That should be the headline in tomorrow's newspapers. But not many will play it that way.
Bush pushed bogus predictions about Social Security. This business about how the system started off with a 16:1 ratio of workers to retirees and now it's got 3:1 and in a few years will be 2:1 is a bizarre argument. As Bob Somerby has formulated the obvious question, if the system was able to go in a few decades from a 16:1 ratio to 3:1 and is still doing fine, how much harder can it be to go to 2:1?
Of course, the funding for Social Security has been set since 1983 to anticipate the changing proportions of workers to retirees. Like all of the Republicans' demagoguery about Social Security's nonexistent "crisis," the notion that the system is a "pay as you go" arrangement is just so dishonest it reeks to high heaven.
The best part about the SOTU was to see the Democrats for once exhibit some real party discipline on something important, as evidence by their obviously declining to stand and applaud on most of the applause lines on Social Security. The Boy King seemed pretty annoyed by that.
But I was relieved to hear in the speech how well things are going in Iraq! The people there all love us, they're happy our soldiers are there, the resistance is just a few malcontented terrorists and they're almost defeated, and we've just had a brilliant birth of democracy in the election this past weekend.
Shoot, with things going that well, all of our troops should be home in, what, three, six months?
2 comments:
Hey ,when you wrote this gibberish, were you on LSD?
Shouldn't we talk about Oxycontin abuse first? - Bruce
Post a Comment