How on earth does a system that you pay into with your own money become an 'entitlement'?

[truebrit71]

I saw over the weekend that the avaricious bastards in the gop are 'preparing to take on entitlements' which is code for "fuck with social security" and I still can't get my head around how anyone gets to say that it's an 'entitlement'?

I pay into it, just like my 401(k), is that an entitlement too?

I miss the good old days when SS used to be the political 'third rail'...

[Blue Owl]

1. Too much thinking

Not enough blind faith in the GOP

:sarcasm:

[SpiralHawk]

6. Republicons don't think like people. They think like tax-dodging billionaires

so anything that Little People do to provide for themselves, via RepubliThink, should be expended on Socialism for the Rich (R).

[sasquuatch55]

167. Republicans are now Libertarians! n/t

n/t

[truedelphi]

178. And sadly, most of our DLC elected officials

Are quite happy to let them do as they will.

They aren't going to suffer one bit.

No matter which side of the "Good Cop, Bad Cop" equation a voter choses, the voter still ends up in the hot seat.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

89. That 'thinking' will turn you into a pinko commie, too!

USA!

[Citizen Worker]

93. To think is pink.

[SharonAnn]

156. "Framing" is everything. "Earned Benefits" is better term for Social Security, etc.

When people use the term "Earned Benefits", there is a better understanding of the fact that individuals have made significant contributions for their own future.

Another difficulty for me is that CEO's outrageous pay is described as having been "earned". I don't believe they were since I doubt that anyone could "earn" those outrageous amounts.. I think a more neutral terms is that the outrageous amounts were "paid".

See what the difference in meaning is for the following statements"

Congress will consider cuts to the Earned Benefits of millions of Americans.

CEO "X" was paid $357 million in 2010.


Now substitute the word "Entitlements" in the first statement and "Earned" in the second statement.

The phrases each have a somewhat different meaning. It's an important enough difference that it could change the battle.

[bvar22]

171. I wish our Democratic Party Leadership would STOP using the Republican framing.

We start in a hole when "they" adopt the Republican Framing and Language,
but maybe thats The Plan.



Who will STAND and FIGHT for THIS American Majority?
Rhetoric, broken promises, and excuses mean NOTHING now.
"By their WORKS you will know them,"
and by their WORKS they will be judged.

[ooglymoogly]

183. Democratic leadership or DLC is funded by the Koch brothers;

Obama was DLC until he realized somebody might figure that out.

[fasttense]

2. I paid for my life insurance policy.

So, when I die and if the insurance company is still in business, is my spouse going to get an entitlement?

[lob1]

3. Congress has robbed Social security.

They started calling it an entitlement when they decided not to pay it back.

[BobbyBoring]

153. Over simplistic

But true +1! There;s nothing to pay it back with but worthless paper. It has to be killed before the truth rears its ugly head

[bvar22]

174. That is UNTRUE...and MORE Republican talking points.

That "paper" is no more worthless than the dollar bill in your pocket.
It is backed by "the full faith and credit of the US Treasury".

"The Trust Fund’s bonds are just like other Treasury bonds except they aren’t traded. When the Trust Fund needs to “redeem” a bond to cover ongoing benefit payments, all that happens is that electronic entries reflecting the change appear on the respective governments accounts, and Social Security checks go out, as always, as scheduled. Calling this a “lottery” is stunningly false.

But the perpetrators of this falsehood don’t care about the facts. They hope to convince people that Social Security is in crisis, because the Trust Fund is illusory, and then use those lies to convince Congress and the public to accept cuts in Social Security benefits to “save it.” As Paul Krugman has characterized it, we had to cut future benefits to avoid cutting future benefits."

http://firedoglake.com/2010/08/26/nyt-and-matt-bai-falsely-call-social-security-trust-fund-a-lottery/

[phantom power]

4. I think the "problem" is that we all contribute, and share it.

Peeling the onion, I think the issue for conservatives is that poor brown people may share some of your money, and they just can't abide that shit.

:shrug:

[Donnachaidh]

9. Conservatives don't want to pay back the iou's they wrote after raiding it

While I agree with you, I think they are shitting themselves thinking about actually having to pay back what they've stolen.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

13. I thought that conservatives are all about "responsibility"

a "responsible" person pays back their debts and obligations even if they might have to sacrifice something (say, for instance, tax cuts for the rich)? :shrug:

[rfranklin]

16. To paraphrase Leona Helmsley: Responsibility is for the little people...

not for the Masters of the Universe.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

58. How true

and how depressing. :eyes:

[oneAngryOhioDem]

117. Responsibility???!!!

The Repubs have redefined responsibility as "steal from the poor to give to the rich (aka contributors)"

[Common Sense Party]

23. Except for the minor fact that Democrats were running Congress for

much of the last 30-40 years that the trust fund was being raided.

It paid for much of the Military Industrial Complex, yes.

It also paid for a lot of feel-good gov't programs that got politicians re-elected.

[fasttense]

38. Really? RepubliCONS ran the congress from 2000 to 2006.

The Republicans' controlled the Senate from 1980 to 1986 but most of the Raygun years it was a split congress with the House controlled by Democratic leaders and the Senate controlled by RepubliCONS.

During most of the Clinton years RepubliCONS ran the congress. RepubliCONS returned to a majority position, in both houses of Congress, in the election of 1994.

For most part between 1995 and 2007, the Republicans controlled both houses. In the wake of the unpopularity of President Clinton's impeachment trial, the 107th Congress (2001–2003) saw the Democrats and Republicans split control of the US Senate 50-50, ending effectively tied.

Democratic leaders are not blameless but they did not are not run the congress for the last 30 to 40 years. And it was the RepubliCONS that turned to calling Social Security an entitlement. It was Raygun who changed it from a pay as you go system into a trust fund system, so politicians could raid it and borrow against it.

