Yesterday, TomP did an excellent diary titled Entitlement Reforms that Progressives Can Support.
The Diary was based on a piece in the New York Times by Tom Edsall, The War on Entitlements. I urge everyone to read TomP's diary and the Times Article. This article should also be the subject of a prominent front page post (unless it was and somehow I missed it).
Essentially, the article states that the entire focus of "entitlement reform" is on cutting benefits, when there are revenue increasing measures, such as raising the cap on the payroll tax, that will fully fund social security for 75 years.
However, the elite debate you see on Sunday morning or Morning Joe or Charlie Rose is that we need to reform entitlements by cutting them. This is contrary to the overwhelming opinion of Americans that benefits should be preserved even if they pay more taxes.
The article notes certain facts:
1. Two-thirds of Americans who are over the age of 65 depend on an average annual Social Security benefit of $15,168.36 for at least half of their income.
2. As 10,000 baby boomers turn 65 every day, 72 percent of them are currently without the protection of a defined benefit pension plan,
3. Federal tax revenues in 2009, 2010 and 2011 have been 15.1 percent, 15.1 percent and 15.4 percent of Gross Domestic Product, lower than any level since 1950.
4. Large majorities of Americans, both Republicans and Democrats, agree on ways to strengthen Social Security — without cutting benefits. Fully 74% of Republicans and 88% of Democrats agree that “it is critical to preserve Social Security even if it means increasing Social Security taxes paid by working Americans.”
Edsall is not a dirty f-ing hippie. He's been a Democratic critic for the usual wrong reasons, as this 2006 diary
notes. So the fact that he now has come out so strongly for the very un-CW idea of raising the cap should be significant.