McCain's Ignorance about Social Security Is the Real "Disgrace"
On Monday, July 7, Senator John McCain told a Denver town hall meeting that Social Security, as originally conceived more than 70 years ago, is an "absolute disgrace."
"Americans have got to understand that we are paying present-day retirees with the taxes paid by young workers in America today," Senator McCain said. "And that's a disgrace. It's an absolute disgrace and has got to be fixed."
Senator McCain's comment is yet another example that he is out of touch. It is a disgrace that after being in the U.S. Congress for 26 years, the Senator doesn't understand how the Social Security system works. It's always been pay-as-you-go, with today's workers paying for today's retirees.
It's a disgrace is that this is news to John McCain.
Working Americans understand that Social Security is the contract between the generations. It has served our country well since FDR signed it into law. But multi-millionaires like John McCain and George W. Bush don't have to worry about making ends meet and they could care less a program that has proven its worth for generations of Americans.
What Bush and McCain want to do to Social Security is privatize it, destroying a system that works just to benefit the wealthy folks who bankroll their campaigns.
John McCain admits that he doesn't know a lot about the economy. Now we also learn that he doesn't know a lot about Social Security.
Earlier this week, he said he would balance the budget by the end of his first term, yet he doesn't tell people that the only way he can do that is by cutting Social Security and Medicare, health care and education funding -- all the programs working Americans rely on to help them navigate through their lives.
John McCain shares the same misplaced priorities of George W. Bush. These guys are two peas in a pod. They're the same on the economy. They're the same on Iraq. And they're the same on Social Security. Now, he's bringing in the Bush team to help him out. And he's bringing back the Bush goal of undermining Social Security.
Just like George W. Bush, McCain's out to destroy something he knows nothing about. When they combine ignorance with power, they leave it to the rest of us to pick up the pieces from the damage they cause. Bush tried to destroy Social Security and we fought him tooth and nail.
If John McCain thinks he can do what we kept Bush from doing, he's got another thing coming. The American people won't let him destroy Social Security.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Unfortunately, we'll never no if privatized social security works unless we try it, right? Wrong. It's already been tried in Chile and 29 other countries. Here, http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9404, is a link to an op-ed that will give you a little taste of what privatized retirement can do. If you truly care about senior citizens, you need to understand this.
McCain is right. It is a disgrace. Started as 2% of income (1% employee, 1% employer). It is now over 12% (a 6-fold increase in 70 years). Poor young people paying for rich retired people. How does that make any sense? At least as a start, means test our current system.
I'll take whatever I'm entitled to based on my working history. At best SS is a supplement, not a primary retirement income.......period. We need to maintain this sytem. The government needs to stop borrowing and tampering with it and then complain when they have to put the money back. If any modifications need to be made, do not send payments to Americans who retire on a registered income of $250K or more, that would help.
Another contrived straw man piece.
From what the author has posted, it appears that McCain knows exactly what Social Security (SS) is about. It's a system that forces lower and middle class Americans (who work) to support one of many classes of government dependents, while they collect only a pittance from the hated rich people.
The income US SS provides seasoned citizens is not enough to live on. It never was intended to. It is now and always has fallen short of the workers' expectations. It is a good plan if your goal is to make people dependent on you keeping your job, and to keep them demanding more of other peoples' earnings, but little else.
Of course, we don't want Americans to be homeless and starving in their old age, so we have to come up with a plan that allows them, then us, to have the funds needed to be independent in the society we've built.
Since it would cost double or triple the amount of the payments to properly fund everyone, the better idea is to personalize each individual's SS account.
We need to revise SS to create Personal Security accounts where you put money in your own retirement account, that you cannot touch, and that the US Congress cannot touch. As has been suggested, it should not become mandatory to switch to a new system if you are not comfortable with it.
Young people, up to 30 years old, ought to be jumping on this idea.
When I observe the ignorance on the subject displayed on this thread on HuffPo, I shudder to think what must be going on at Fox News.
Below is a list of John McCain's income taken from his website why is he receiving social security? With all of the money that he and his wife have?