[Common Sense Party]

54. That was my point, neither party is blameless.

To act like the thievery and overspending is ONLY done by Repubs is disingenuous.

[emilyg]

91. Thanks. Good chart.

[guardian]

144. Thanks

good chart. Very concise.

[Enthusiast]

44. Most of it went to partially

pay for two wars of choice and profit. The rest went to pay for the results of Wall Street malfeasance and tax cuts for millionaires.

[on point]

123. So did T-bills! Are you suggesting we shouldn't pay those as well?

[Common Sense Party]

137. You lost me there. I have no idea what you're on about. n/t

[on point]

147. The SSI IOU's need to be paid, same as T-Bill IOU's. Cut SSI only if willing to stop paying T-Bills

[ooglymoogly]

173. Democrats, for the last 40 yrs have not run congress or the Senate.

All have been run by blue dogs, DLC'ers, DINOly's and pugs. Its all an illusion to make you think Democrats are in control when bad things are going down.

[Common Sense Party]

180. Democrats are Democrats.

You can pretend otherwise, of course.

[ooglymoogly]

181. Only a homogenized mind could make such a statement.

So if a corporate shill who cannot win as a pug, runs as a dem; that in your mind makes him a Democrat, even though he will follow Repug principles and a Repug platform.

That is an insult to Democrats who are democrats because they are faithful to Democrat principles and the Democrat platform.

A rose by any other name will smell as sweet...a stinkweed posing as a rose is still a stinkweed and will stink ever the more.

Roosevelt the first ran as a stinkweed, yet smelled, acted and was recognized definitively as a rose.

See how that works.

[Common Sense Party]

182. And Republicans are Republicans.

It was Democrats AND Republicans that ran up the national debt to unsustainable levels.

Feel free to believe otherwise.

[ooglymoogly]

184. And that is just what you are programmed to believe. nt

[Scuba]

39. They don't want to share, regardless of color. n/t

[freshwest]

151. They only agreed to a common cause when it advantaged them.

hen t

[mwooldri]

160. It's NATIONAL INSURANCE!!!!

It's "socialism" at its best, it works just fine.

Social Security and Medicare are NOT entitlements. it's nationalized insurance.

eom mark.

[obxhead]

170. poor people in general will share it.

The poor have no entitlement to any kind of help. Help is for billionaires and their friends, not us.

[Donnachaidh]

5. the congress.org page on facebook is being written by RW nutbags now

They just love calling SS entitlements. But they got HEAVILY corrected on it.

[hobbit709]

7. republican semantics.

[spanone]

8. because you are entitled to the money you paid in.

entitlement is not a bad word except in the hands of the right

[lumberjack_jeff]

75. +100

[dionysus]

10. how bout this, i paid into it, i'm entitled to get it back?

[Scuba]

41. It goes beyond that. Minor children of American who perish are ....

...eligible for Social Security. Kidney failure and other severe medical problems can make one eligible.


This is as it should be.

Don't tell me we can't afford it. We just need a different tax policy.

[Coyote_Bandit]

49. delete

[dionysus]

67. i am aware it's also an insurance program for the children of deceased parents. i never said we

can't afford it either.

:shrug:

[Common Sense Party]

56. So, if the cap on SS contributions is removed, and the rich wind up

putting in MUCH more in SS contributions, are they "entitled" to get it ALL back?

[dionysus]

66. no. i'm just saying there's nothing wrong with the word entitlement, except the way the RW uses it.

[LooseWilly]

101. Socialist...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

11. Well, the GOP never stops trying anyway

They see a "golden opportunity" to do whatever they want in the name of reducing the deficit/national debt. I think, however, once there is an actual proposal made, people will unite against it just like what happened back in 2005. Truth be told, I thought that we were in a heckuva lot more danger back then and I actually expected there to be some "bipartisan" support for Bush's privatization scheme. I'm thankful that I was proven wrong but we have to remain vigilant and watchful. I don't believe, as some do, that President Obama is gunning for Social Security but there are clearly a few Democrats, particularly in the Senate whom are so obsessed with deficit reduction that they may be willing to sign on to some cuts. Like I said, however, it will be easier to fight the GOP over the issue once an actual proposal is made. If the GOP wants to shoot themselves in the foot (again), I say go ahead and let them. Like a zombie, the attempts to kill Social Security and/or Medicare are never going to die.

[AnneD]

12. Teacher and Public Employees....

also contribute to their pensions. I have contributed enough quarters to SS to collect but because I will get a state pension, I will not be getting SS.

[footinmouth]

17. I'm a retired public employee

I collect a state pension and will start receiving Social Security in May. I'm able to collect both. Why can't you?

[AnneD]

30. Windfall Elimination Act...

and the OWL (can't remember what it stands for). The school does not pay into SS and employees don't get it... it fair enough. But 2nd career folks like me that have been working since they were 16 will not get they are owned. Neither will the spouses get survivor SS benefits (like every other person in America) if they work for a district that doesn't not pay in to SS. After I retire I will have to work 5 years to bridge the gap.

[footinmouth]

82. I guess it does vary from state to state, district to district

I had 5 years where I did not pay into SS, I think I was working 15 hrs a week. We had an option whether or not to opt in. I was advised by my employer not to pay into it at the time. When my hours increased it became mandatory. I worked for a school district in NY state.

[hack89]

34. Many teachers don't contribute to Social Security

they just contribute to the state pension fund. In Rhode Island, for example, 24 of 36 school districts do not participate in SS.

[marew]

71. That varies from state to state.

I live in Fl and receive both. Yet a friend who retired years ago from Maine can't get SS. I paid into SS for well over 30 years.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

99. Me, too here in CA

but my S.S. is drastically reduced despite the fact I got in all my quarters. It's seen as double dipping.

:crazy:

[WinkyDink]

127. That's your state. In PA we teachers pay into both, and get both.

[mlevans]

163. Well, we do at present.

But who knows where Corbett will strike next?

