Tuesday, January 20, 2015

GOP won't give up tearing down Social Security & Medicare

The News is GOOD
After rising for a decade, the number of Americans experiencing 
financial distress from their medical bills has started to decline, 
a new survey has found.      The result provides new evidence 
that the Affordable Care Act, by providing uninsured people 
with health insurance, is also improving their financial security, 
a major goal of the law.

Michael Hiltzik

LOS ANGELES TIMES-January 19, 2015michael.hiltzik​@latimes.com
The disability program is facing a fiscal crisis that could force a cutback in crisis that could force a cutback in disability payments of about 20% starting next year; Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky) and other Republicans have signaled that they won't accept the customary remedy for similar situations, which involves reallocating some payroll tax revenue from the old-age fund to cover disability's near-term shortfall. Instead, they're demanding a full-scale fiscal rebalancing of Social Security, which in practice means benefit cuts for everyone -- disabled, retirees and their families.
A large proportion of Paul's own constituents would be harmed by his approach. In 2013, his home state of Kentucky had the fourth-highest disability rate in the country -- more than 225,000 residents, or 8.2% of the population -- fostered in part by low educational attainment and lack of gainful employment opportunities. (What has Paul done to alleviate those conditions?)
The most cynical aspect of this attack is  that it comes from some lawmakers who were helped by Social Security in their own lives. The roster includes Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), who received Social Security benefits during his college years, after his father's untimely death, and now thinks that the nation can't afford to keep paying them as currently scheduled.

Another is Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.), the sponsor of the House rules change, whose father died when he was 2 and then was raised by a single mother on Social Security and veterans benefits. Now he talks about Social Security going "bankrupt," which is flatly incorrect, and promotes a measure aimed at cutting benefits for all. This is known as climbing the ladder and pulling it up behind you. If Reed, Ryan and Paul get their way, the only option left to the rest of us will be to hold tight. ###


EARNED BENEFITS PROGRAM-Social Security

A wedge is attempting to be built pitting older generations against younger ones and trying to convince our grandkids to settle for less than what they deserve, which is a secure retirement that they earn through their work.

Every effort to curtail the onward existence of Social Security comes with the pitch to younger people, "it won't be there when you are ready to retire". 

The question, if so many people recognize and understand that by not increasing the minimum wage (most propose to $10.10 an hour) it is draining state and federal poverty programs keeping full time workers incomes so low they can't even support themselves let alone a child or a family, why is the Republican opposition so furious?  Do the Republicans really want people on "the dole"? 

Originally "the dole" was considered a government program for the unemployed, today the Republicans think any government program directed to combat poverty levels and help feed poor people such as food stamps or school free lunch programs are being wasted on people lacking initiative and just plain lazy "folk".

Of course government corporate assistance, special tax breaks, subsidies, farm programs for corporate farms are not the dole!  Money directed to private businesses and corporate, even foreign corporations, represented by millions of dollars paid to unregulated lobbyists and front groups is not government welfare.

So what does the minimum wage have to do with Social Security and the Republican opposition?  The GOP dependence on the financial favors of a few huge campaign money machines and shadow "unconnected not for profit advocate groups" may have a little bit to do with their opposition.  How many elections would the GOP win without the dark money blasting and distorting Democrat policies and values? 

Time after time every poll and expression of public opinion supports and favors Democrat ideals and positions of issues.  Yet the confusion, and constant negative rhetoric has taken a toll on election results as in Statehouses, State Legislatures and the Halls of Congress itself. 

Changes advocated for Social Security, Medicare and opposition to lifting the minimum was all have to do with profits, the amount of money the fat cats get to keep.  Payroll taxes in the percentage of paid wages are lower with lower minimum wages, increase the minimum wage more taxes would be collected for the Social Security Trust Fund for Medicare. 

It's the payroll taxes!  Think about it, higher pay, less people on the government dole, cut spending on government assistance programs, more chance to balance the federal budget, bring down the deficit, more money for the expanding Medicare rolls,  and protecting the earned benefits of Social Security.

Voucher out Medicare, snake oil solutions for future Social Security benefits and maintaining high corporate profits all the while pointing, yes, giving the finger to the working poor!  No solution to immigration without allowing low wage guest workers, no path to citizenship for millions living under the cover of darkness, and absolutely blocking every effort to empower people's the right to vote.

Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)
On the other hand, less than a third (31 percent) of Americans 65 and older favor the law. A lot of their opposition may be rooted in the misconception that Obamacare “cut” Medicare. And, of course, there’s the fact that people in the 65+ age group have access to Medicare and don’t face many of the problems the law was designed to solve - like being turned away by insurers because of pre-existing health conditions or paying sky-high premiums because of age.  {I got mine attitude}