Senate to hold mock Social Security debate

[Robbien]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Neither President Bush nor congressional leaders have put forth a bill to overhaul Social Security, but that won't stop the Senate from beginning its deliberations. Two Democrats and two Republicans will square off Tuesday night in a mock debate on the Senate floor, arguing whether — and how, if necessary — the government retirement insurance program should be altered.

. . .

Democrats have tapped Sens. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Debbie Stabenow of Michigan to prosecute their case. The Republicans, meanwhile, have selected Sens. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Jim DeMint of South Carolina.

The debate, scheduled to begin at 6 p.m. EDT Tuesday, will be broadcast nationally by C-SPAN. It is expected to last about an hour.

. . .

The administration argues such accounts have the potential to offer greater payments to retirees, plus offer an inheritable asset should a worker or retiree die. Critics say the effort to create the accounts is a veiled attempt to kill Social Security by starving it of the money needed to provide traditional benefit checks.

Both sides agree that the accounts will not solve the program's long-term solvency issues.

http://www.nola.com/newsflash/washington/index.ssf?/base/politics-5/1112647665156370.xml&storylist=washington

[kevinmc]

1. Thanks For the Head's Up

[swag]

2. Somebody tell me they're not on the clock for this SHIT

"Both sides agree that the accounts will not solve the program's long-term solvency issues."

[LoganW]

3. How is it shit

to present arguments in order to inform people of the pros/cons?

[Robbien]

4. If you want a debate on a proposed plan, FIRST put forth the proposed plan

But Bush has no plan and all his talk won't solve any long term problems.

Debate Pro/Cons of WHAT?

[LoganW]

5. The pros and cons

of the idea of killing social security. It doesn't matter WHAT the proposed plan says exactly - it only has one goal that everyone with out rose glasses on can see - killing social security.

[lancdem]

6. You got that right

[Robbien]

7. This is only a ploy to get the Dems to propose ideas which the RNC

will use to say the Dems ideas don't work so support Bush's non-plan. For the last three months the RNC has been desperately trying to get the Dems to propose alternatives to BushCo's non-plan. This is just another one of their ploys.

[swag]

9. For elected representatives

the floors of the House and Senate (during actual proceedings) are the appropriate forums.

Now the House and Senate floors are relegated to grandstanding, and policy debate competes for TV time. Hence, policy debate becomes shit.

and, since

"Both sides agree that the accounts will not solve the program's long-term solvency issues,"

tell me what "issues" do these account address?

[Robbien]

10. Yes. After hours debate is just a political stunt

Every time one of these comes up it is for the politics not the issue. I believe right now the RNC needs some movement in its failed push for social security and they are hoping the Dems give it to them.

[wellst0nev0ter]

8. For THIS They Deserved Yearly Pay Raises

while turning their backs on minimum wage?

[stevebreeze]

11. My pal, OK I only met him 5 times, Sen Dick will kick her ass!

Not only is their no reason to reform a system that is more solvent now then it was in the 50's 60' & 70's, their 'reform' can not help put reduce returns just on it's own.

Assume for a minute that private accounts didn't increase the national dept by ridicules amounts, that the GOP assertion that private accounts are free because we will save money 30 years from now. Returns from stocks are based on the profitability of the company's they are issued from. Assume that all US companies return $1 trillion, and currently 100 million people hold stocks. That's an average of $1,000 per person. Now what happens if 200 million people own stock. Will that improve the profitability of the companies held? Or will each person gain half as much $500) from the ownership of the companies? Of course the price of stocks in the sort term will skyrocket as more money chases the same product, but when the boomer's start to retire and more money is leaving the stock market as going in prices will tumble. Could it get and dumber then to try this ponzi scheme? I think any rational person with a grasp on the facts would think not.

[0007]

12. Thanks for the heads up!