[hack89]

14. Entitlement is a legal term which means a guarantee of access to benefits

based on established rights or by legislation. SS has always been a entitlement.

[Common Sense Party]

24. Exactly. Thank you for stating what should be obvious. n/t

[emilyg]

92. Thank you.

[tcaudilllg]

113. It's become a pejorative for people who think they are owed something without offering anything

in return.

[TahitiNut]

138. You miss one essential characteristic.

An "entitlement" exists SOLELY by government fiat.

Break down the word itself and focus on "title" -- something that does not exist in nature. Think of "titles" like "Duke" or "Baron" or "lord" ... and think back to the days of monarchies where "title" conferred economic power. In those days, ALL the land of the "realm" was presumptively owned (granted by GOD to the control) by the monarch ... the sovereign. The 'subjects' were, for the most part, mere chattel. ALL the proceeds of anyone's labors on the land (the sole "means of production") were owned by the monarch ... to be doled out as the monarch saw fit (or by whim).

Think about Pennsylvania ... an entitlement to William Penn.

Now... think about the title to a car, the title (fee simple) to land and real property. Those titles exist (and have value) SOLELY by government fiat ... and a system of (government) record-keeping, (government) police power, and (government) courts required to obey that fiat. And it's ALL paid for by working people ... to the benefit of their Masters.

The right wing is the very WORST at abusing "entitlements" ... think about the stock market. Think about their attitude towards capital. They regard a CAPITALIST as virtually the same as a monarch ... presumedly the 'entitled' owner of ALL THE PROCEEDS from any labor performed using their "means of production."

It's insidious.

:puke:

(I've packed a LOT into the above summary ... and mere phrases used above could easily be expanded to essays.)

[truedelphi]

187. This post of yours is one brilliant essay.

It was a pleasure to read it.

[TahitiNut]

189. Thank you. It's something I've thought about a lot ... and researched.

The incredible propaganda peddled from the (fascist) right is VERY reminiscent of the crap that abounded in the early 20th century and voiced by the fascists (and "sympathizers" like Ford and Lindburgh) all over the world, but particularly in the US.

As a "war baby," I benefitted from a public education that was informed by the spectre of fascism in the aftermath of WW2, and chose to incorporate teaching on propaganda, critical thinking, Critical Reading (an actual course in high school), and decent history lectures. Even as I snoozed through classes, some seeped through ... particularly because my maternal grandparents were WW1 emigrants from NOrway and still had family in occupied Norway. My grandfather was particularly attuned to the insidious right wing propaganda.

The right wing's (successful?) demonization of "liberals" and "entitlements" is a corollary to the "Big Lie" approach, a kind of "aversion therapy" performed on the entire Body Politic ... in service to the modern day Robber Barons who, by hook or by crook, have been steadfastly dedicated to BUYING corrupt politicians worldwide ... now what I call "corporate colonialism" ... or the fascist takeover of anything resembling a democracy.

[drm604]

15. In the Republican language words have whatever meaning best suits the wealthy.

• A system you've paid into is an "entitlement"
  
• Working class people are "elitists"
  
• Living wills are "death panels"
  
• Sarah Palin is a "competent politician"
  
• The mainstream media is "liberal"
  
• ketchup is a "vegetable"
  
• muslims are "communists" or "nazis"
  
• teachers are "thugs"
  
• war is "peace"
  
• up is "down"
  
• left is "right"
  

etc.

[Enthusiast]

46. Well said.....nt

[tonybgood]

162. you forgot one for muslims - "athiests"

[pnwmom]

18. Entitlement means something is owed or belongs to you. It's a fine word.

How on earth did "entitlement" become a bad word?

[truebrit71]

20. ..in the frame of reference being used by the gop it means "getting something for nothing"..

..as though people feel entitled to it, even if they didn't do anything for it..

[pnwmom]

53. But that's referring to a false sense of entitlement,

as opposed to really being entitled to something.

[truebrit71]

140. ..which is precisely why the gop uses that word...

..to stir up their base..remember their base are the same mucking forons that don't want the government to control their Medicare...:crazy:

It's a very clever and cynical ploy by the plutocratic gop to get the poor to vote against their own best interests...again..

[closeupready]

25. This is actually an excellent point. Due to complicity with media mouthpieces, the GOP has successf

successfully turned a legitimate term into a bad one, much like they did with terms like welfare or liberal, the first of which is actually provided for explicitly in the US Constitution!

[Enthusiast]

47. Same way that 'liberal'

became a bad word. It became a bad word through right wing propaganda.

[TahitiNut]

139. See my response above.

:hi:

[BadgerKid]

19. GOP sees entitlement and thinks privilege(d).

The left is not privileged in GOP minds (I preach to the choir here, of course.)

Entitlement programs could be renamed co-operatives, but that would sound too socialistic to GOP ears.

edit: added clarity

[closeupready]

21. Not just social security, but unemployment insurance.

The premiums are paid from payroll taxes, just like social security. Yet, when you become eligible and collect, you are getting an 'entitlement'. :wtf: :crazy:

I can't waste time on people who believe these falsehoods unquestioningly.

[eShirl]

22. Because the government feels entitled to the surplus.

[Skidmore]

26. When the Koch Bros & the BFEE tell you so.

[Octafish]

27. Yeah. You're entitled to your money.

Trouble is: Congress and its warmonger owners feel they're entitled to it, too.

[Trailrider1951]

78. Wow, isn't that the truth......they just do not admit your right to

the money. Like it is theirs to spend, never mind you and your contribution. Think about it.

[loudsue]

28. We need to start taking away "entitlements" from legislators. We need a big push

to do that from Teabaggers, Dems, Independents, everyone. No more health insurance for life, no more pensions for life, no more. Those, my dear, are "entitlements", not savings accounts.

