American workers $6.6 trillion short of retirement needs & we're discussing CUTTING Social Security?

[Bluebear]

Via Americablog: Let me get this straight. The Obama administration is discussing the possibility of cutting Social Security because the GOP is hopping mad about it? Where were the Republicans when they were handing out TARP payments to their friends on Wall Street? Between Bush and Paulson lending free money and giving direct cash payouts, the richest of the rich have been at the front of the feeding line yet a Democrat is going to listen to the Republicans? Why is it urgent to save a banker but not everyone else? CNBC:

The study, conducted by Boston College's Center for Retirement Research, says savings have been squeezed by declines in stock and housing values.

The study was commissioned by Retirement USA, a coalition of organized labor and pension rights advocates that hopes to use the study to push for a more stable retirement system. The group plans to unveil the study at a news conference in Washington on Wednesday.

The $6.6 trillion figure is based on projections of retirement and income for American workers ages 32-64. The study's authors say they arrived at the amount using conservative assumptions, including a 3 percent rate of return on assets and no further cuts in pension coverage or increases in the Social Security retirement age.

http://www.americablog.com/2010/09/american-workers-are-at-least-66.html

[bobbolink]

1. Its right up there with cutting Food Stamps, which return $1.74 for each one dollar spent.

The U.S. motto: Penny Wise and Pound Foolish.

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. America hates itself. Seriously, it's all I can come up with.

[bobbolink]

4. And its right here at DU. My one vote doesn't come up.

I just love coming here and being surrounded by people who just plain don't give a shit about poorer people!

It warms the cockles.

[Bluebear]

5. They don't give a shit about anything but "winning", face it. nt

[bobbolink]

6. "winning" what???

That's the part that eludes me.

[Bluebear]

7. Any election. It's just a football game anymore.

And once the win is in, all bets are off.

[End Of The Road]

3. It makes as much sense as...

raising the retirement age at a time of high unemployment.

:shrug:

[MineralMan]

8. I don't know, but I haven't heard any direct statement by

any of the main Democrats about plans to cut Social Security. I've heard lots of speculation, but no information. Has President Obama said that he's interested in doing that? Harry Reid? All I've heard is that it's a forgone conclusion that that's what's going to happen.

If you have some real information where those cuts have actually been proposed by someone able to make the cuts, I'd like a link, so I can read it for myself.

[bobbolink]

9. Oh, exactly,

There are NEVER any stealth moves in the government, right?

[Dr.Phool]

10. There's a reason you haven't heard a direct statement.

They'd be unemployed real quick.

[MineralMan]

11. In that case, I don't believe that any such cuts will ever be

enacted. It's a red herring being used for some other purpose, I think. When I hear a powerful, elected Democratic official say that's what he or she wants to do, then I'll take this rumor seriously. And by powerful, I mean the President, the House Speaker, or the Majority Leader in the Senate. Lacking that, I see no evidence that it's likely to happen at all.

I would be absolutely opposed to such cuts, and would campaign strongly against any such thing. I just don't believe it's in the cards.

[bobbolink]

25. So lets wait until we have proof... like thousands of deaths.

It worked for Raygun...............

[quiet.american]

12. Unrec, for the usual reason that the unsourced assertion in the OP is misleading and untrue. nt

[MineralMan]

13. +10

[damntexdem]

14. The third rail of politics needs to shock any who touch it: GOP or Dem.

And older voters are poised to deliver the shock.

[MineralMan]

15. And that's why it simply won't happen, or even be seriously

proposed. It's a Red Herring.

[MineralMan]

16. The only people I hear discussing cutting Social Security

are opposed to Barack Obama. They discuss it to cast doubt on the President. I sure haven't heard President Obama discussing cutting Social Security. Not at all. If you have, please link to him doing so, and I'll go read it and apologize.

[chill_wind]

18. President Obama needs to come out with his position, doesn't he?

If he opposes cuts and "fixes" he should tell the American electorate that, don't you think?
Instead of the "saving it from privatization" strawman?

>The only people I hear discussing cutting Social Security are opposed to Barack Obama<

Do you really imagine The Deficit Commission, the future of social security and the likes of Alan Simpson isn't going to generate political discussion among middle class America and people-- of all political stripes-- especially those likely to be affected most?

[MineralMan]

22. I'm sure he will, as soon as the commission releases their report.

Of course there will be political discussion, but nothing has even been put forward officially yet. I'm waiting until there some sort of concrete information. I'm not making any assumptions. I'll leave the assuming to others and react when there's something to react to. This reacting to smokescreens makes no sense.

[ipaint]

24. He doesn't have to say anything. He set up a secret commission to take care of the details and

their recommendations go directly to an up or down vote on both the house and senate after the elections, no discussion allowed.

If folks are stupid enough to not raise holy hell about a SECRET commission of anti social security hacks then all is lost.

Secret??? What the hell for. That's our money. There is no worker representation on the panel. We aren't even allowed to know what is happening. The whole thing stinks and after 35 years of watching the wealth of workers stolen by the top the "audacity" of a unnecessary commission of the biggest thieves on the planet deciding what to do with a worker owned program worth trillions is shameful. Add in the massive loss of middle class retirement funds and a permanent recession and this has to be the stupidest move this administration has made.

People need to be raising a stink now and until recommendations on social security are flushed down the toilet by reps and senators who want to keep working.

[PA Democrat]

17. And yet John McCain says we need to extend the Bush tax cuts because

filthy rich people need to get richer "certainty." How about certainty for non-wealthy senior citizens that they won't be forced to live on cat food?

[mmonk]

19. Because in the US, people don't matter, corporations do.

[WinkyDink]

23. Bingo.

[rschop]

20. RE:American workers $6.6 trillion short of retirement needs

What did everyone expect when we sent all of the factories in the US to China and sent all of the jobs to be out sourced to India.

Maybe we can ask China and India to pay for our Social Security? HOW GOD DAM DUMB CAN YOU GET!

[onethatcares]

21. you sir are correct.

on top of your statements, how gad dammm dumb can we be to allow hedgefund managers to run pension funds for the workers after taking a commission for whatever trades and investments he does with that fund.

Kinda like the Florida School Pension fund that has hedgefund managers playing tootsie with department of education bigwigs. No conflict of interest implicated at all.