Future cuts in Social Security and Medicare spending will be necessary.

[SuperGrover]

EEK!


(CNN) -- Democratic presidential contenders on Wednesday condemned Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's warning that future cuts in Social Security and Medicare spending will be necessary.

"If I'm president, we're simply not going to do it," Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, said during a campaign stop in Ohio, one of 10 states holding Democratic presidential contests next week.

Kerry's chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, called Greenspan's proposal an "outrage."

Distancing himself from Greenspan, President Bush said he did not believe current retirees' benefits should be cut, but restated his support for allowing younger workers to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in private accounts.

Bush insisted that his proposed budget would cut the current projected deficit of more than $500 billion in half within five years.

"As you know, in the 2000 campaign I articulated a point of view that we ought to have personal savings accounts for younger workers that would make sure those younger workers receive benefits equal to or greater than that which is expected," Bush told reporters at the White House. "I still maintain the same position."

Greenspan warned a House committee Wednesday that growing federal budget deficits and the retirement of Baby Boomers will require future cuts in Social Security and Medicare to avoid tax increases that would damage the economy. Since that population will begin to draw Social Security benefits within the decade, he said Congress has a "reasonably short" time to head off a crisis.

Greenspan's testimony to the House Budget Committee brought quick criticism from the Democratic campaign trail.

Kerry, the front-runner, said cutting Social Security would be "the wrong way to cut the deficit."

"I welcome this debate," he said. "This is a debate that I will win, and we will win, and we will restore our economy in a way that is fair to Americans without destroying the solemn contract of Social Security in this nation."

Edwards also weighed in with a written statement.

"Alan Greenspan is right to call attention to the record-shattering deficit under President George Bush," the senator said. "But it is an outrage for him to suggest that we should extend George Bush's tax cuts on unearned wealth while cutting Social Security benefits that working people earn."

Greenspan told the House committee that the Bush tax cuts -- the centerpiece of the president's economic policy -- would benefit the economy over the long run and should be extended, as the president is asking Congress to do.

Edwards proposed rolling back the tax cuts on wealthy Americans, saying doing that -- combined with a new tax on the richest 1 percent of taxpayers and the elimination of corporate subsidies and wasteful spending -- would reduce the deficit and shore up Social Security's fiscal foundations.

Greenspan said he does not support cutting benefits to current retirees.

"We have an obligation to those in and near retirement to honor what has been promised to them," he said.

[sleuth]

Originally posted by SuperGrover
"Alan Greenspan is right to call attention to the record-shattering deficit under President George Bush," the senator said. "But it is an outrage for him to suggest that we should extend George Bush's tax cuts on unearned wealth while cutting Social Security benefits that working people earn."

Typical liberal. It never ceases to amaze me that these people sincerely believe that rich people have not earned their money. Apparently they think it just magically appears in their bank accounts.

[SuperGrover]

Originally posted by sleuth14
Typical liberal. It never ceases to amaze me that these people sincerely believe that rich people have not earned their money. Apparently they think it just magically appears in their bank accounts.

doesnt it for the likes of paris hilton and others like her? anyways, seems like the first person who makes the millions is the most responsible and the rest tend to become leeches...

anyways my proposal to that once the person uses up all of their social security savings, they are placed on welfare. i remember a 20/20 or some show where the people being interviewed said that they had saved the money and should get back what they placed in the system. when the host mentioned that they have received all of what they had placed into they system within 1-2 years, they became indignant.

[Toxick]

Originally posted by SuperGrover
"If I'm president, we're simply not going to do it," Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, said during a campaign stop in Ohio, one of 10 states holding Democratic presidential contests next week.

Kerry's chief rival for the Democratic nomination, Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina, called Greenspan's proposal an "outrage."

Distancing himself from Greenspan, President Bush said he did not believe current retirees' benefits should be cut, but restated his support for allowing younger workers to invest a portion of their Social Security taxes in private accounts.

One of these days a politician will emerge who owns an actual pair of testicles, and states what he really thinks and this person is going to be the best president ever.


I only hope it happens in my lifetime.

[itsbob (Premo)]

Here's my thoughts, for whatever they're worth, on SOcial Security retirement. Scrap the retirement benefits totally, it's not the governments responsibilty to take of you or provide you an income when you retire...
If you weren't responsible enough to save for your retirement then go without.. become a greeter at Wal-Mart.. I do believe we should pay in to provide for those that becoe disabled, but that amount would be a SMALL percentage of what we pay in now.. and if you invested the money yourself SMARTLY, your retirement would increase 10 fold over what SSI is going to give you..
Don't decrease my retirement benefit, get rid of it totally.. I'm not a welfare recipient now, and don't plan on being one when I retire either!!

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally posted by itsbob
Here's my thoughts, for whatever they're worth, on SOcial Security retirement. Scrap the retirement benefits totally, it's not the governments responsibilty to take of you or provide you an income when you retire...
If you weren't responsible enough to save for your retirement then go without.. become a greeter at Wal-Mart.. I do believe we should pay in to provide for those that becoe disabled, but that amount would be a SMALL percentage of what we pay in now.. and if you invested the money yourself SMARTLY, your retirement would increase 10 fold over what SSI is going to give you..
Don't decrease my retirement benefit, get rid of it totally.. I'm not a welfare recipient now, and don't plan on being one when I retire either!!

1. This country is NOT going to allow a "drag out your dead old folks day" because they starved to death. SSI is here and it will have to stay.

2. I want to be a 67 year old welfare recipient. I have paid into it for 25 years I want to get a little back. I spent 67 years staying off welfare at least I should recoup a little SSI.

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally posted by kwillia

http://instagiber.net/smiliesdotcom/cwm/big/Duhard.gif

[Pete (Premo)]

Originally posted by kwillia
http://www.boomspeed.com/carolrobert/playnice.gif

always resorting to violence.......Ilike it

[sleuth]

If SS were to ever get the axe because they can't make it work, I hope they at least send me a check for whatever I paid into it.

I should at least get my money back if it's not going to be there when I retire.