our payroll tax into a private account owned and managed by us! Government could keep the rest and continue to squander our money on dopey projects like the African penis washing study for $800,000. That is the kind of waste that runs through every bill and it is why people don't think their social security benefits that they paid into and were promised should be cut.

Stop all the dopey projects that Congress likes to fund with other people's money, stop all the congressional perks (bottled water for example), cut
government workers salary and benefits and index them to private sector salaries, force Congress into social security hell with the rest of us... Get serious about reducing the size and scope of government. Hogtie the EPA.

Do all of the above and I am sure that a discussion about restructuring social security will be acceptable. But until the Feds get serious about their spending addiction, no one will want to reduce social security. Because if social security is cut now, it is a transfer from our elderly to public sector unions and employees. That is unacceptable, PERIOD!

[matt]

bottom line is that SS is going bankrupt within the next 20 years whether we like it or not. It has been a piggy bank for thousands of other programs. Life expectancy is also far beyond what it was when the program was instituted and the only modifications have been to expand eligibility and benefits. None of these add up to a fiscally sound program, plain and simple.

So do we take one big hit or let it die of 1,000 cuts?

Do we face the fact that most public and many private pension programs in the country are deeply underwater and were the cash cows that made administrators rich for 40 years?

Generationally, any way you look at it, we're screwed and our children are screwed. I am right on the cusp, and don't expect to see much of mine. Remember, the Medicare time bomb goes off in 2017 by the CBO's estimate, and they're not wearing rose colored glasses or anything, are they?

They are already floating the Argentine model of nationalizing private pensions in DC.

The Fed's actions, the tax cut issue, and the currency games are going to make Q4 a very interesting time. Obama will say the Republicans own it now even though they don't take office till January.

There are stark choices ahead.

[Cecil Turner]

I just don't want the cuts to apply only to the "rich" as part of yet another redistributionist scheme.

Exactly. All that would do is extend the life of these pyramid schemes, which are doomed to failure anyway. Far better that they fail earlier, while we still have some reserves left with which to clean up the resultant mess.

[PDinDetroit]

Obama is on TV now...

[Rob Crawford]

Obama is on TV now...

Thanks for the warning!

[PDinDetroit]

Obama was asked by an AP guy (paraphrased): "Can you concede the election yesterday was a fundamental rejection of your agenda?"

Short Answer: No

Obama Answer (3 minutes): No?

[PDinDetroit]

Obama was asked by an NBC lady (paraphrased): "If you are not reflecting on your policy agenda, can the voting public conclude that you are still not getting it?"

Short Answer: Yes

Obama Answer (5 minutes): Maybe?

[mockmook]

Obambi presser:

Argggh!!!!

WTF was that lame question from Jake Tapper?

[Danube of Thought]

We have a two-year project, beginning today: target every one of the 23 senate seats the Dems have to defend in 2012. Keep passing legislation in the house that will put the potato squarely on those bastards' fork, and see how many of them got yesterday's message.

[daddy]

Tapper asks,

"Will you compromise on the 250,000 tax cap limit on the Bush tax cuts and compromise to a new number like maybe 1 million."

Obama, still blathering, refuses to answer.

[Chubby]

((Obama will say the Republicans own it now even though they don't take office till January.))

the blame game is his particular specialty

[mockmook]

Obambi presser:

Government made electric cars for all!!!

Inefficiency? Sorry, never heard of it.

[mikey]

Man o Man, this guy doesn't get it. He tries to say the right thing "like I take responsibility etc" while at the same time he pushed the same line.

[daddy]

Dennis Prager is very excited this morning.

Listening to Obama do this Press Conference Prager is excited because he says Obama does not get it.He says Obama did not hear the message delivered by the voters last night. Obama is continuing to think he can do what he has been doing, and Prager is very happy about this, because he think is that is what needs to happen for this victory yesterday to continue on into the future.

[Charlie Martin]

Why is there an arbitrary ceiling on wages subject to payroll tax?

because there's an arbitrary ceiling on returns.

[mockmook]

Whoohoo!!!!

Obambi promises to get out of the Whitehouse more (to be with the people)!!!!

More trips to the golf course?

[jimmyk]

Why is there an arbitrary ceiling on wages subject to payroll tax?

Because there's a ceiling on benefits. The two things (contributions and benefits) are supposed to be, you know, like, connected. The program, Ponzi scheme though it was, was not fashioned as a scheme to redistribute income.

[Charlie Martin]

Because there's an arbitrary ceiling on the benefits you receive.

Yeah, like he said.

