Even Republican hero Ronald Reagan got it -- why are we now fighting Dems on SS?

[tpsbmam]

“Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once and for all… Social security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund or reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or raising or lowering the deficit.”

[dkf]

1. That used to be true until this latest social security tax holiday.

For the past few years we HAVE been using general funds and I think it is possible we may extend it.

[earthside]

2. That was a BAD idea.

I was against it for that very reason ... it opened the door to tying Social Security to the deficit.

Folks also should understand, in my estimation, that the reason that Social Security is eventually going to be at least partially privatized is because the bulge of baby boomers are soon going to be selling off the 401K stocks to pay for their retirement. That means the stock market is going to take a long term hit. The easiest way to pump-up the market will be to get a big chunk of Social Security money funnel to Wall Street.

Watch and see.

[dkf]

4. I didn't realize it would last this long. People are going to scream when they reverse it.

[closeupready]

3. Because cutting SS is likely to please future employers who

are predictably likely to give them highly-paid make-work positions when they leave Congress as a reward.