Myths

.
OK, my gentle snowflakes, here is a another handy, dandy list containing links to the facts that you can easily use to bedevil your Republican/Tea Partier brother-in-law when he starts spouting the myths promulgated by the conservative mind-machine and Frank Luntz.

> Ben Bernanke is the most inflationary Fed chairman in recent memory.
(Except he's not.)

> Cutting taxes is a magical, mystical sure-fire job creator!
(Except it's not.)

> Allowing voters to register on election day results in widespread fraud.
(Except it doesn't.)

> As the Koch brothers' net worth rises, so does employment at their companies.
(Except it doesn't.)

> American companies are overregulated.
(Except they're not.)

> Bloody violence is out of control along the Mexican border, and illegal immigrants are streaming into America at record levels.
(Except it's not and they're not.)

> President Obama's plan to boost the economy doesn’t appeal beyond the liberal hippie fringe.
(Except it does---big-time.)

> Social Security is going broke, it adds to the deficit, and we have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.
(Except it's not, it doesn't and we don't.)

> Don’t listen to that Paul Krugman---he's not very accurate!
(Except he is.)

> The earth is getting cooler.
(Except it's really really not.)

> Mitt Romney is a member of the middle class.
(Except milk just snorted out my nose.)

All courtesy of Bill in Portland Maine.

Thank you, Bill. I just love facts.

There Are Myths AND Then There Are Facts

.
James Roosevelt, FDR's grandson, spoke at the National Press Club Friday, 6 August, 2010, about Social Security, past, present and future. He spent a good deal of his 30-minute speech speaking to the attacks on Social Security coming from the Deficit Commission. (Emphasis added.)

Now let's take a true measure of where we are. Social Security has been the most effective government program; it has been the most responsible government program. Social Security costs are funded out of its own dedicated revenue stream. It does not and cannot borrow money to finance its operations.

There is no deficit financing. Social Security is the epitome of Yankee frugality. It could not be better managed. Social Security returns more than 99 cents to beneficiaries on every dollar collected. I dare you to find a private investment plan that can claim that.

The United States does not have a social security crisis. It never did. What we do have is fear of a crisis. It is fear that has been fed by the propagation and accumulation of myths about the program. If we let our fears rule our judgment we will undo the greatest government program in our history, one that has eliminated poverty for millions of Americans and supported millions of families in time of need. This brings us to the current National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform. While I am deeply supportive of President Obama's efforts to control the burgeoning federal deficit, I am deeply concerned that he has instructed that everything has to be on the table, including Social Security.

I'm afraid that by placing Social Security under the purview of the Deficit Commission we are contributing to the mythology of fear around Social Security. That mythology says the program is heading for bankruptcy and is unsustainable. That mythology says the program will not be there for our children and our children's children.

I am concerned that although Social Security contributes nothing to the deficit it will be targeted by its enemies on the commission. Its enemies have failed on their frontal assault on Social Security but now they have been given cover by a Deficit Commission.

The opponents of Social Security have been biding their time waiting for an opportunity to attack Social Security without being seen as attacking it. The Deficit Commission could be that opportunity.

As Paul Krugman recently pointed out on his blog, the deficit hawks want to have it both ways when it comes to Social Security. They want to treat Social Security as just another program in the federal budget so they don't need to credit it for the quarter century and billions of dollars worth of surpluses it has accumulated. Surpluses which of course, are denominated in those worthless IOUs anyway.

But they want to view Social Security as a program unto itself when the times come that its payments exceed its annual revenues, which we said before is projected to occur in 2017 so they can claim it is going broke.

It is completely nonsensical and deceitful to try to have it both ways.

And, so, they should not, under any circumstances be allowed to have it both ways.

Social Security must be protected.

.

Top 5 Social Security Myths

.
This is way too important not to spread around.

(BTW, thank you Miss Duke for teaching me not to split my infinitives. --Sorry, this was an inside thing, Miss Duke being my high school English teacher. Boy, was she good.)

Rumors of Social Security's demise are greatly exaggerated. But some powerful people keep spreading lies about the program to scare people into accepting benefit cuts.

Myth: Social Security is going broke.

Reality: There is no Social Security crisis. By 2023, Social Security will have a $4.3 trillion surplus (yes, trillion with a 'T'). It can pay out all scheduled benefits for the next quarter-century with no changes whatsoever.¹ After 2037, it'll still be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits--and again, that's without any changes. The program started preparing for the Baby Boomers retirement decades ago.² Anyone who insists Social Security is broke probably wants to break it themselves.

---

Myth: We have to raise the retirement age because people are living longer.