[tonybgood]

164. 2 words - TERM LIMITS!!!

No elected public official should ever be allowed to hold office long enough to QUALIFY for a government pension!!!

[iamtechus]

29. You seem to be confused about the meaning of "entitlement"

An entitlement is something you are entitled to. Get it? If not, please look it up in the dictionary. Posts like this make us look stoopid!

[truebrit71]

35. You seem to be confused about how the gop is using that word..

..THAT's my point...

[aquart]

31. Thieves say things like that. And it is still the third rail.

[MannyGoldstein]

32. The Right (and the Third Wayers) have demonized the word "entitlement"

The word is correct, but it's spit out by the Right with disgust as if it means "charity".

[truebrit71]

36. Bingo! Just like "liberal" is used as a put-down..

..

[Lex]

33. Your question answers itself. nt

[Jim Lane]

37. The real problem is lumping all "entitlements" together so as to attack Social Security.

As others have pointed out, there's nothing wrong with the concept of entitlements. The right-wing propaganda takes this form:
1. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are entitlements.
2. All these entitlement programs, taken collectively, face serious financial shortfalls in the future.
3. Therefore, we must cut all entitlement programs.

The answer is that the shortfall is almost all in Medicare and Medicaid, driven by rising medical costs. Social Security, taken separately, is, depending on what assumptions you make, (a) fiscally sound indefinitely or (b) facing a partial shortfall some decades from now, one that's small enough that it could be readily addressed with some tweaking, using such remedies as raising or eliminating the cap on income that's taxed.

It's far more important to deal with medical costs. Unfortunately, many of the sensible approaches to doing that meet with fierce Republican opposition.

[Scuba]

45. Meanwhile we borrow money to wage war. n/t

[Urban Prairie]

40. Because if the Rethugs can significant cut or much better still, eliminate SS/SSD/SSDI

All of those aged and disabled US citizens who are no longer productive will no longer need to be supported by those who are still employed, nor will those who are liberal/progressive be likely continue to live long enough, after most inevitably will soon become homeless, ill, and starving, likely be able to vote in future elections for, or contribute to Democratic candidates, since they will no longer have a permanent address, and will be obviously preoccupied with "mere" survival.

Wouldn't surprise me to learn someday soon, that the Rethugs will introduce legislation ala requiring state IDs, that also takes away the right to vote, from those who are supported by any government programs, those who have poor credit ratings, as well as those who are unemployed, and those who do not pay any federal/state/local income taxes, becoming ineligible to register to vote.

[annabanana]

42. They have stolen and twisted the word "entitlement"

The word "entitlement" means, literally..."You're entitled to it! They have been saying the word with a sneer.. the same way they pronounce "liberal" (until it becomes a negative)... but in this case they have managed to actuallyREVERSE THE MEANING until it is shorthand for something you are not in fact, entitled to.

the media is the message, kids....

[2gabby]

43. And where are the ultra right conservatives to champion contract law?

I just have to wonder, you'd think the libertarian types would be the first to complain about breach of contract, or some argument along those lines. Having been forced into the contract and having our wages garnished seems to have made it MORE acceptable to squander the funds and justify decreasing or eliminating benefits? While we wage wars?

I don't understand. I will just never understand. I mean, if it isn't a contract, what is it? Don't any of the same rules or theories apply? Even if you didn't believe in SS or other forms of social programs, how can people write off the fact that we all paid into these programs?

The ultra right, they seldom fail to disappoint me. Stuff like this I'd really like to shake them till they fizz.

So don't let them off the hook, okay? The ones that hate social welfare the most, THEY know people paid into a system, and they can at least admit people deserve a fair payout. And a bailout if necessary. It isn't chump change, people need that money.

[Atypical Liberal]

48. The conservative logic goes like this:

If you get more out of it than you paid into it, then it's an entitlement.

Same kind of people who don't want to pay for schools if they don't have kids.

[stockholmer]

106. some charts showing lifetime benefits and taxes for SS & Medicare (hint-Medicare is toast)

some quick points (btw, the interest earned on SS/Medicare tax payments IS included in the taxes paid portion)


1. In the past, single people got back a tremendous amount more in SS benefits than they and their employer put in (even including interest earned on the taxes paid in), but as of a couple years ago, all single people starting SS (and living to average age) will get back less than they nd their employer paid in, and that gap grows every year. However, when the employer's match is taken away, even the single gets back much more thn they actually paid in.

3. The system favours couples (and women), especially one-earner ones. BUT, the more the second spouse makes, the closer the couple comes to being in the same situ as a single person, with a two earner couple (one high, one average wage) wage already getting back less than they and their employers paid in. Once again, however, they get back much more than they themselves put in.

3. Medicare is the truly broken 800 pound gorilla. In the past, all got a huge amount more back (percentage-wise) than they paid in. But, unlike SS, this doesn't correct itself. Even singles in the future will get back at least 3 times of benefits (hundreds of thousands of dollars more), and couples will get back 4 or 5 times the amount they paid in.

4. Personally, these charts for medicare are way too optimistic, due to the USA for-profit health care costs simply exploding over the lst 20+ years' The rate of increase projected from 2010 to 2030 looks very underestimated to me.

Bottom line:

A. Anyone retiring now and in the future is not getting back the total paid into SS, except for one earner couples, but they are getting back more than just they personally paid in. Expect this to be used to attack the system by quotes that leave out the employer match.

B. In Medicare, all are getting back so much more than they paid in that the system will collapse without huge changes, IMHO.


http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/social-security-medicare-benefits-over-lifetime.pdf





the article this is from:

http://moneywatch.bnet.com/retirement-planning/blog/financial-independence/whats-the-return-on-your-social-security-taxes/1151/

Whether you believe it or not, Social Security is going to be a part of your future, and when the time comes, you’ll be glad you’ve got it. Yes, our national pension system has some well-known fiscal problems, but Uncle Sam can solve them by any number of bearable cost-cutting and/or tax-raising solutions before the money runs out. The question remains, though: Is it worth it? Will the benefits you’d receive under current law compensate you for the career’s worth of taxes you’ll have paid into the system? The latest answer, generated by a new Urban Institute Social Security study, is: yes. (Surprised?) As far as it’s possible to project, Social Security and Medicare give you a positive return on your tax “investment” even after inflation.