Senate Salary: $161,675 $161,708
Book Royalty Income: $80,390 $176,508
Social Security Income: $22,104 $23,157
US Navy Pension *: $56,496 $58,358
Not to defend McCain, but apparently you don't understand either. Social Security is NOT welfare!
No it is not welfare. It is a social insurance program with defined returns based on contributions backed by a promise. I totally disagree with Mcentee. The problem is that Social Security has never been run the way it was supposed to be.
I wonder if Afscme's pension is pay as you go. I wonder why state and local workers covered under other pensions fought for so long for their right to opt out of social security.
Are you saying that people who pay into SS all of their working life should not be eligable to recieve what they've paid for?
Interesting.
How about this? If everyone paid into their own personal accounts, then they wouldn't have to (in your perception) take away from funds that someone else might need.
Of course, that couldn't happen right away. But if we start personalizing SS now, then future generations wouldn't have that perception problem.
He gets a social security check because he is entitled to it. But if he thinks it's so wrong, why doesn't he return the checks to the treasury?
BTW, the "US Navy Pension" is really disability payments. He is considered to be 100% disabled.
"National Disgrace?'
If these people had to work for a living, they'd know that by the time they get to be old, their bodies are worn out. When these elitists get done jawing about unraveling the entire social network of the government to line their pockets, maybe they can also explain what they're going to do with millions of retired workers, who, without Social Security benefits, can't afford to live day to day.
You say you're young, and don't like paying into this? What fantasy world are you in, that you are so sure you're going to end up wealthy and not need it when you're old? Nonsense.
Oh well, it's campaign season, lot's of useless rhetoric flying.
Well, if it is such a disgrace then why does he not send back his check?
But multi-millionaires like John McCain and George W. Bush don't have to worry about making ends meet and they could care less about a program that has proven its worth for generations of Americans.
This is so true. John McCain should refuse the Social Security check he collects every month along with his disability payment. How can he in good conscience accept this? Oh yes I forgot, the War Hero, ex POW doesn't have a conscience. I agree that the system is broken and one of the biggest ways that shows that it is broken is allowing millionaires to collect payments. There should be a net worth question attached. If your net worth exceeds a certain amount, you are not entitled to it. Another group that should be excluded are people that move into this country and then are able to claim disability payments.
I would not want a Republican in office no matter who was running. But John McCain is the dumbest of the bunch. As long as all the baby boomers know what he is going to do to end Social Security he will not win.
Make sure to let your friends know that John McCain intends to end Social Security.
My suggestion to Senator Obama is to bring our troops home, reduce the defense budget and close military bases around the world. We can use the money saved for things like solar powered electricity, wind power, better roads, better schools and SOCIAL SECURITY.
AND ALL MY IDEAS WILL CREATE JOBS TOO.
OBAMA 08
"What Bush and McCain want to do to Social Security is privatize it, destroying a system that works just to benefit the wealthy folks who bankroll their campaigns."
First of all, what Bush proposed was both VOLUNTARY and PARTIAL privatization. Hmm, I suppose Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) also wanted to destroy the program when the Commission he co-chaired endorsed the very same idea?
Booo$hie wanted to cover his butt about tanking Wall St. probably because he's bankrupted America -- as well as make bundles for all those fund managers who'd get on the dole to do the public's business. Who really wins here? Not We the People.
My husband and I are less than 10 years away from collecting SS. This is not a joke to us, but our survival. If is crazy to jerk Baby Boomers around like this.
We have paid into SS since we were both young to help support our parents and grandparents. That is how SS works. For McCain to say it's a disgrace for young folks to pay for it is immoral and dangerous to all the seniors survival. No one talks about what it was like for old foks before SS.
if McCain has his way, young folks will have to support their parents and grandparents.
Think about that!!!!!!!!!!!!
Imagine if you (and your employer matching) had paid into something with a much better rate of return (not to mention something you could pass on to your children and/or spouse in the event of your death).
Think about that!!!!!!!!!!!
Because investments are paying such wonderful returns now - you can really depend on that. My July statement for my retirement account was a joke. If things continue as they are, the next statement may be a bill. Keeping it under the mattress would produce nearly as good a return.
Sub-prime mortgages, perhaps?
