Posted on 02/08/2006 9:24:57 AM PST by West Coast Conservative
If you read enough numbers, you never know what you'll find. Take President Bush and private Social Security accounts.
Last year, even though Bush talked endlessly about the supposed joys of private accounts, he never proposed a specific plan to Congress and never put privatization costs in the budget. But this year, with no fanfare whatsoever, Bush stuck a big Social Security privatization plan in the federal budget proposal, which he sent to Congress on Monday.
His plan would let people set up private accounts starting in 2010 and would divert more than $700 billion of Social Security tax revenues to pay for them over the first seven years.
If this comes as a surprise to you, have no fear. You're not alone. Bush didn't pitch private Social Security accounts in his State of the Union Message last week.
First, he drew a mocking standing ovation from Democrats by saying that "Congress did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security," even though, as I said, he'd never submitted specific legislation.
Then he seemed to be kicking the Social Security problem a few years down the road in typical Washington fashion when he asked Congress "to join me in creating a commission to examine the full impact of baby-boom retirements on Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid," adding that the commission would be bipartisan "and offer bipartisan solutions."
But anyone who thought that Bush would wait for bipartisanship to deal with Social Security was wrong. Instead, he stuck his own privatization proposals into his proposed budget.
"The Democrats were laughing all the way to the funeral of Social Security modernization," White House spokesman Trent Duffy told me in an interview Tuesday, but "the president still cares deeply about this."
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
From what country will F'in Kerry call for a filibuster this time?
Hooah!
"I don't have a clue why he is being so stubborn on the 'guest worker program' . . ."
I'm a Texan, and I'm very concerned about illegal immigration, too, but I also think I know what's happening.
1) The whole issue is very complicated. It's been tough maintaining a good economy after the Clinton recession and 911. As much as we'd like to deny it, the underground workforce is has a big effect on the overall economy. Messing with it will create problems. Doesn't mean I agree, but I do understand.
2) Bigger issue: population. Bush, despite the aw-shucks facade, is a sophisticated and visionary thinker. The guy sees the big picture, whether it be the entitlement dilemma, Islamic terrorism, or other threats. And he doesn't back down.
Us white folks whose families have been here since the 1600s are not producing enough babies to maintain our population and keep this country viable. Neither are black families who are part of the educated middle class. We yearn for prosperity, and, let's face it: kids are a drain on the pocketbook.
From the economy, to revenue, to innovation, to the armies that defend us, we have to have people. Without immigration, we will die, like "Old Europe" is doing now.
Better Mexicans than Arabs.
If, as a Texan, you know Mexican families like I do, you know that they are mostly hard-working, church-going, good folks with big families. Very family-oriented, so much so that their kids tend to drop out of school at 16 to help make ends meet.
They pay taxes. They pay into Social Security. They make great soldiers. Look at the casualty lists from Iraq. Even those illegals who are overburdening our schools and welfare systems want to be legitimized and allowed to pay into the system.
The violent Mexican gangs are very much an exception. They do not represent the average and ubiquitous Mexican immigrant.
I know what I've just said is not popular, but I believe it to be the truth. The US needs a stable and committed population to survive, financially and militarily. The dilemma is how to sift through those trying to enter and legitimize the good guys.
That's what the Guest Worker program is all about.
My opinion. Take it for what it's worth.
I appreciate your opinion very much...it is well thought out and, probably very close to being correct.
And, like you said, not very popular.
I think that the MEDIA that is usually considered conservative are behind a lot of the "angst"...and it makes all of us on the "conservative" sites even more combative.
Thanks for your post...I liked it a lot.
I do know one thing...neither the democrats OR the Republicans, with the exeception of a few, like JD Hayworth are willing to tackle this during an election year...so I wouldn't look to any real legislation DONE this year..IMHO>
"Notice ONE constant? They NEVER attack the Left on anything. ALL 100% of their posting is firing on what is supposedly THEIR side."
I can't speak for everyone, but the guy you addressed this post to is a VERY vocal critic of both the left as well as the GOP when deserved.
That has been my impression as well.
One that isn't invested solely in company stock.
Or Lotto-backed bonds.
bump
Yes...you are correct...I forgot to add that...thank you.
Nobody suggested the President could change the law with a proposed budget. Why shouldn't he put a plan into his budget? If the report is accurate, what's there to lose except making the Democrats have yet one more hysterical public fit and yet again state they are against SS reform? And possibly getting some Republicans to grow a spine on the issue.
Finally, you post little on this forum (don't bother trotting out your sign up date, it means nothing) and yet you come on this thread to call the President a moron.
*sniff!*
It seems the young people are actually somewhat conservative, tuned in to savings, investments, 401K plans, etc. They know that SS is not likely to be there for them and many are looking at viable options. They now have access to the world through their keyboards and many are poised to take full advantage. They give me great hope.
Sorry, thats untrue.
There is a huge difference between remaining viable, and a population explosion that strains the very fabric of our society and its resources,
When I was in HS the population was approaching the 200 million mark.
I assume that you know what it is now?
We did not get over 150 million immigrants in that time, and I further say that this type growth of unrestrained "growth" would be more properly termed "cancer."
Yee-haw! Hope it's true. Force the issue onto the table. Thank you, Mr. President.
Not to conservatives. Conservatives place factual truth above all else. You want to keep giving Bush a pass on his domestic spending agenda, his expansion of the federal bureaucracy and his opposition to immigration reform, have at it. Make all the excuses you like. You can bet I'll be holding Bush and the GOP Congress accountable for their actions whenever they don't conform to the conservative principles and whenever they attempt to advance a liberal agenda.
Thanks for speaking the truth.
True. So what?
I can't defend Bush anymore. I agree with the liberals on this one...he is a moron. The social security issue is a loser. Won't happen. My taxes are still WAY TOO HIGH. He can't make the cuts permanent. We are in a war we can't win. Our borders are leaky, and not secure. Government has never been bigger, nor the deficit higher.
So, let me ask you. Do you think anything would be different if we elected Gore or Kerry? I don't. (ok, maybe the supreme court nominations...but that's it).
sshhhhhh!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.