Politics
Out of context: Reply #10442
- Started
- Last post
- 33,772 Responses
- ukit0
"Are those under 55 ... gonna get the same deal as their parents? No, probably not," he said.
Throughout the interview, the congressman said Social Security benefits should be kept the same for those already receiving them, or those over 55.
"You mean cut Social Security benefits as a way of balancing the budget," Chris Matthews said.
Hensarling rejected Matthews' wording, but continued to call for privatization and reduced benefits for those under 55.
http://tpmlivewire.talkingpoints…
So instead of simply allowing the Bush cuts to expire on schedule, which would require no new legislation, the Republican plan is to "privatize" social security. But wait - not for the baby boomers who are currently hitting retirement age and receiving those benefits - the same generation that took our economy from no debt to 5 trillion debt.
Nope, the cuts will only be for the younger generation (us), despite the fact that we've all been paying into the system our whole lives just like them. If this plan is so awesome, why not implement it for the boomers - the largest retiring generation ever and the one that has the least savings?
All of this, despite the fact that Social Security isn't even the major issue in terms of the deficit.
"Per SSA Social Security is faced with a 2.01% payroll gap over the next 75 years. But if you break that down you see that the gap for the next 25 years is only 0.32% of payroll. And CBO puts the overall gap at only 1.3% of payroll."