Tax Time With Hillary
Talking about Social Security, Hillary Clinton has taken to bashing privatization and has all but admitted she plans to raise taxes:
Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton promised retirees that if elected president she will not cut Social Security benefits, raise the retirement age or privatize the taxpayer-funded systemhe New York senator told the AARP’s legislative conference that she would bring a “renewed national commitment to Social Security” to the White House.
“This is the most successful domestic program in the history of the United States,” Clinton said to applause from seniors gathered in Washington to push their policy agenda. “When I’m president, privatization is off the table because it’s not the answer to anything.”
She also said she does not support cutting benefits or increasing the retirement age.
So what’s left? Foisting more of the cost on taxpayers in order to "save" a failed program. But pumping more money into Social Security coffers isn’t the way to go. I think Sen. Brownback explains the issue well.
Sam Brownback pulled some change from his left pants pocket and placed the coins in the right pocket.
As visual demonstrations go, it was quite low-budget. But the Republican presidential candidate wanted to convey a message about what he considers a big budget disaster.
Shifting coins from pocket to pocket doesn’t create more money – just as keeping Social Security in its present form will eventually provide little benefit to workers, said Brownback, who is a U.S. senator from Kansas.
Without a significant fix to the system, the government eventually must choose one of three unviable options, Brownback told a small crowd Tuesday at Bonhoeffer’s Cafe. It can increase the federal deficit by upping its contribution, increase taxes or lower individual benefits, he said.
But if the government wants to keep Social Security a fair and viable resource for future workers, it can provide the option for market-based accounts, Brownback said.
The security and safety that supposedly comes with Social Security is a joke. The payouts are tiny, especially if you live in an area like, say, New York, Boston, or Washington with a particularly high cost of living, and they’re far less than the return you’d get investing the same amount on your own. And as for "security," well, a program that’s likely to crash and burn before my generation retires doesn’t exactly sound "secure" to me. And that’s why Clinton has implicitly agreed that continuing the program will require a tax raise — meaning even more taxpayer money taken in favor of an under-performing, unnecessary government program.