[jimmyk]

I'm 50 and might even be willing to give up all my SS benefits if I could opt out, get a 12.4% raise, and put that into a tax-deferred retirement account. The problem is the government needs my contributions to pay off the current retirees.

[mockmook]

Ooooh

Megyn Kelly just invited me to email her!!!!

She did just mean me, right?

[Danube of Thought]

We seem to have forged a consensus on the arbitrary ceiling.

[Chubby]

I don't think Obama does "burden of responsibility" well. He's probably secretly relieved and delighted that he has a shiny new punching bag toy onto which he can project his failures over the next two years.

[mikey]

Obama can make the case that some of his policies like stimulus and auto bailouts were important to save the economy. The problem is that he is always seeking political solutions to economic problems. The stimulus was for bailing out the public service unions at the state level and the auto bailout were for saving the auto union workers. Both part Obama's base. This pisses people off. When he talks about raising taxes on those making >250,000. it is not about the deficit, it is about playing to his liberal base. Politics trumps reality.

[Danube of Thought]

I feel the same as Prager. Let this clown just walk right into the propeller blade, and in two years we'll finish the job.

[mockmook]

Obambi:

I am open to compromise on cap and trade.

But, if I can't get it, I'll use the EPA, suck on that, suckers!!!

[Pagar]

"A $32B oopsie the SocSec Admin slipped into yesterday's news queue when the focus was elsewhere."

DebinNC, I noted that yesterday and wondered why we are all sitting here believing every thing we hear on election results that affect every single person in America.

Every figure we get from the government gets revised. We have system checks so poor that they can't even detect a 32 billion dollar error. It takes two years to find out how many people died on the US highways yesterday, when every state highway patrol office knows exactly how many died in their state yesterday. The lists go on and on. Nothing they publish is iron clad rock solid never to be changed numbers except election results where Democrats win. Makes no sense!

[tommy mc donnell]

this is another example of class oppression by the liberal elite(both Republican and Democratic). the deal was if you pay so much into social security you earn so much of a benefit. now the politican class wants to renegade on the deal. why should we(the politicans)give this benefit to someone who worked for it and earned it. it would be much better for the politican class to dole it out to someone whose vote they can buy with it. if social security is in financial trouble why don't they stop giving benefits to people who never paid into it. if there are weathy people who want to voluntarily give up their benefit then that should be their choice. not the politicans! if not then let people have the right to opt out of social security if they are going to be discriminated againist by the politicans. the class warfare between the american people and the american politicans never stops.

[Charlie Martin]

We seem to have forged a consensus on the arbitrary ceiling.

What he said.

[jimmyk]

We seem to have forged a consensus on the arbitrary ceiling.

Sorry, DoT, I'd skimmed the comments before answering and somehow missed yours (as did Charlie, I guess).

SS is one of the more misunderstood programs. I'm guessing 95% of the public has little clue of how it really works or what the issues are.

[jimmyk]

And Charlie and I seem to be on the same wavelength. That's two posts in this thread saying more or less the same thing at the same time. At least this proves we're not the same person.

[jimmyk]

Prager is excited because he says Obama does not get it.

I did not hear the presser, but if this WSJ summary is accurate, Obama is as shameless as ever:

"Facing a divided government, he also said that he will have to work harder to build consensus in Washington."

Harder? He wasn't the least bit interested in consensus except among the Democrats so they could ram what they wanted down our throats. The guy is a psychopath. The Repubs better give him a taste of his own medicine.

[NK]

Jimmy K said: " I'm 50 and might even be willing to give up all my SS benefits if I could opt out, get a 12.4% raise, and put that into a tax-deferred retirement account. The problem is the government needs my contributions to pay off the current retirees."

Hey Jimmy K. there's a word for this sort of thing the government is doing-- it's called FRAUD!! Bernie Madoff will spend the rest of his natural life in prison for doing this EXCEPT-- Bernie paid the first people a 15% return, current SS retiree's get a fraction of that. I'm a fair man, I would make the same deal you would, but Barry O can't make that deal he has to pay the deadweight recipients, so he's got to keep the Ponzi scheme going-- Barry O says "if you don't like call a cop sucka."

[Pagar]

Madoff's crime was he did too small a crime. If he had tried to get everyone in on his scheme than they would have called it a government program and he'd have been setting pretty the rest of his life.

Look at how Schakowsky and her husband does it.

"Rep. Schakowsky’s husband, Robert Creamer, used to be the leader of Citizen Action/Illinois. He also founded its predecessor, Illinois Public Action, in which Ms. Schakowsky served as Program Director. He runs a political consulting firm, the Strategic Consulting Group, which lists ACORN and the SEIU among its clients and which made $541,000 working for disgraced former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich.