That question has been chewed over through the years with generally less upbeat answers. Uncle Sam, for example, does its own Social Security money’s worth calculation and generally shows that the payoff for being a loyal Security Security taxpayer shrinks a lot with each succeeding cohort. The big difference is that the Urban Institute study, conducted by Eugene Steurle and Stephanie Rennane, adds in Medicare. That, it turns out, has been a very good deal, in part because all taxpayers (not just Social Security payroll taxpayers) pick up so much of the cost

[Atypical Liberal]

119. Great info

That's great info, but I wish there was a way to plug in my salary history and see what the benefit would be to me. I haven't made $43K a year in about 15 years.

I started working around 1990 making about $30K a year. By 1998 I was making about $45K a year. By 2002 I was making about $55K a year. By 2007 I was making about $80K a year. I currently make $90K a year.

I've always wondered whether I would get more out of SS or if I had taken that money plus my employer match and invested it privately.

[geardaddy]

50. I hate that word.

I challenge people who use that word to tell me if their public school education was an entitlement.

They usually say no, but this is different. :puke:

[Bandit]

51. What you don't think that after paying in for so long you are not entitled?

:shrug: what else could you call it?

[PeaceNikki]

52. Better question: When did "entitlement" become a dirty word?

[baldguy]

55. Because it benefits poor people.

And - except for the top 10% - we're all poor people.

[in_cog_ni_to]

57. What ROYALLY PISSES ME OFF is that DEMOCRATS are using that

word too! WTF is wrong with them? Anyone with a brain knows SS is NOT an "entitlement." Repukes spent a LOT of $$$$$ to have their so-called "think tanks" come up with descriptive words that would damage Democrats. That's one of the words. Fucking assholes.

[Lorien]

62. Are they really "Democrats" if they are helping drive the GOP agenda forward?

:think:

[tcaudilllg]

114. Fo realz. PURGE 2012!!!

[dionysus]

70. "An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation."

it is an entitlement. it a a benefit you legally have rights to receive because you pay into the system. an entitlement is not a gift, or charity.

just because the republicans say it with a sneer doesn't mean it's the wrong word. they made liberal a dirty word too.

[JuniperLea]

59. And Medicare is an insurance policy we are forced to pay into...

Which lays waste to the Pubbie meme that no one is ever forced to pay for insurance... and it's not an entitlement per se either... it's just what I said it was... an insurance policy that we have the right to use some day.

I hate hearing the word "entitlement" used with such venom. Yes, I bought into these plans! And YES I AM ENTITLED to collect from them as well.

[frebrd]

60. You're entitled by virtue of the fact that you paid into it!

When and why did "entitlement" become a dirty word?

:shrug:

[Lorien]

61. It's not. It's a Social Program. Reagan branded them "entitlements"

and we need to remind people that his misleading label was and still is complete bullshit.

[tonybgood]

166. Reagan also never balanced a budget!

Reagan raised taxes, broke laws (at least his suboordinates did) and started unauthorized military actions. It might also surprise some that Reagan's first elected office was as the president of the Screen Actor's Guild (a union)!

[MilesColtrane]

63. "entitlement" is not a pejorative.

An entitlement is a right guaranteed by law or contract.

[Initech]

64. Because the rich bastards don't have it?

[sarcasmo]

65. In 20 years the rich will claim you're 401k is an entitlement.

[Rex]

68. Ya that was my first thought when I heard the pundits drivel and drooling

over something I PUT money into is nothing more than a French Benefit (I know but I like it better).

[dionysus]

69. do you know the meaning of the word?

"An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation."

just because the RW uses it as a smear, doesn't mean the word is wrong.

[hulka38]

76. When your average middle of the road independent American

listens to a politician use the word "entitlement" when discussing SS say, do you think he's hearing "a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation" or some other definition? Very unlikely. He's hearing the loaded version, the smear. He's hearing something akin to welfare. Don't tell me the Democratic pols aren't sophisticated enough understand this. Yet they keep on saying it without hesitation. There is something very wrong with that.

[dionysus]

77. i'd rather we not let them do to the word "entitlement" what they did to "liberal".

it got to the point where liberals started calling themselves progressives to avoid the smear.

there's nothing wrong with the word liberal, nor is there anything wrong with "entitlement".

[hulka38]

79. The GOP has been largely successful in redefining the word

wrt large government run social programs. I think that's one place where you and I differ. So Democratic pols continuing to use the word that has been redefined by the GOP does not help to bring the word back to its original meaning on its own. I'd rather Dems, if they're going to use the word, take thirty seconds and explain to the listener that "entitlement" does not mean "giveaway" and then go on to explain the deal that is SS. Simply saying the word entitlement is not combating the GOP redefinition of the word but instead reinforcing it.

[Exilednight]

80. That's one meaning, and here's the way some in government use it

In a casual sense, the term "entitlement" refers to a notion or belief that one (or oneself) is deserving of some particular reward or benefit<1>—if given without deeper legal or principled cause, the term is often given with pejorative connotation (e.g. a "sense of entitlement").

It really depends on what side of the aisle you are standing on.

[hulka38]

72. I don't know.

but it may have something to do with Democratic leadership being complicit with the GOP message though.

[fascisthunter]

73. EASY... it's Called Fascist Propaganda via FOX News, Rush Limpballs, etc.

a conspiracy yes...

