OK, Listen up and listen good! Social Security is not, and never was...

[Liberal_Andy]

an investment vehicle. So stop comparing returns. SS is not an investment.

IT'S AN INSURANCE POLICY AGAINST OLD AGE POVERTY!!!

Since SS was created, we've cut elderly poverty in half! Sometimes, no matter how hard you work and play by the rules, shit happens. Markets crash, people get sick, hurt, whatever, bad things happen to good people.

Remember the The Crash of '29, and The Great Depression? It's no coincidence that SS was created in 1935. And since LBJ expanded it in '66, the elderly poverty rate dropped from 29% to 12%.

I really think we need to frame the argument this way.

Discuss, and respond.

[Dookus]

1. It's even better than you state...

poverty among the elderly has dropped from nearly 50% to less than 10%.

[JD Lau]

2. Good points. I just watched the Dem meeting in NY this afternoon

on C-SPAN. Comments from folks who remember, who were there, the time of the great crash(stock market).

As for my part, this is something that can NOT be compromised. We must not give...not an inch. I don't know what it will take. I have written all my congresspeople twice(via e-mail and USPS).

If govt is going to be smaller(via Repubs), then it's going to have to lose weight in some other area. EOM

JD

[Liberal_Andy]

5. Yes, write your congress, Man!!

or Woman!

[Yosie]

3. And, as an insurance vehicle

with some "savings" or "investment" attributes -- it is a good buy. But, first, last, and always, it is SOCIAL INSURANCE.

And Bush's unannounced, ephemeral proposal has:

1. No life insurance
2. No disability insurance.
3. No SSI.

Figure at least $1000-$1200/year to buy the same "insurance" features for a 40 year term policy --- and you still couldn't buy the same coverage.

[ellenfl]

11. no health insurance either. eom

[BuyingThyme]

4. I don't know why we have to frame it at all.

Do we need to pander to the people who have absolutely no clue what Social Security is?

[Liberal_Andy]

6. Would have been nice if Dems had been as united against the Iraq war...

as they are on SS!

[bush_is_wacko]

7. Yes! It surprises me the Dem's aren't using this EXACT argument!

My grandparents lived off SS and a military pension for, gosh, somewhere in the neighborhood of 25 or 30 years. They were dirt poor, really, and had to have other public assistance, including income based retirement housing, but they didn't miss much according to them because they lived as adults in an era where all these extras families have learned to believe are essentials didn't exist, so they never really missed things like a dishwasher and a microwave. The rest of the family bought those things for them and they NEVER used the microwave for anything more than a breadbox.

SS and that military pension kept a roof over their head and food on their table, but that's about it. If people want to INVEST money, that should be their choice. Lord knows I am not counting on SS ALONE to keep me comfortable in my old age!

SS is HANDS OFF as far as I'm concerned. The latest argument that I heard from the thugs was something to the effect that if the SS money is kept in a trust fund the US government can use it for OTHER purposes so we have to get the money out of that trust fund where they can't get their hands on it.... HELLO?!?!?!

Are American citizens to understand now that our role is to PARENT our elected ADULT officials because, like two-year-olds they can't be trusted alone with the dangerous toy?!?!?!

This argument is UNBELIEVABLE to me. If our politicians need to be treated like children, they don't deserve to be in office. PERIOD!

If they are so tempted to play with other peoples toys maybe they should considering making it a CRIMINAL offense, punishable by 25 to life in the shoes of the elderly persons they took that money from. I guarantee if they had to live in those peoples shoes and hand over their lives to the people they took the money from it would be a fate WORSE than death for them.

To be serious though. Why the hell don't they make it a criminal offense for our president or any other politician to touch those funds?

These people can be trusted to hold the key to the most powerful and deadly weapons known to man, along with the power to send our children off to die in battle for things they will NEVER benefit from, but they can't be trusted to keep their hands off OUR money? GET REAL!

[Liberal_Andy]

9. GOP argument = "It's your money, you could get better returns!" ...

completely ignores the original intent of SS. It's a compact between generations, between workers and retirees. It's that simple, and we need to keep shouting it out.

Write LTEs! Write Congress!

[bush_is_wacko]

13. Oh, I have written them. The ONLY response I have received so far is a

rather lame attempt to make sure he didn't address any of the exact issues contained in this thread. I have received nothing from the Democrat side of the issue in the form of personal messages. Only the party line stuff!

