When Congress talks about cuts to Social Security within the context of the budget it is complete malarkey and they use it to make us think that a reduction to Social Security benefits will somehow have any baring on our financial solvency. It was and still is a separate trust fund. The fact that it is even discussed in context of the budget, the fact that they try to lump it with Welfare and SNAP assistance and call it an
entitlement (don't even get me started on the misuse of that word)
is ALL a snow job designed to fool the people into thinking that these cuts are necessary and will have an impact on the financial prosperity of our nation.
All of it is
FALSE FALSE FALSE.
But don't take my word for it. (which no one should ever do with any OPED they read. Honestly, use your brains and not just your eyes and ears.)
I have posted one of the most relevant myth busting quotes below the fold, but everyone needs to read the whole truth for themselves from the credible source called, are you ready? Wait for it. The Social Security Administration's Historical Archives.
Now you may be saying to yourself,
"Holly shit balls Batman! You mean to tell me you can find that kind of stuff on the interwebs? You mean to say that I can find something other than crackpots, exaggerations, Hey Look At Me nut bags, and complete pants on fire lies?"
Yes. Yes I am.
http://www.ssa.gov/...
Myth 4: President Roosevelt promised that the money the participants paid would be put into the independent "Trust Fund," rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement program, and no other Government program
The idea here is basically correct. However, this statement is usually joined to a second statement to the effect that this principle was violated by subsequent Administrations. However, there has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government.
The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."
Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.
See? We are being carpet bombed by pure unadulterated malarkey.
So why are Congress and the talking heads doing it? (there is always a reason)
They are trying so hard to convince us that Social Security is at this moment an irrevocably broken system, a drug we have become addicted to, and a drain on our economy. That we need to start finding a new alternative. Start from scratch.
The fact is, over the years many changes have been made to the system designed to help secure its solvency. Some have been good and some have set us up for where we are now. Still, it is flexible and fixable with more adjustments that would not require reducing benefits.
So again, why? What is to be gained with this misinformation crazy train and the GOP's obsession with benefit reduction?
It is a tax and they like taxes as long as they don't have to pay them, but it is a tax for a specific and FOREVER locked in purpose. Hmm. That could be part of the problem. Congress as a whole doesn't like it when they can't play bait and switch with our taxes dollars.
Let's look at the other source of the funds for Social Security, the employer.
Your employer is being taxed at the same rate that you are and that goes into the system as well. So that means it is basically a mandated equal contribution retirement system.
Oh, now we are getting somewhere. We know how much big employers hate being mandated to give anything to their employees that could be used instead to beef up their profit margin.
Here is my opinion. I personally believe that the motive for reducing Social Security benefits is to squeeze people, who have nothing else to rely on, into desperate poverty and the whole time they will be telling us it's happening because the system is broken and it's time to privatize Social Security.
How willing will you be to believe them when you find out your 70 something next door neighbor is collecting cans and eating cat food to survive? How will we feel when we find out how many elderly die in the extreme heat and cold because they won't use utilities they can't afford? How outraged will people be to find out how many elderly on Social Security are forced to go to the food banks (because cat food is getting too expensive)? News flash: all of this is already happening.
People start thinking, "holy crap, is that going to be me? Yes. Change the system so I won't have to live like that. If you say it needs to be scrapped for a new system, do it and do it soon because I'm going to be retiring in 10 years." And before you know it you have bought your ticket and hopped on the crazy train.
Okay. Let's say privatization gets the go ahead. Here is what will happen. Privatization will require dissolving the Social Security Trust Fund and an entirely new system will be built with new rules and structure. AND the GOP will be the ones calling the shots if it's done in the current political climate. So you can pretty much guarantee that the new system will benefit businesses at the expense of future retirees. It will be a system where the money will be 'invested' on Wall Street. Yes, let's feed that monster some more. Look how well that worked out for those that built their whole retirement through investments on Wall Street. When the Great Recession hit, many lost it all and will be/are retiring on...? Yep. Social Security because it's all they have left. But like someone with a bad gambling habit and thinks somehow the next time will be different, those same people will say yes, lets privatize.
The GOP wants a system that's not locked up and protected from their scheming and pandering to big money and reducing benefits when they should be increasing them is the first act in their "Prove It's Broken" farce.
I could be wrong, but it sure fits the modus operandi of both the GOP and the big money that owns them.