Republican Lies About Social Security Debunked Again: So Why Does Mainstream Media Keep Repeating Them?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 27, 2016 4:26 PM GMT
    theantijock%20engage%20stalker%20reducti

    http://www.alternet.org/economy/republican-lies-about-social-security-debunked-again-so-why-does-mainstream-media-keep
    Republicans have been gunning for Social Security for decades. This is understandable, as an ideological matter, because Social Security’s very existence undermines the anti-government mythology on which the modern conservative movement thrives. The nation’s public retirement system stands as living proof that large government programs can be successful, popular, and extremely efficient.

    What can conservative ideologues do when faced with such inconvenient facts? One possibility would be to adapt to reality and move on to a different fight. Instead, Republicans have chosen the path of obfuscation and distortion....

    The simple facts are these:

    •Social Security is NOT going bankrupt
    •Social Security will continue to exist in perpetuity (unless Republicans succeed in repealing or undermining it)
    •Social Security will continue to provide a modest but essential retirement income for all Americans, long after Baby Boomers have met their maker
    •The path of the economy will determine the size of future Social Security benefits, and finally
    •Any of the alternatives to Social Security would be worse for young people than keeping the current system....

    2015-03-17-1426628578-9390833-VH3Rbbt.gi
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 27, 2016 5:24 PM GMT
    Perhaps because the "mainstream media" is controlled by the ultra rich, 2 (or 1) percent right wing conservatives icon_question.gif
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    Mar 27, 2016 5:27 PM GMT
    if it had been so robust why did it require several "fixes" over the years. Its taking in less and giving out more because people are living longer.

    And lets not "lie " and say the mainstream media is anything but left leaning. Its been proven time and again.

    Your source as usual is a left leaning hack/blogger. And is not a journalist.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 27, 2016 5:42 PM GMT
    musclmed saidif it had been so robust why did it require several "fixes" over the years. Its taking in less and giving out more because people are living longer...





    Perhaps if the money raided by Presidents Reagan (used for tax cuts for the rich) and Bush (used for illegal foreign wars) was paid back there might be more funds available?

  • musclmed

    Posts: 3279

    Mar 27, 2016 6:37 PM GMT
    rnch said
    musclmed saidif it had been so robust why did it require several "fixes" over the years. Its taking in less and giving out more because people are living longer...





    Perhaps if the money raided by Presidents Reagan (used for tax cuts for the rich) and Bush (used for illegal foreign wars) was paid back there might be more funds available?


    There was never a dedicated fund.
    Remember Al Gore's lock-box.

    Congress has been raiding that fund for decades, and until recently Congress was controlled by Democrats.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11524

    Mar 27, 2016 7:02 PM GMT
    musclmed said
    rnch said
    musclmed saidif it had been so robust why did it require several "fixes" over the years. Its taking in less and giving out more because people are living longer...





    Perhaps if the money raided by Presidents Reagan (used for tax cuts for the rich) and Bush (used for illegal foreign wars) was paid back there might be more funds available?


    There was never a dedicated fund.
    Remember Al Gore's lock-box.

    Congress has been raiding that fund for decades, and until recently Congress was controlled by Democrats.




    The usual short sighted, conservative Republican Social Security response for when they are caught in a mess of their own making.

    And if anyone knows about shortness; it's Musclmed.



    icon_lol.gif
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Mar 27, 2016 7:21 PM GMT
    musclmed saidif it had been so robust why did it require several "fixes" over the years. Its taking in less and giving out more because people are living longer.

    And lets not "lie " and say the mainstream media is anything but left leaning. Its been proven time and again.

    Your source as usual is a left leaning hack/blogger. And is not a journalist.


    It is taking in less because the population is aging, and incomes are dropping.

    The mainstream media is neither left nor right. They are corporate and serve their stockholders. Whatever brings in the most advertising revenue is what they're going to broadcast. That said, one thing you won't hear on so-called left-leaning news networks is anything bad about corporate America. For example, rather than warn their viewers that adjustable rate mortgages are dangerous for both the homeowners and the nation in general, they created one show after another about house-flipping.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 28, 2016 10:07 PM GMT
    https://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html
    Q1. Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

    A1: 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 question 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 effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.