I am not Liberal. Are you?

[Pale Rider]

Any given Government program= X amount of dollars.
>>> EXAMPLE <<<
Liberal plan to increase is X + 10%

Conservative plan to increase is X + 5%

Liberals say that = TAX CUT!!

See the Liberal (assinine) logic?

Since it's not as big a bump as they propose, that is the same in their minds as a CUT.

[once a runner]

It's a matter of semantics. Since the Bush plan proposes less than the current plan offers, it's a cut. If you're promised a $1,000 raise and find you only have a $250 raise, it sure feels like a cut.

[LionPride]

[quote="once a runner";p="94721"]It's a matter of semantics. Since the Bush plan proposes less than the current plan offers, it's a cut. If you're promised a $1,000 raise and find you only have a $250 raise, it sure feels like a cut.[/quote]

Ok OAR, now why don't you tell the whole story on how that works, instead of the liberal talking points that make the case against Bush's plan.

Using your numbers, does EVERYONE's INCREASE in benefits go from 1,000 to 250? I know the answer, I just want you to admit it.

[southpaw]

Semantics is liberal spin! Benefit cut = Tax raise! lol Maybe in the world of Pelosi and Reid who are desperate to say anything to stop the overhaul of SS.

Two reasons for the stalling on SS overhaul. The AARP is against it and they have a very powerful lobby and any plan with privatization would bring a democratic filibuster.

[fleaflicker]

Well, reducing benefits, is still, in a way, a cut. With the inflation rate constantly rising, the spending power of a dollar goes down. When a person's wages don't keep up with inflation, it may be a slight increase in the amount of DOLLARS earning, but the SPENDING POWER of that money has gone down. So far all practical purposes, that isn't a raise in pay, in fact, as far as spending power is concerned, it is a PAY CUT. Yes, the amount of money, in dollars, has increased, but those 15 dollars an hour aren't worth as much as the 12 dollars an hour said person was earning two years ago. In other words, in said comparision (just as an example, not actually true), one would be able to buy more with 12 dollars in 2003 than 15 dollars in 2005.

[LionPride]

[quote="fleaflicker";p="94779"]Well, reducing benefits, is still, in a way, a cut. With the inflation rate constantly rising, the spending power of a dollar goes down. When a person's wages don't keep up with inflation, it may be a slight increase in the amount of DOLLARS earning, but the SPENDING POWER of that money has gone down. So far all practical purposes, that isn't a raise in pay, in fact, as far as spending power is concerned, it is a PAY CUT. Yes, the amount of money, in dollars, has increased, but those 15 dollars an hour aren't worth as much as the 12 dollars an hour said person was earning two years ago. In other words, in said comparision (just as an example, not actually true), one would be able to buy more with 12 dollars in 2003 than 15 dollars in 2005.[/quote]

Once again, tell the whole story. Whose increase in benefits are being reduced?

[fleaflicker]

Well, in this case, the people receiving social security are receiving less increases, and these increases may not be able to keep up with inflation. If those increases do not keep up with inflation, it is, in essence, like a cut in social security.

Above, I was just giving a for instance example to show how that could be a cut in social security by using a person's wages. I wasn't necessarily saying that the wage earners, in this instance, are taking pay cuts. I was demonstrating how an increased income that doesn't keep with inflation would be a decreased income.

[TheAnalyst]

So if I get a raise next year at my job, but it isn't as much as this year, it's a pay cut? Bet my bosses will laugh at me when I bring that up at review time.

[southpaw]

With private accounts there is no need for inflation adjustments because of the awesome power of compound interest from the investments!

Apparently most of you liberals don't understand how it all works.


I'm still waiting on OAR and FF to explain what their solution to the SS problem is. Or are you just going to be typical liberals and complain and crticize the other side and offer no ideas of your own.

C'mon OAR I answered your questions. How bout it?

[fleaflicker]

I believe that each individual person should be able to invest a portion of their social security as they please for bigger returns. However, I am explaining how a reduced increase can function as a pay cut. Being a free thinking individual, I am allowed to agree with points from both sides.