Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If he did - well that was before most people living today were even born. There has been plenty of time to change it around. No one has, not Clinton, not Obama or any of the many Democrats in Congress.
You can't go on forever blaming things on some long-ago past that we've had plenty of time to see wasn't a good policy and get it undone.
It was 26 years ago is it your contention that most people living today are under 26?
To change it they would have to change the tax rate back to pre Reagan. Which means the top tax rate would be in the 70% range. Do you think that would have been possible in yhe last 26 years?
You have read none of the links nor have you studied up on your own. You just made something up and threw it against the wall to see if it would stick. Pay attention now.
SS during the Johnson era was a pay as you go system there waaas no extra.
It was Reagan that took a short term shortage and claimed to fix it for a hundred years. Raising the patroll taxes on the middle class and putting the money in the General fund. Thus paying for his tax cuts for the rich.
First off, drop the self-rightous attitude.
The lowest income tax rates when Reagan took office were 14%. They were lowered to 11%.
And you fail to understand ONLY Congress can rasie or lower taxes. Reagan was not in Congress. And Congress was controlled by Democrats. So blame democrats for cutting taxes "for the rich."
The Johnson Administration was the first to mess with the social security budget.
When revenues flow into the four Social Security and Medicare trust funds, the money is instantly handed over to the Treasury, which issues non-marketable long-term IOU's to the trust funds. These IOU's are listed as assets by the funds. But, through the wonders of government accounting, they are not listed as liabilities on the government's on-budget budget. They are liabilities only on the off-budget budget, which most Americans are unaware of. This chicanery has been going on ever since the Johnson Administration
First lets deal with facts instead of a right wing propaganda made up by Rush Limbaugh.
Social Security was NOT a huge slush fund for congress to spend and just writ IOUs for. The truth is that SS was set up as a pay as you go fund. With minor adjustments from time to time to keep it solvent.
Now comes Reagan in the early 80's He picked Greenspan (before Greenspan was fed chief) to head a commitee to overhaul SS so it would be solvent for 100 years. Or at least that is how it was sold.
Well this is where the big slush fund came from and any lock box should have been used then.
Instead Reagan used it to pay for his tax cuts for the rich.
do you remember that crook named madoff?
he was convicted of doing a ponzie scheme, the same exact thing that social security is based upon. hence the federal goverment is doing nothing but commiting a crime in making each and every american pay into the crime called social security.
The lowest income tax rates when Reagan took office were 14%. They were lowered to 11%.
And you fail to understand ONLY Congress can rasie or lower taxes. Reagan was not in Congress. And Congress was controlled by Democrats. So blame democrats for cutting taxes "for the rich."
The Johnson Administration was the first to mess with the social security budget.
When revenues flow into the four Social Security and Medicare trust funds, the money is instantly handed over to the Treasury, which issues non-marketable long-term IOU's to the trust funds. These IOU's are listed as assets by the funds. But, through the wonders of government accounting, they are not listed as liabilities on the government's on-budget budget. They are liabilities only on the off-budget budget, which most Americans are unaware of. This chicanery has been going on ever since the Johnson Administration
You can write the same crap all you want the fact remains that when Johnson was in office SS was a pay as you go system. The surplous if there was any was used in the following year.
Reagan sold the 100 year fix that allowed the huge surplus in SS that he used in the general fund. That huge surplus was never there before.
There were no long term IOU's before Reagan period.
do you remember that crook named madoff?
he was convicted of doing a ponzie scheme, the same exact thing that social security is based upon. hence the federal goverment is doing nothing but commiting a crime in making each and every american pay into the crime called social security.
SS is no more of a Ponzi scheme than any insurance policy. That must have sounded good on talk radio but it fails.
First lets deal with facts instead of a right wing propaganda made up by Rush Limbaugh.
Social Security was NOT a huge slush fund for congress to spend and just writ IOUs for. The truth is that SS was set up as a pay as you go fund. With minor adjustments from time to time to keep it solvent.
Now comes Reagan in the early 80's He picked Greenspan (before Greenspan was fed chief) to head a commitee to overhaul SS so it would be solvent for 100 years. Or at least that is how it was sold.
Well this is where the big slush fund came from and any lock box should have been used then.
Instead Reagan used it to pay for his tax cuts for the rich.
Reagan didn't pay for his tax cuts for the rich (or anything really)
Look at any chart showing the national debt. It skyrocketed under him. He expected the following generations to pay it off, (just like every politician after him)
Johnson combined SS with the federal budget and converted it into a general fund to hide the cost of the Vietnam War. In fact, ever since the social security trust fund was created back in the 30s, the surplus (if there was one - mostly in the 60s) was robbed and spent as if it were part of the general fund. All Johnson did was make it easier to take that surplus money, since nobody would notice if it were part of a unified budget. The early 80s recession threatened to put SS into a deficit, which is why taxes were increased in 1983. Under that same legislation, the SSTF was to be detached from the federal budget once again to protect it from the general fund. Beginning in 1993 it only appeared in the unified budget. In the 90s - under Clinton - surplus funds from the SS trust fund were taken and invested in treasury securities and once again found their way into the general fund to cover the budget deficit. This is why the surplus was quickly vaporized when the early 00s recession hit, because the economic slowdown had cut into revenue collected by the social security payroll tax, uncovering the deficit once again.
Reagan didn't pay for his tax cuts for the rich (or anything really)
Look at any chart showing the national debt. It skyrocketed under him. He expected the following generations to pay it off, (just like every politician after him)
Reagan is the one who set us up on the path to financial ruin......it just took a long time to get there.
He was the first to have the huge SS excess. And he still couldn't balance the budget.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