Creamer resigned from Citizen Action/Illinois after the FBI began investigating him for bank fraud and tax evasion at Illinois Public Action. He was convicted in 2006 and sentenced to five months in federal prison in Terre Haute, Indiana, plus eleven months of house arrest.

While in prison—or “forced sabbatical,” he called it—Creamer wrote a lengthy political manual, Listen to Your Mother: Stand Up Straight! How Progressives Can Win (Seven Locks Press, 2007).

The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern—the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House—and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer’s tome “provides a blueprint for future victories.”

LUN

He writes the Obama care outline while in prison, she gets reelected again.

[daddy]

Don't know if you are following the breaking story on the Yemen bombs, but the bad guys seem to have been using the tracking technology of the Cargo companies to actually follow the progress of their mailed bombs. Interesting.

[Barbara]

"Obambi promises to get out of the Whitehouse more (to be with the people)!!!!"

That means Air Force One will be on the road 24/7 for the next 2 years. He loves campaigning. He needs to hear crowds cheering for him (even diminished crowds); his ego demands it. Govern the country? What's that? It's all about him.

[Porchlight]

Barbara,

I think he was always planning to begin the 2012 campaign asap, and now he can dress it up as "being with the people."

As if they want him. Please, more half-empty halls...

I saw the presser on mute in a restaurant. Couldn't really follow along with the captioning, but he looked miserable. I imagine a lot of cigs got smoked last night.

[matt]

so that means that they will probably be switching off that ability, daddy. A coup in their asymmetrical war.

[Porchlight]

Let this clown just walk right into the propeller blade, and in two years we'll finish the job.

Yes. Absolutely yes.

[daddy]

Still 200 comments behind but just wanted to mention this;

Did you see how upset Chris Matthews was last night when Michelle Bachmann made the comment about the leg tingle in front of the sign behind her. Chrissy was really P.O'd because he says he never actually used the word "Tingle."

And this from the A-hole who continually says himself and also sits quietly while his guests and co-hosts lie about Sarah Palin and say she said "she could see Russia from her house or back porch in Wasilla."

Yeah. He really cares a lot about precise semantic accuracy.

What a pussy he is.

[daddy]

BTW,

Has anybody told Joe Biden that the US tanks are in Bagdad, errr, that his side actually lost last night?

[Frau Kaffeetante]

From Patterico: California bucks Sanity trend.
Whoo! It wasn't Stewart and Colbert who restored some sanity to the country, however.

[Barbara]

Porchlight,

"As if they want him. Please, more half-empty halls..."

Yes! Obama's chickens......are coming home to rooooost!

[PaulY]

Has anyone seen a breakdown of the percentages received last night between Rs & Ds last night for House, Senate & Governors.

[Ignatz Ratzkywatzky]

--The book was endorsed by leading Democrats and their allies, including SEIU boss Andy Stern—the most frequent visitor thus far to the Obama White House—and chief Obama strategist David Axelrod, who noted that Creamer’s tome “provides a blueprint for future victories.”--

Take it from a denizen of a state owned lock stock and barrel by the SEIU etc; it's not clear to me at all that this country can survive the existence of public employee unions.

[daddy]

"Madoff's crime was he did too small a crime."

Reminds me of that Willie Nelson comment which was veru cl;ose to this:

"When you owe the Government $50,000 in back taxes, you have a problem, but when you owe the Government $50 Million dollars in back taxes, they have a problem"

[Rob Crawford]

so that means that they will probably be switching off that ability, daddy. A coup in their asymmetrical war.

Which brings me back to my original question: Why do we have package and passenger service to Yemen?

(Germany has blocked package service with them, BTW.)

(Oh, and Greece has suspended outbound package service in wake of bombs there.)

[mockmook]

If we had a free press:

President Obambi, you just said that you would be willing to work with the GOP on fine tuning ObambiCare.

When you were running for President, you ridiculed SOS Clinton for supporting the individual mandate. You were opposed to the mandate.

Does this mean you are now willing to work with the GOP to remove the mandate?

[Saver]

It make sense to give less social security to richer recipients. People act like social security is an investment. It's not. It's a tax that goes to older people to ensure that they have some form of income later in their lives. It's a waste of money to give social security to people who don't need it.

[Rob Crawford]

Um, "Saver", you *may* want to look into how Social InSecurity was originally marketed and is *STILL* marketed.

