My brain is turning to tapioca on the National Ponzi Scheme. Anyway, here’s the latest from the NY Times titled “Social Security: Help for the poor or help for all?” It seems that some Democrats are opposed to Dubya’s plan for “progressive indexing” because the political support for the program derives from the fact that everybody receives a check:
In choosing to preserve benefits for the less well off and not raise taxes on more affluent people, Mr. Bush sought to cast himself in the Democrats' traditional role as a defender of the poor. In his radio address on Saturday, he said: "By providing more generous benefits for low-income retirees, we'll make good on this commitment: If you work hard and pay into Social Security your entire life, you will not retire into poverty."And here’s a shocker: instead of paring back benefits, the Dems want to raise taxes on the rich. Whatever. Pass me another beer.
But critics, including most Democratic lawmakers, say that such an approach would undermine a central bargain conceived during the New Deal: that Social Security is not just a welfare program for the poor but a form of social insurance that people at all income levels pay into and reap rewards from.