House Democrats forced a procedural vote on Social Security today. No big deal, but we get some
interesting comments from Dubya.
First, Bush admits personal accounts will do nothing to ensure solvency...twice! From the AP:
Bush twice acknowledged during a White House news conference that
"personal accounts do not solve the issue" of Social Security's long-term financing. But, he said at the White House, "personal accounts will make sure that individual workers get a better deal with whatever emerges as a Social Security solution."
(Emphasis mine)
If personal accounts won't do anything about long-term solvency, then how can they make sure that individual workers get a "better deal"? Makes no sense.
More below.
So, why exactly is the system so insolvent? Read on:
In unusually expansive remarks, Bush also sought to dispel the concept of a trust fund.
"A lot of people in America think there is a trust: Your money goes in, the government holds it, and then the government gives your money back when you retire," the president said. "That's just not the way it works."
He added, "Right now, we're paying for a lot of programs other than Social Security with the payroll tax coming in, thereby leaving a pile of IOUs. And part of why I think a personal account is an attractive option for a younger worker is that there would be real assets in the system at this point in time."
And I wonder what those programs are? How is it, that with record deficits, we're waging a war? By robbing the Social Security Trust Fund.
All these pieces come together like a puzzle revealing something hideous once you put it together:
They give the rich huge tax cuts, turning a surplus into a deficit. Then they go into an optional war, racking up even more debt. To pay for that war, they rob the Social Security Trust Fund. Once there's no money in the Trust Fund, they scream "crisis!" and try to gut the system by cutting everybody's payments. It all makes sense, from a twisted, Grover Norquit-perspective.