[Avant Guardian]

74. Because the republicans want to steal it

So they have to relabel it

[On the Road]

81. Reminds Me of an Older Guy Who Used to Hang Around the Diner

in Durham North Carolina in the late 70s. Sported a big salt-and-pepper afro and wore a red plastic fire chief's hat. He had apparently retired from a job with the railroad, because one night he kept saying over and over: "People say the government's giving me a living. That's not their money -- that's MY money. I worked for that place for damn near thirty years and I earned every cent of it. And people say the government's giving me a living. That's not their money -- that's my money...." And so on and so on.

He had more sense than half the stupid politicians in the country.

[dkf]

83. Your money was given to retirees, not invested.

You will be paid by another worker with their earnings, not your investment.

If you want it to be an investment that you get back you are asking for privatization of social security. Right now it is a tax on workers and a payout to retirees.

[rdking647]

84. the problem is

you dont get back just teh money you paid intoi the system you get back more..
the simple fact is something has to be done to fix it or it will go bust.
end of story


heres my plan to fix social security. it makes everyone pay something
1. raise the retirement age to 70 for ss benefits. when ss was formed people lived a lot less than they do now. that is one of the reasons its broke
2. change the limit on ss taxes from the first 110k or so to 250k. index that ammount for inflation
3. no automatic cola increases.. It sucks but any increase in benefits should have to be voted on.not happen automatically.
4. if your income is over 250k you dont get ss that year


that way everyone shares some of teh burden for fixing the system..

[Mnemosyne]

96. Retirement at 70? Okay. What line of work are you in, btw?

[rdking647]

109. why does it matter?

[bluethruandthru]

120. I hope you're a bricklayer or a carpet installer.

Try doing that at 70.

Sad how the right wing talking points have become so ingrained in our society.

[rdking647]

149. even if your a brick layer

you can still retire at 65 and use your own retirement saving until your 70.
and if you have no retirement savings thats your own problem..

since you dont want to raise the retirement age whats your solution to SS?
and just raising taxes isnt an answer

[bluethruandthru]

159. There is no "solution" needed for Social Security!

This link is to economist James Galbraith's statement to Obama's catfood commission. Please see sections 6 and 7.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=569194nk

[anneboleyn]

188. Raising taxes so that appropriate amounts were paid, as they were forty years ago, would fix SS

The bone-headed opposition to taxing the super-rich at levels that Eisenhower and Nixon supported makes absolutely no sense. Those arguments are just products of propaganda, not rational thinking.

Since it's all arbitrary according to people like you, why not raise the retirement age to 80? Then you can be sure that many workers who paid into SS for decades will be dead before they can draw on it. But if they save enough in the right investments (not like our friend's company that went under five years ago), avoid all illness or job injury, etc., they can retire at 40!

[Mnemosyne]

121. because there is a huge difference between sitting at a desk until 70, and

roofing until 70. That's why.

[bettyellen]

128. except it doesn't need fixing, it just needs it;s loans repaid

[Kip Humphrey]

85. Hmmm... cause you're entitled to it?

[MrMickeysMom]

86. Boy, isn't THAT the damned truth?

+ a gazillion.

I have been saying this over and over....

No one seemed to even noticed this "little extra in your paycheck" bullshit our president announced when in fact, 2% has been extracted out of SS, thereby giving a NOD to strategically DRAINING the fund.

What legal right is there to touch this? Answer: NONE, but Congress is too fucking distracted by their next run up to re-election coffers to even give one shit about it.

[fried eggs]

87. probably because the amount most people pay into it

is exhausted in a year or 2.

[Silver Swan]

88. I worked for the Social Security Administration whole working life

until I retired.

We used the term "entitlement" to mean one had filed for SS benefits and met the requirements. Then you were entitled to benefits.

If you met the requirements, but had not yet filed, you were "eligible" for benefits.


There is nothing wrong with being entitled--it just means you are getting what you are entitled to under the law.

[defendandprotect]

175. Frank Luntz and GOP can turn any word into a DIRTY word -- !!!

[Frisbee]

90. If they are so dead set on eliminating this "entitlement"...

then give me back every fucking cent I've put into it. Fucking thieves!

[defendandprotect]

94. When Frank Luntz -- GOP propagandist works on it -- !!!

:evilgrin:

That's why we now have "Climate Change" instead of the more precise Global Warming --

Frank Luntz told W to change it to Climate Change in 2002 -- !!


Global Warming is more accurate in making clear the HEAT is on --

right now we have the glaciers melting which one scientist explained as being like

having your freezer door open. But in the end it is about heating up the planet --

and the chaos that increasing the HEAT in the atmosphere causes with weather conditions.

Changing weather patterns and systems -- increasing severity of weather -- and numbers of

severe weather events -- and more.





The Richwing Koch Bros. Funded the DLC --

http://www.democrats.com/node/7789

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x498414

If you knew about this, why didn't you tell us?

If you didn't know, pass it on -- !!

:)

[ejpoeta]

110. global warming makes you think the earth is getting warmer. in fact

i believe weather patters will become more intense.... so snow will be more and hurricanes and heat waves..... climate change fits that better. every time it snows my brother says, gee, so much for global warming.

[defendandprotect]

172. That's the confusion Rush Limbaugh sells ... but false --

The condition we are suffering is Global Warming -- the HEATING of the

atmosphere which creates chaotic weather conditions --

See: "The Heat is On!" -- your library probably has it --

GW is increasing all weather conditions and making them more severe --

including hurricanes and snowstorms -- that's true.

The cold comes because we still have the Arctic melting -- one scientist described

it as having your freezer door open.

One example is the Great Lakes which don't always freeze now -- therefore when

winds, clouds pass over them they now collect moisture which is dropped in the

form of SNOW when the system next meets cold air.

This will continue while the glaciers are still melting --

There will be droughts/floods -- more hurricanes, tornados, cyclones -- we have

changed weather systems -- wind patterns -- ocean systems --

And GW will create more earthquakes and more severe earthquakes --

some think it may even create more volcanic activity.


