RE: The Big Picture

[Michael Jones <powderfinger99@yahoo.com>]

<<<<
is it fair to promise these additional future revenues to a program for
retirees, 
>>>>

I don't understand the question. The excess revenues are FICA
taxes. By law the FICA taxes must be dedicated to Social
Security. Why would they be used for anything else?

<<<<
when there is a high rate of poverty and health problems among
children, and millions of Americans don't have health coverage?
>>>>

Where is the poverty? Where? Where did all the trillions go
over the past 30 years to fight "poverty"?

<<<<
Are the
President and the Republicans equally guilty of ducking hard choices
about Social Security, and simply betting on surpluses, the way a person
might anticipate winning the lottery.
>>>>

Bob Rosenblatt and his friends in Congress seem to have a lot
of similar opinions. It doesn't surprise me. So much for
objective mainstream media.

The viewpoint expressed above is front and center why we have
a Social Security problem in the first place. I have posted this information
many,many times on this forum. Unfortunately, Mr. Rosenblatt
and his colleagues in the media are more than willing to
add to the confusion.

Each time Social Security taxes were raised, the government
essentially took all the money and increase spending. A simple
example which explains this is to consider your own budget, 
which perhaps might look as follows:

* You have a monthly car payment and a mortgage.
* You have a monthly income.
* You have monthly living expenses.

Now, assume that your got extra income each month. What 
would you do with the money? The prudent course would be 
to pay down debt. Paying down the debt will increase future 
cash flow.

If you followed the course that Bob Rosenblatt suggests,
you would take the extra money and buy a new boat on loan.
The additional debt leaves you in a worse financial condition
because your debt has increased and your monthly debt servicing
payments have increased.

This is very similar to what happened when the Congress raised
the payroll taxes in 1983. The government did not pay down debt,
but increased spending and actually left the government and 
Social Security in a worse off position because the debt load
increased and the debt servicing payments increased.

This is your government at work. I disagree with nearly all of
Clinton's politics, but he is right on when says that the 62%
(which is the excess FICA taxes - the other 38% is REAL surplus
money from the operating part of the budget) should be used
to pay down debt.

It begs the question. Why does the President or Congress even 
have to recommend this? Shouldn't paying down debt be the fiscally
prudent course, done by default? Unfortunately not, because
people like Bob Rosenblatt feel absolutely no remorse about 
spending as much money as you are willing to send in. Even if 
that money is supposed to "save" Social Security.

Perhaps B. Rosenblatt is trying to bait us. Nevertheless, there
are plenty of people in the media and Washington who would spend
the country into oblivion if they could.

Michael