Reality: This is a red-herring to trick you into agreeing to benefit cuts. Retirees are living about the same amount of time as they were in the 1930s. The reason average life expectancy is higher is mostly because many fewer people die as children than did 70 years ago.³ What's more, what gains there have been are distributed very unevenly--since 1972, life expectancy increased by 6.5 years for workers in the top half of the income brackets, but by less than 2 years for those in the bottom half.⁴ But those intent on cutting Social Security love this argument because raising the retirement age is the same as an across-the-board benefit cut.

---

Myth: Benefit cuts are the only way to fix Social Security.

Reality: Social Security doesn't need to be fixed. But if we want to strengthen it, here's a better way: Make the rich pay their fair share. If the very rich paid taxes on all of their income, Social Security would be sustainable for decades to come.⁵ Right now, high earners only pay Social Security taxes on the first $106,000 of their income.⁶ But conservatives insist benefit cuts are the only way because they want to protect the super-rich from paying their fair share.

---

Myth: The Social Security Trust Fund has been raided and is full of IOUs

Reality: Not even close to true. The Social Security Trust Fund isn't full of IOUs, it's full of U.S. Treasury Bonds. And those bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.⁷ The reason Social Security holds only treasury bonds is the same reason many Americans do: The federal government has never missed a single interest payment on its debts. President Bush wanted to put Social Security funds in the stock market--which would have been disastrous--but luckily, he failed. So the trillions of dollars in the Social Security Trust Fund, which are separate from the regular budget, are as safe as can be.

---

Myth: Social Security adds to the deficit

Reality: It's not just wrong -- it's impossible! By law, Social Security funds are separate from the budget, and it must pay its own way. That means that Social Security can't add one penny to the deficit.¹

---

Sources:

1."To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security" New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010
http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/06/14/to-defict-hawks-we-the-people-know-best-on-social-security-12290/
2. "The Straight Facts on Social Security" Economic Opportunity Institute, September 2009
http://www.eoionline.org/retirement_security/fact_sheets/StraightFactsSocialSecurity-Sep09.pdf
3. "Social Security and the Age of Retirement"Center for Economic and Policy Research, June 2010
http://www.cepr.net/index.php/publications/reports/social-security-and-the-age-of-retirement/
4. "More on raising the retirement age" Ezra Klein, Washington Post, July 8, 2010
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/07/more_on_raising_the_retirement.html
5. "Social Security is sustainable" Economic and Policy Institute, May 27, 2010
http://www.epi.org/analysis_and_opinion/entry/social_security_is_sustainable/

6. "Maximum wage contribution and the amount for a credit in 2010." Social Security Administration, April 23, 2010
http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/240

7. "Trust Fund FAQs" Social Security Administration, February 18, 2010
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html

8. "To Deficit Hawks: We the People Know Best on Social Security" New Deal 2.0, June 14, 2010
http://www.newdeal20.org/2010/06/14/to-defict-hawks-we-the-people-know-best-on-social-security-12290/

Pass it on to everyone you know, especially those who keep spreading the lies. And even if you don't send it to someone who needs it, you can keep this at hand for your ultra Republican brother-in-law who is always getting in your face.

So, relax and enjoy the next family gathering.
.

You Have Got to Be Kidding!

.
What a mess. When he was asked about cuts he would recommend to the President and Congress, Alan Simpson said “We are going to stick to the big three,” meaning Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Alan Simpson starts from the premise that the Treasury will default on the bonds issued to the Social Security trust fund, because all the best people apparently know that it’s better to default on America’s senior citizens and plunge them into poverty than it is to default on, say, the Chinese.

Despite Simpson’s assertions, raising the retirement age to 70 IS a benefit cut. It would put an estimated 1.5 million senior citizens into poverty. After two years of watching billions of dollars in taxpayer money being paid out to Wall Street CEOs in lavish bonuses, that takes a fat load of nerve.

You know, my gentle snowflakes, raising eligibility age for Social Security is just wrong on so many levels: 70 for a Congress person may not be old, but it is really old to a miner, a crude oil driller, a ditch digger, a waitress/waiter, a farm worker, a carpenter, a fisherman, a mason, etc., etc., etc. If you don't get this, I can not even begin to explain it. I have tried. Lord knows, I have tried.

[As] more and more old people began to receive SS benefits, the quality of life of the older population increased dramatically. Their lives regained some dignity. The poor farm closed.

As far as I am concerned, "good" fixes for Social Security include (there may be others):

• means testing (if you have enough other taxable income to render your SS benefits taxable, reduce or eliminate your SS benefits)
• raise the limit from which Social Security is withheld; still limit the top benefit received
• income taxes paid on benefits of high income individuals should be returned to Social Security fund
• increase the % of benefits subject to income tax to those with high incomes.