There's another fantastic book I can't think of at the moment -- about the oceans.

Your library will have it, as well. Will add the name later.

[ejpoeta]

185. thanks. i agree that it IS a warming, but there is also climate change

related to that global warming. I think people don't want to have to do the work involved. It's easier to just pretend it isn't happening and worry about it later. But later it will be too late. thanks for the book ideas. i will check it out.

[defendandprotect]

186. Climate change is a euphemism intended to make the public think that

something natural is going on -- it isn't --

Keep in mind that the oil industry -- ExxonMobil and others -- spent tens of billions

of dollars over 50 years to keep the public from understanding Global Warming and the

threat to humans and the planet. About three years ago the Royal Academy of Science

called them out on it -- demanded that they stop lying to the public - stop financing

campaigns that distort the truth, stop the propaganda.


We've known about Global Warming since the mid-1950's -- in 1992 to try to combat the

rightwing propaganda Nobel Scientists issued a 'WARNING TO HUMANITY' at a press

conference calling for total change in society -- values -- as being necessary.

It was ignored by the corporate-press.


Here's the SCIENTISTS' WARNING RE GLOBAL WARNING --

http://www.ucsusa.org/about/1992-world-scientists.html



Here's the book -- I highly recommend it -- there's much to understand about what

happens when fresh water from glaciers mix with salt water --

not only rising oceans -- much more!

http://www.amazon.com/Song-Blue-Ocean-Encounters-Beneath/dp/0805061223

[Citizen Worker]

95. Social Security is a program created by the passage of the FEDERAL INSURANCE CONTRIBUTION ACT. It

is NOT an entitlement. It is, in fact, an insurance policy into which workers pay one half of the premium and employers the other half.

Whenever a teevee news reader or newspaper calls Social Security an entitlement we need to flood them with letters and phone calls to inform them that it is an insurance policy for which we pay one half of the premiums.

[Norrin Radd]

97. Because they are aware that the word is most commonly used

in the phrase "false sense of entitlement" or "sense of entitlement,* instead of in its basic or legal meaning. The word carries the negative connotation of the phrase by frequent association.

[Keith Bee]

98. K & FUCKING R!!!

[pnwmom]

100. Simple. You earned it, thus you are fully entitled to it.

The question is why the word "entitlement" -- which used to have a positive connotation -- came to be equated with a "false sense of entitlement."

[Crusader Rabbit]

102. SS Welfare?

The powers aligned against the people are using any means to discredit democratic institutions. The word "entitlement" they know perfectly well is not correct but since most of the people in this country are borderline morons they find it convenient. They will convince all these dummies that SS retirement is really welfare and thus get their votes. That's all there is to it.

[Populist_Prole]

103. So true. It's a buzzword so firmly entrenched into the lexicon of apathetic dolts

One of many buzzwords. Not really processed by the brain by these RW cretins as much as it is a reaction by short circuiting the nerves to provoke a reaction.

[Obamanaut]

104. Because it is yours, you are 'entitled' to it? n/t

[old mark]

105. When the GOP lies about it....nt

[Sherman A1]

107. Precisely

Thinking of cutting SS is simply beyond absurd.

[JoeyT]

108. Because it's our money.

And we're damned well entitled to it.

The word is technically correct, it just doesn't mean what they think it means.

[freedom fighter jh]

111. entitlement: a right to benefits specified especially by law or contract

That's one definition of the word: a right. In this sense, social security benefits are indeed an entitlement: All your working life you pay in, and in return you have a right to retirement benefits.

The meaning of the word has been distorted.

[tcaudilllg]

112. How does it become a "sacred cow"?

Media companies prop up opinionated louts with messianic self-delusions.

[WinkyDink]

130. Whom are you quoting?

[rucky]

115. Cutting entitlements is equivelant to a retroactive tax increase.

Without politicians having to say they're increasing taxes.

If the 'baggers saw it that way, they'd shit themselves.

[Mudoria]

116. I agree

I've never understood how something every worker pays into all their life can be called an entitlement. I guess the English language undergoes some kind of change in DC.

[indimuse]

118. Because you ARE entitled to it...it's yours!

They are spin masters! Some words have 2 meanings...

[ctsnowman]

122. Because social security couldn't be cut.

They had to rename/rebrand it so they could hack it. And it isn't just repubs that are doing it.

[dothemath]

124. foot in mouth

How on earth does a system that you pay into with your own money become an 'entitlement'?
*********************************************************************
What? Try this: A system that you pay into with your own money become an 'entitlement'. This does not mean politicians can, and do, redefine any- and everything that meets their agenda. Digressing for a moment, a politician who claims he/she does not have an agenda but merely wants to represent about 700,000 of his fellow Americans and their viewpoints is a....... oh yeah, a LIAR.

Back to entitlements. Yes, you are ENTITLED to get back the money you put into you 401k. Just because you invested your 401k funds as recommended by others and lost a little or a lot, goes past what you are entitled to recover. You are entitled, under the law, to recover what is left. Period.

[WinkyDink]

125. But it IS an entitlement! The PROBLEM, THE EVIL, is that Republicans have made the LEGITIMATE term

into a pejorative.

"The main part of the program is sometimes abbreviated OASDI (Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance) or RSDI (Retirement, Survivors, and Disability Insurance)." Wikipedia

People need to put Republicans on the hot seat for turning their backs on THE LATTER TWO COMPONENTS.

[Vinca]

126. I miss the good old days when elders were respected rather

than thrown in the GOP miserable deadbeats pile. If it wasn't for that "pro-life" thingy they'd give us all gift certificates to Dr. Kevorkian.

[WinkyDink]

129. FTR: Teachers pay SS taxes in 36 states.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Are_teachers_who_receive_state_retirement_ever_able_to_collect_Social_Security_My_State_says_no._Do_I_have_to_move_to_one_of_the_14_States_without_state_pensions_I_need_more_info.