[Liberal_Andy]

14. Well maybe they need to be told the error of their ways.

:shrug:

Nudge 'em a little, remind them what side they're on.

[spooky3]

15. Al Gore's analogy to lock boxes was apt--and prescient.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

8. Good Point...

Also Ed Schultz was speaking on the subject a couple of weeks ago and brought up the point that before social security, there was actually a specific department assigned to going out in the streets and picking up bodies of poverty level senior citizens who had starved or frozen to death. I know I am pretty old, but even I don't remember hearing about this, but perhaps this fact should once again become common knowledge.

[cry baby]

10. 1/3 of recipients of SS are disabled, so it is also an insurance policy

for them, too. Great points, Andy, it is simple if we make it simple. It's all in the framing.

[Liberal_Andy]

12. egg-actly!

We must fight those who are trying to bring about the Privatization Nation!

[spooky3]

16. or children of the deceased.

[sevendogs]

17. I receive Social Security Disability INSURANCE

Yup, that is what it is. Granted, if I had waited about 10 years to retire, then that money would have come via retirement.

But, my disability prevented me from continuing to work and I was one of the lucky ones who got approved right away. So, the thugs better not mess with my benefits! I worked hard for over 30 years and, now, when I need it, I get benefits that are called Disability Insurance, not Disability return on Investment!

[madmark]

18. SS not an insurance policy

An insurance policy is a contract between an insured and insurer in which the insured pays a premium in return for a contractual right to a benefit from the insured. The State is not contractually obligated to pay anything on SS. Only ephemeral political will keeps the payments coming. That's one of the things I don't like about SS. Some sort of vesting should occur on behalf of the payees. By the way Bush' Plan does not do that. Payees still only get ephemeral political promises, no vesting, and Bush crony's get access to payroll taxes from which they will skim with service fees and commissions. Its the worst of all worlds.

Also, even if you wanted to view SS as an insurance policy, how is it that you think insurers pay out the benefits? They invest the premiums and from the principle and investment return they pay out the benefits.

[Liberal_Andy]

20. yes it is, insurance is when a group of people pool their $ against future

hardship/ catastrophe. Investment is when they do so with the sole intent of growing $.

There's a difference.

[Andromeda]

19. That's what I've been saying for months.

And I don't understand why we haven't framed the argument in that way.

It's really so simple. I hope we don't have anything like the crash of 1929 to wake people up.

[xchrom]

21. indeed -- you are correct.

old age even before the crash was not easy in the u..s. - there's that myopic view of american history again -- families took care of their seniors.

well yes, some did -- and some didn't -- and others had no family to take care of them.

life was brutal for many americans until social welfare laws began to take effect -- anything from child labour, mining practices, to ss, etc.

there has never been an ''ideal america'' -- except dedicated liberal activists made it better.

[Liberal_Andy]

22. Thank you, xchrom!

We can't let the "It's my money, mine, mine, mine" argument win the day!

[OneTwentyoNine]

23. Does anyone get the Hightower publication?? Great article on SS

Why,he put it so clearly about SS and how it works and how it will continute to work that even a tail dragging Freeper could figure it out.

Honestly,it was a great,well written piece.

[GOPBasher]

24. Why the hell are you making sense?

Don't you know that you can be crucified for saying all those stupid, "truthful" things? Our Lord and King, the Almighty Dubya, will have your head!!!

[Liberal_Andy]

25. Better to burn out, than fade away

Come and get me, Chimpy McWarmonger and Unka Dickie!

[progressivejazz]

26. Cat food.

There was a time in the '80s or so when stories of SS recipients reduced to eating cat food in order to pay for their medicines was all over the news. I assume it's still that way for some, but the news isn't reporting it.

When people suggest to me that SS is an investment, I reply that it is really an insurance policy that makes it possible for old people to continue to live. It provides them enough money to eat cat food, live somewhere, and get some medicine. Old people with pensions or 401Ks can generally eat better than cat food. That's why some kind of investment in addition to SS is important.

Do people really want to deprive the elderly of their cat food so that they themselves can invest some of their money? And if their investment goes sour, do they want to deprive themselves of the cat food?

I don't know how well this argument will work on most people, but it sure worked on my 32 year old son last week.

[Liberal_Andy]

27. Good for you, PJ!

I just wish the dummasses that appear on TV for our side would use it.