Think about your mommy daddy, out of work uncles...grammy...even disabled children....living with you...in poverty. Without a social safety net.... our country would be full of theives and perhaps neighbors stealing from you just trying to get by.
You mean like those smart folks who worked for Enron?
My wife and I are less than 10 years from collecting SS and I hope they do pass SS personalization. They shouldhave done it decades ago when, instead of making it permenently solvent, they raised the amount we pay in so they could have more campaign funding. (Thank you Democratic Party).
Though one can disagree with privatization, McCain's comments are also consistent with Gore's policy of putting SS in a "lockbox." The point is, SS is (should be) an annuity. Annuities are based on interest on a fixed investment. That investment should have restrictions on it. It shouldn't be used for today's cash needs. Only when this is done will SS be "secure." Whether the investment is held by individuals (privatazation) or the state (lockbox), the annuity concept differs from what SS, as the author rightly notes, has always been. The question is, since the government has proven itself unable to keep its mitts off the money, should it be sequestered like an annuity?
Bottom line, this quote by McCain is a very slender reed on which to base this author's attack, and makes the author appear more ignorant (and opportunisitic) about this issue than McCain.
You know, never mind the up-front increase in payroll taxes required to fund this change without cutting existing retirees' benefits ("Largest Tax Increase in History"). Let's also consider the following:
The economic consequence of implementing your proposal is that Social Security would become the single largest retirement fund in existence -- and it would be managed by Federal bureaucrats. Are you _really, really_ sure you want a pack of unelected officials managing the single largest investment in the American economy?
Are they better educated about their job then the elected ones who seem to know nothing?
Heck of a job Brownie *
You misread. I didn't make a proposal.
McCain KNOWS what's going on. He wants you to believe that he's ignorant to the facts. McCain's assets were not acquired through ignorance.
The GOP is simply banking on whether voters will, ONCE AGAIN, fall for their rhetoric hook, line, and sinker.
He got his assets through marrying a rich woman. Not necessarily inconsistent with ignorance.
Bet Mccain knows his buddies have stolen social security funds...Of course he wants to fix (privatizes steal) before everyone finds out....
If you take away every government program that benefits the vast majority of people, and still compel them to pay taxes, what you're really doing is re-establishing a social system based entirely on the notion of "tribute." The rich compel the rest to pay for their upkeep - just like it always used to be in the "good old days" before the American Revolution, the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution, and so on. The fact that McCain, the Republicans (and, mark my words, pretty soon the Democrats) feel comfortable campaigning for a return to the age of plunder tells you just how far we've strayed from the "quaint" notion of liberty. We read about ancient societies where the people were forced to build monuments to their rulers, and we wonder how on earth the people allowed it. Now we know.
Only a liberal can equate government seizure and redistribution of wealth (as done via the Soc Security program) with "liberty".
McCain is TOO RICH TO CARE about social security.
Republicans constantly try to STEAL YOUR MONEY for their privatized corporations' PROFITEERING.
STEALING from the American public is the name of their game.
Get used to it.
You have an interesting perspective on stealing. I happen to think it's stealing when the government takes 14% of my pay (my 7% and my employer's 7% "contribution") and hands it over to a bunch of old geezers. Of course it's a "popular" program because these folks were only giving up closer to 3 or 4% when they were contributing and the worker to geezer ration was on the order of 10 to one. And the rate of return that you'll see (if you see it before this pyramid scheme collapses under its own weight or before you die) is pathetic. Not to mention that if you kick the bucket before you see any return then your estate gets nary a penny. That is government THEFT at its worst.
Um... is insurance theft, if you don't file a claim? Remember that you are required to hold auto insurance in most states in order to own and drive a car. You are paying into a fund, and the contract is that some day you will be paid by the fund. It's one thing to be concerned about its ability to pay you when the time comes (a concern I share). But is it really theft, when there is an expectation that you will in future receive benefits?
If You "kick the bucket" before you reach retirement age, your wife will receive payments when she reaches retirement age from your having worked 10 or more years; your dependent children will receive payments until they are age 18 or so.
Social security is a good program that helps support millions of elders, disabled people and children, so don't knock it without first checking the facts.
Regards,
Retired senior citizen
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