[on point]

131. To be precise: Defined benefit vs defined contribution

When you pay into a 401K, that is a defined contribution and it will pay out until it is exhausted. This, stock market willing, is a happy amount.

Social security is a defined benefit. When certain conditions are met, it pays out regardless of how much you have put into it. This could be more, or less than what you contribute. Some people never get out what they put in, because they die early for instance.

Unlike a 401k, you cannot pass on what you did not consume to your heirs. One exception might be the idea that SSI will pay benefits to minor surviving children.

All things considered, it is insurance. Across society the averages are supposed to balance out.

And true, it WAS set-up as a Ponzi scheme. The idea that an ever expanding population would support prior generations, has met the limits of population control and the finite resources of the planet. But this is always how humans have handled retirement and is one of the drivers for large families in prior societies. We do need to consider how to arrange things in a sustainable way, in a sustainable economy. There are many things our current capitalist system is not managing in a sustainable way and this is one. To be intellectually honest we do need to figure this out.

However, the current discussion of SSI is not really about this. It is about the way in which the right wing intends to cheat people out of the benefits they have paid for because they don't want to admit their supply side economics is a fraud and they need to increase taxes on the rich to what they used to be. They are trying to buy more room before they admit their ideas don't work. They held a party for the rich and now don't want to pay the bill. I say bring back the Eisenhower tax rates of 50 and 70 percent until the debt is paid off. Perhaps then the rich will realize how well they were doing under Clinton era rates, before they got greedy under Bush the Liar rates.

The SSI system itself is fully solvent until the 2030's without ANY changes. Small changes, like raising the SSI tax ceiling, or ensuring that all people pay in regardless of source of income (hedge fund traders and dividend babies should pay in too), would clear up solvency for at least another hundred years and would allow us time to transition from Ponzi to sustainable insurance program.

[nolabels]

132. That's easy, the neo-cons, corporations,republicans,etc get thier orders from......

the higher-ups to call it that.........and there you have it.

Remember the ones that steal the most gold get to make the rules ;-)

[midnight]

133. Sounds like paying out retirement benefits for elected officials is also

an entitlement and needs to be gotten rid of?

[Recursion]

134. Because you're "entitled" to the money after you've paid in

I'm not sure why the word "entitlement" has come to culturally mean the opposite of what it means: something you deserve by right.

[Deep13]

135. You're entitled to get what you paid for. nt

[Historic NY]

136. When they have to pay you back?

[TahitiNut]

141. As a mental exercise, just substitute the word "earnings" and regard the similarity.

(See my response above for further insight.)

[certainot]

142. easy. americans let 1000 radio stations create that reality for guys like the kochs, by allowing

loudmouthed liars to read coordinated think tank material, repeat it all over the country for 20 years, on public airwaves, while protected by call screeners, while the americans give them a free speech free ride.

really easy.

[struggle4progress]

143. since the reagan era, the gop has been counting social security withholding to

"balance" the budget, so future payouts will "threaten" future military spending

It'll be a choice between guns and grandma -- so grandma gets painted as a greedy old biddy with a sense of entitlement

[BrklynLiberal]

145. The repukes lie better than the Dems tell the truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Because the repukes know how to frame an argument and use semantics much more effectively than Democrats
Why isn't George Lakoff REQUIRED READING for the Dems and their strategists?

[The Wizard]

146. They like to include veterans benefits

in the entitlement frame, but veterans benefits are earned benefits. As long as the Republicans own the media they will continue to frame things as they want them perceived.

[Gregorian]

148. When warmongering psychopaths own the media.

When those who never got to live healthy childhoods run the country. They also have horrible taste in music, I might add.

[jwirr]

150. And it isn't even that we as individuals pay into it. Some of us did

not pay in enough to cover what we get back but our children and grandchildren are paying in so that we can be taken care of. You are right - Social Security is not an entitlement like they define the word.

[earcandle]

152. True dat. I think we need to sack the Republican Party as a viable legitimate electable party.

Fuck them  Disempower them.  Ignore them.  Divorce them. 
Starve them.  Don't work for them.  Fuck them. 

[katty]

154. only entitlements for: corporations and the rich, it's called

corporate welfare.

[Kablooie]

155. Shut up and drink your tea.

It's kool-aid flavored!

[DefenseLawyer]

157. Social Security isn't a 401(k)

There is really no way to discuss it at all as long as people are lead to believe that social security is a personal retirement plan.

[SoulSearcher]

161. It's so broken, not sure discussion now helps anyway.

[DefenseLawyer]

165. Actually it isn't broken at all

The structure is solid. The only people who insist that it is "broken" are the people that want to take all of that social security tax money (and yes, it is a tax) and pour it down the Wall Street hole.

[bvar22]

176. Bullshit....Social Security is NOT "broken".

Social Security is running a SURPLUS,
is fully solvent, and will be paying FULL benefits until 2037 if absolutely nothing is done.
Again, if absolute NOTHING is DONE.
If The Cap is raised, Social Security will be solvent indefinitely.



There is NO "crisis".

[DesertFlower]

158. whenever i hear social security referred to

as an entitlement i want to scream.

[Turbineguy]

168. When Wall Street

thinks they are entitled to it.

[colorado_ufo]

169. It's a transfer program, NOT an entitlement!

[peace frog]

177. What we thought was ours, is actually theirs

Just ask, they'll tell you. What, you expected to get back what you paid in? Silly wage slaves!

[Corruption Winz]

179. C'mon people. Don't be foolish...

So, you fund it with your own hard work. Yes, you give all you can to society in hopes of being rewarded at or near the end of your life. Obviously, you just asking for your own share.

But.. why should YOU get it, when someone who sits in his office feeding off the poor could use it for another boat or plane?

Use your heads, people.