[NK]

Read a transcript if the Barry O presser. He really is clueless. By all means, let him wander into the propeller blade on his own. The only problem is when he goes splat, there will be a lot of collateral damage. But, hey, it's better than him ramming through his socialist agenda.

[Danube of Thought]

No, Paul. I also haven't seen a final tally. Taranto says there is a net of 60 in hand, with eleven races stii undecided, and the GOP leads in five of them.

[daddy]

Just caught up and now dog walking time, but let me post 2 links I found interesting while trying to catch up:

1) This one from the UK is about a recently discovered photo album of a German soldier arriving in Dunkirk with Hitler just hours after the Allies fled the place in the make-shift Armada. Fascinating> ">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1326171/Nazis-photo-album-reveals-images-Dunkirk-Hitler-signing-autographs.html"> When I met Hitler, Mussolini and saw the devastation at Dunkirk: Astonishing images from a German soldier's photo album

2) This is a UK view of yesterdays Election from the UK's James Dellingpole: ">http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100062211/tea-party-now-for-the-presidency/"> Link

Woof!

[Old Lurker]

Well, the plain fact of the matter is that our governments at all three levels have made promises of future payments that simply cannot be paid from any reasonable expectation of their future income. Using whatever term from bankruptcy one might prefer (illiquid, insolvent, bankrupt), were any of these govenments a company, its Board would be filing Chapter 11 yesterday.

Then the judge would allocate the assets and the future income streams to satisfy each creditor based on the strength of his claim - some will get 100% and some will get 0% and most contracts will get rewritten reflecting the new reality. (Yes I know...this quaint statement was valid before Chrysler and GM).

I'd be in favor of wiping the slate clean on the whole damn thing...SS, Pensions, Current Pay, Entitlements...and then reset the promises based on what we want to pay to whom in the future, and who should pay it. As several said above, SS was a Ponzi scheme from the get go; government pensions in some cases are downright absurb and in some cases criminal; many "entitlements" equally so.

Blow the whistle on the whole mess and start from scratch.

[cathyf]

you *may* want to look into how Social InSecurity was originally marketed and is *STILL* marketed.

A vanishingly small number of people were of voting age when SS was originally marketed. And once it passed, it was never marketed again (it's a government program, not a market product). Various and sundry dumb and dumber things have been said about social security by various and sundry dumb and dumber politicians over the years, but that has nothing to do with "marketing"

[Old Lurker]

I know what you mean Cathy, and technically you have a point. But in reality, each generation has bought into the scam or else it would have been repealed. That "buying in" was the result of each generation "marketing" the scam to their children.

[hit and run]

DoT:
Taranto says there is a net of 60 in hand, with eleven races stii undecided

TX-27 has been decided in favor of the Repub by 799 votes out of ~101K. The Dem (72 year old,~500 year incumbent) is currently deliberating on whether to go for a recount...

[cathyf]

OL, my parents never marketed it to ME as anything other than the canonical example of a ponzi scheme! (But then my dad was a member of the Libertarian Party National Committee in my teenaged years and I went to Camp Cato...)

[Danube of Thought]

OL, the bankruptcy laws do not permit states to file, which is very unfortunate. Dick Morris says the GOP will amend the law appropriately when they get the chance. That's the only way I can see for states like CA to get out from under the public employee pensions and benefits.

[Old Lurker]

Mine too, Cathy. But I was in a minority even in those days! Anyway, my hippie sister (raised in the same house) would (and does still) cancel out each of my votes anyway.

[Old Lurker]

DoT I'm hoping that one silver lining in the vote Tuesday was to have a House that might refuse states like CA from nationalizing their problems more than Obama already did in the Stim Bill last year. Though I don't hold out too much hope.

Cathy speaking of my hippie sister, I hereby reaffirm my offer, once she dumps her third husband, to hook her up with Iggy's litigous brother. They sound like bookends.

[cathyf]

Yeah, and come to think of it, when I competed in parliamentary debate in high school I wrote a bill to eliminate all social security taxes and payouts, and to fund SSI through general tax receipts. (SSI would be expanded by all the newly-needy seniors who became impoverished by their lost social security, but rich seniors wouldn't qualify for SSI.)

[mockmook]

Can the House pass a Debt Ceiling hike in a Bill that also repeals ObamaCare?

Then, let the Senate or Prez be the "party of no"?

Me likey this idea, if it is allowed.

[Rick Ballard]

OL,

What would you imagine could be offered to Speaker Boehner that would induce him to propose filling the beggars' cups in California, Illinois, New York and Massachusetts?

