4 ms·

> is meant to highlight the other party wants to get rid of social security I didn't know if eliminating social security was actually a part of the republican

by nullc 4y ago

> is meant to highlight the other party wants to get rid of social security I didn't know if eliminating social security was actually a part of the republican platform, though it seemed very unlikely. I googled and found: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/27/false-claim-that-senate-republicans-plan-end-social-security-medicare/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/27/false-cla...

RunningDroid 4y ago
Counterpoint from a quick DDG search: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/yes-some-republican-senators-are-talking-openly-about-social-security-cuts-11667576391 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/yes-some-republican-senato... Tl;Dr: cuts, not elimination
- partiallypro 4y ago
  "Some Republicans" doesn't mean it's the party platform. Some Democrats have advocated nationalization of some social media platforms, that doesn't make it the party platform.
  - BitwiseFool 4y ago
    Indeed, and partisan politicians in safe seats also like to float ideas they know don't have a realistic chance of advancing in order to appeal to their ideological base. Every now and then Ted Cruz tweets about "Abolishing the IRS", a prospect I don't think any GOP policymakers are actually willing to fight for. They'll pay lip service to it, however.
  - alistairSH 4y ago
    The GOP has been against Social Security from the start. Their stated goal has changed variously from privatization, or voluntary enrollment, to simply slashing benefits. Goldwater, Reagan, Bush all wanted to vastly reduce SS or privatize it completely. More recently, the GOP congress at the end of Obama's term pushed him hard to compromise on cuts. In 2016, Trump was unique among GOP presidential candidates in not calling for cuts. In April of this year, Rick Scott (chair of GOP campaign apparatus) called for adding a "kill switch" on SS, Medicare, and MedicAid. Current minority leader (McCarthy) wants to couple the debt ceiling and social programs. The only reason the GOP hasn't killed SS yet is because it's a popular program.
    - parineum 4y ago
      > The only reason the GOP hasn't killed SS yet is because it's a popular program. That's the only reason politicians do anything.
      - alistairSH 4y ago
        Fair. SS is popular nationally across many socio-economic groupings. It’s almost impossible to touch (unlike something like abortion rights, which are widely supported, yet here we are looking at more bans, effectively the opposite of what the majority wants).
    - partiallypro 4y ago
      Cuts and privatization aren't "getting rid of" which is what this thread is about. It's like when Democrats want to reform something, Republicans will claim Democrats want to get rid of it. Which is false. Same here. I'm pretty sick of it and wish people would stop falling for things like that, when the proposed policies are actually very complex. Would privatization be bad? I don't know, I've never seen a good retort other than "markets have downturns." Would limiting firearms to someone 21+ be bad? I don't think so, but the only thing I hear against it is 18 year olds can be in the military. Those arguments somehow work on people. I guess real gripes about it don't fit into campaign ads or speeches.
      - alistairSH 4y ago
        Privatization - SS would be replaced with a pay-as-you-go private account, similar to a 401k. I have seen some suggestions where SS is partially kept, or it becomes optional, either way, it probably kills the system because there won’t be enough money coming into the system to pay out.
        agensaequivocum 4y ago
        There's already not enough money going in. It's going to get worse because no one is having kids.
  - smileysteve 4y ago
    Rick Scott, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee
- atdrummond 4y ago
  Lee, Johnson and Scott are outside the GOP mainstream on this one. Even historically Republicans who have wanted to “kill SS” have wanted to replace it with something like they have in parts of Texas (https://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/05/12/how-three-texas-counties-created-personal-social-security-accounts-and-prospered/amp/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/05/12/how-...). Hell, Nixon (before he stepped down) was ready to push for a negative income tax.
  - smileysteve 4y ago
    Rick Scott, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee - is outside the GOP mainstream. Interesting context.

by nullc 4y ago

RunningDroid 4y ago

Counterpoint from a quick DDG search: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/yes-some-republican-senators-are-talking-openly-about-social-security-cuts-11667576391 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/yes-some-republican-senato... Tl;Dr: cuts, not elimination

partiallypro 4y ago
"Some Republicans" doesn't mean it's the party platform. Some Democrats have advocated nationalization of some social media platforms, that doesn't make it the party platform.
- BitwiseFool 4y ago
  Indeed, and partisan politicians in safe seats also like to float ideas they know don't have a realistic chance of advancing in order to appeal to their ideological base. Every now and then Ted Cruz tweets about "Abolishing the IRS", a prospect I don't think any GOP policymakers are actually willing to fight for. They'll pay lip service to it, however.
- alistairSH 4y ago
  The GOP has been against Social Security from the start. Their stated goal has changed variously from privatization, or voluntary enrollment, to simply slashing benefits. Goldwater, Reagan, Bush all wanted to vastly reduce SS or privatize it completely. More recently, the GOP congress at the end of Obama's term pushed him hard to compromise on cuts. In 2016, Trump was unique among GOP presidential candidates in not calling for cuts. In April of this year, Rick Scott (chair of GOP campaign apparatus) called for adding a "kill switch" on SS, Medicare, and MedicAid. Current minority leader (McCarthy) wants to couple the debt ceiling and social programs. The only reason the GOP hasn't killed SS yet is because it's a popular program.
  - parineum 4y ago
    > The only reason the GOP hasn't killed SS yet is because it's a popular program. That's the only reason politicians do anything.
    - alistairSH 4y ago
      Fair. SS is popular nationally across many socio-economic groupings. It’s almost impossible to touch (unlike something like abortion rights, which are widely supported, yet here we are looking at more bans, effectively the opposite of what the majority wants).
  - partiallypro 4y ago
    Cuts and privatization aren't "getting rid of" which is what this thread is about. It's like when Democrats want to reform something, Republicans will claim Democrats want to get rid of it. Which is false. Same here. I'm pretty sick of it and wish people would stop falling for things like that, when the proposed policies are actually very complex. Would privatization be bad? I don't know, I've never seen a good retort other than "markets have downturns." Would limiting firearms to someone 21+ be bad? I don't think so, but the only thing I hear against it is 18 year olds can be in the military. Those arguments somehow work on people. I guess real gripes about it don't fit into campaign ads or speeches.
    - alistairSH 4y ago
      Privatization - SS would be replaced with a pay-as-you-go private account, similar to a 401k. I have seen some suggestions where SS is partially kept, or it becomes optional, either way, it probably kills the system because there won’t be enough money coming into the system to pay out.
      - agensaequivocum 4y ago
        There's already not enough money going in. It's going to get worse because no one is having kids.
- smileysteve 4y ago
  Rick Scott, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee
atdrummond 4y ago
Lee, Johnson and Scott are outside the GOP mainstream on this one. Even historically Republicans who have wanted to “kill SS” have wanted to replace it with something like they have in parts of Texas (https://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/05/12/how-three-texas-counties-created-personal-social-security-accounts-and-prospered/amp/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/merrillmatthews/2011/05/12/how-...). Hell, Nixon (before he stepped down) was ready to push for a negative income tax.
- smileysteve 4y ago
  Rick Scott, chair of the National Republican Senatorial Committee - is outside the GOP mainstream. Interesting context.