« Anti-abortion circular reasoning | Main | The "infinite future" of Social Security? »

February 23, 2005



I think you may have finally hit on a reasonable thought. But, once again you didn't follow through. If the American worker has the choice of how to invest that money and which funds or whatnot to place it in then things should be fine.

SS was not menat to be a sole retirement income. FDR himself said that. It was to HELP in your retirement years.

Richard 23

It's much worse.


The first prong is Bush’s ultimate gift to the rich that has the added benefit of compounding the government’s fiscal crisis. Bush hopes to use the government’s deficit as a wedge to leverage even greater cuts in government, especially the privatization of Social Security. For the strategists of the Republican Right, the privatization of Social Security is not simply, or even primarily, about lining the pockets of their Wall Street cronies. The GOP hopes that dismantling the most popular and enduring legacy of the 1930s New Deal–and as such, one of the chief sources of legitimacy for the modern Democratic Party–it will create the conditions for a decades’ long Republican domination of American mainstream politics. That’s the true agenda behind the Madison Avenue hype of Bush’s "Ownership Society."

Yes, it's about power: alienate and bleed the Democratic base, and bask in decades of authoritarian Republican tyranny.

The comments to this entry are closed.