I would hope that he would offer to examine any legislation proposed by the President and Minority Leader with great care and due attention, calling lengthy investigative committee meetings to examine precisely which union contracts are most in need of abrogation - prior to passage of anything which might conceivably be classified as a bailout.

I don't think the process would take much more than 18 months - 24 at the outside.

[cathyf]

Well, mockmook, you couldn't argue that it was out of order. Since repealing Obamacare would allow a lower debt ceiling...

[Rob Crawford]

Various and sundry dumb and dumber things have been said about social security by various and sundry dumb and dumber politicians over the years, but that has nothing to do with "marketing"

You don't get the annual statement of what's in your SS "account"?

What's the purpose of that joke? It's intended to keep up the illusion that it's an investment.

[PaulY]

DOT, I was interested in a breakdown of raw vote total.

[Rick Ballard]

The Roadmap section on Retirement Security has at least one thing which will displease everyone (it won't be the same thing for everyone but there will be at least one thing with which everyone can be displeased).

I know the Roadmap does not have the endorsement of party leadership or many sponsors but it does have the benefit of actually existing.

So, what do you hate most about the Roadmap proposal for Retirement Security?

[Danube of Thought]

Haven't seen a raw vote total either.

I am extremely confident that this house will not tolerate any bailout of CA of any scope under any circumstances. They would much prefer to hold them out as an example of liberal governance.

The CA state pensions are protected under the state constitution, and cannot be modified by mere legislation.

[Old Lurker]

"The CA state pensions are protected under the state constitution"

Not when I'm King for a Day.

[Specter]

Hey All,

Just dropped in to catch up with everyone. I've been out of circulation for almost 4 years but I'm back!!!

[jimmyk]

Rick: At least one is right.

Those who choose the personal account option will have the opportunity to begin investing a significant portion of their payroll taxes into a series of funds managed by the U.S. government.

Individuals who choose to invest in personal accounts will be ensured every dollar they place into an account will be guaranteed, even after inflation.

No problems here, right? Why do the names Fannie and Freddie come to mind?

This road map also has "progressive indexation", which seems to be more or less what Bayh is talking about. Hey, who needs Democrats when Republicans can be just like them?

[mockmook]

hey cathyf,

I think I've answered my own question. The debt ceiling Bill I see online contained PAYGO. So, it seems you can bundle the limit hike with other provisions.

[Specter]

The news here in CT is announcing that Dan Malloy won the Governor's race - but it's close - only 3,100 votes. And to boot, some judge in Bridgeport allowed the polls in that town to stay open an extra few hours due to "irregularities" in the number of ballots available. Wouldn't you know that the Republican candidate, Tom Foley, was in the lead before that happened. It sounds like he'll challenge the results.

[Old Lurker]

Good pick Jimmy

[Rick Ballard]

jimmyk,

What if a self managed and controlled option were made available - without guarantee?

[Pagar]

"it's not clear to me that the country can survive the existence of the public employees unions"

All the public employees unions have to do to get more benefits etc is have the Democrats create more public employee jobs. They then pour more money back to the Democrats to create Obama care and such programs that will add millions more public employees.

"As a result of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, private sector job growth has seen a steep drop, while public sector jobs continue to increase. Government employment has increased by 590,000 while the private sector has lost nearly 8 million jobs since the beginning of the recession. After the passage of the Recovery Act, these trends have continued: the private sector has lost an additional 2.7 million jobs, or 2.5% of total private employment, while state and federal governments have continued to grow, adding an additional 400,000 jobs.[2]

State and local government have reduced their workforce, mostly by not filling vacancies, by 1.3 percent in 2009. This amounted to 258,000 jobs.[3] in that same time, federal jobs have increased by 3.4 percent, or 2.2 million jobs. "

There is no way to control the damage.

[jimmyk]

What if a self managed and controlled option were made available - without guarantee?

Two issues: One is how do you commit to not helping the poor shlub who puts all his money in Lehman stock? So if by "controlled" you mean "a limited set of relatively safe assets," it sounds good to me. Pretty much what I do with my 401K.

The second issue: How does the government keep paying current retirees without all that revenue from the under 55 set? The answer would have to be a bunch of debt now that will get paid off once the under-55ers retire and the system starts to run a surplus. But I didn't see that spelled out in the roadmap either.

[Old Lurker]

Make it self managed and keep the money away from the government and allow unlimited transfers offshore without telling the government and then we can talk.

:-)

[jimmyk]

There's also the issue that if suddenly 100 million people start putting money in actual assets rather than turning it over to the government Ponzi scheme, that someone will have to sell assets, and that would seem to drive down yields, but maybe I'm missing something.