Let's keep the poor farm closed.

As for our esteemed Congress Critters:

The Congress, with it's relative geezerdom, isn't a particularly fair reflection of life in the real world, where few 70 year-olds have multiple staff people to get them through their days. That's true now, and it will be true for the now middle-aged people who will be facing a longer working life if these guys get their way.

Here's something our Members of Congress should be occupying their noggins with: the middle-aged and older are the largest group of the long-term unemployed. A little job creation could potentially go a long way here. Maybe if they actually were working, and contributing into the system by paying both income and Social Security taxes, our economic picture would be a little less bleak. Telling these people now--who want to be working--that they'll have an extra 15 years to be stigmatized by being unemployed is just cruel.

Official "Retirement Age" has been advanced enough. No more.
.

"White House Summit Must Spare Social Security and Medicare."

.
God, I love Sen Bernie Sanders ! !

• "During the last decade, the wealthiest people in our country have become wealthier while working people have struggled desperately to keep their heads above water. It would be a betrayal of the needs of the middle class of this country if we lowered Social Security benefits or raised the retirement age for Social Security eligibility" said Sanders, a member of the Senate Budget Committee.
• Medicare finances are in trouble, the senator allowed. "There is a financial crisis in Medicare, but that is directly related to the disintegration of our entire health care system -- the most costly and wasteful in the world. The way to address that crisis is to join the rest of the industrialized world and create a national health care program guaranteeing health care for all," he said. (Emphasis added.)

Meanwhile, over at the Washington Post Robert Kuttner tells you everything you need to know to battle the fiscal conservatives when they say (and they will) that the "unfunded liabilities" will bankrupt this country and rob our children's future.

• Since the early 1980s, Peter G. Peterson has been warning that future entitlement deficits would crash the economy. Yet when the crash came, the cause was not deficits but wild speculation on Wall Street.
• The overall bottom line? The economy we bequeath to our children has everything to do with getting growth back on track and almost nothing to do with imagined future deficits.
• We need to increase public spending and debt now to restore economic growth and then gradually reduce the debt ratio once recovery comes. Social Security has little to do with this challenge. Nor does Medicare, if we reform our overall health system.

I wrote my opinion on this topic back on 28 Jan 2009.

• I am getting concerned about Social Security.
• Bush 43 tried to put it into Wall Street. Aren't we glad that failed?
• ...as the years passed, and more and more old people began to receive SS benefits, the quality of life of the older population increased dramatically. Their lives regained some dignity.

I have not changed my position.

Medicare for All.

And leave Social Security benefits ALONE.
.

Before They "Mess" With Social Security --

.
I am getting concerned about Social Security.

Bush 43 tried to put it into Wall Street. Aren't we glad that failed?

Now Obama is saying it is on the table for consideration of reconstruction.

Let me be clear about this: I receive a very small SS check each month, but that is not why I am really worried. I got by before I began receiving it and I will get by if it stops. My concern lies elsewhere.

I grew up in a small, rural town in Oklahoma. I am old enough to remember when, as a child, most old people around me did not receive SS. I remember what were euphemistically called "poor farms" here in Oklahoma. I remember how desperately people tried to stay off the poor farms.

I remember my grandmother's much older cousin, Sol, a widower, going from house to house among family members; never staying more than a few days, and at most a week, in any one house. He had all he possessed tied up in a red blanket.

I now suspect he stayed out many summer nights after stopping for no more than a meal and maybe a bath with family. He was a very funny, pleasant fellow and it was obvious there was a great deal of affection between my grandmother and him--they talked about their youth and laughed a great deal.

"Uncle Sol" came around a lot in the summer time, though; he helped Grand-dad with the full-lot sized garden to the east of the house. In return, he had a good meal or 2 or more or he took away some of whatever was ripe at the time.

But Sol never stayed overnight in the summer. And I never saw him much more than a couple of times in the winter. Maybe he gave in and went to the poor farm in the winter. I just don't know.

But no single household of his extended family had enough to just take him in. My grandmother and grandfather were already supporting my great-grandfather in a one room house which sat near the back of their large, deep lot.

But as the years passed, and more and more old people began to receive SS benefits, the quality of life of the older population increased dramatically. Their lives regained some dignity. The poor farm closed.

As far as I am concerned, "good" fixes for Social Security include (there may be others):

• means testing (if you have enough other taxable income to render your SS benefits taxable, reduce or eliminate your SS benefits)
• raise the limit from which Social Security is withheld; still limit the top benefit received
• income taxes paid on benefits of high income individuals should be returned to Social Security fund
• increase the % of benefits subject to income tax to those with high incomes.

Keep the poor farms closed.
.