I try to avoid opinions about things that directly involve my own well-being for two reasons. First, my opinion is open to suspicion by others, because it has to do with my own welfare. But second, I don’t trust my own judgment either. I notice this problem a lot when people talk about child reaing. It’s one of those places where "what I did was right" is rampant. Likewise with taxation. During the 2004 campaign, someone said to me, "Well, I’m not voting for anyone who will raise my taxes. I can’t afford it right now." At the time, I thought that was a pretty shallow thing to say, but it probably has a lot to say about how people actually vote.
That said, I still have an opinion about Social Security and Medicare, even though I am a recipient of both. In a comment this morning, Joy says, "About a year before former Gov. Ann Richards died she told Larry king on CNN exactly what you just wrote about bankrupting the country and when something has to be done saying we’re very sorry but we have to get rid of Social Security and Medicare because we have no money to pay for these ‘entitlement’ programs." I also wrankle at the use of the term "entitlement programs" to describe Social Security and Medicare.
They’re using the term "entitlement" is a contemptuous way – meaning quite the opposite. They are implying that the elderly are free-loading on the rest of
us them. I didn’t feel like that when I was younger, and I don’t feel like that now. Nor am I interested in mounting any complex argument to defend that position. It seems to me that common decency ought to be enough to carry the point. But I would like to say something about their methodology. In a recent post [
“trickle up” economics…], I suggested that they are trying to destroy these programs by essentially bankrupting the country so we can no longer afford them. That is neither a democratic or political method that deserves reinforcment. So, in the scenario they propose, the only elderly people who can be supported or receive health care are the ones that can still work, the rich ones, or the ones with rich [and generous] kids.
In China, there is no social security. It is the stated cultural norm that the sons [and their wives] care for the elderly parents. That worked okay until they passed the one child per couple law. So if you don’t have a son, you have no retirement. Many female children have been killed, given up for foreign adoption, or, as we saw there in an orphanage, left on some doorstep. The orphanage was all girls [because that’s the only kind of orphans they have]. Surely we can beat that.
It’s a difficult problem, expensive, hard to administer, vulnerable to fraud, but it seems a worthy endeavor. The welfare of children and the elderly seems to me to be a bottom line obligation of organized society. To simply ignore it and try to passively destroy our attempts to deal with it is inconsistent with either American or human values. Why people are drawn to this kind of callousness in simply beyond me. So, I pass this request on if you want something to click…
| |
|
John,
There is a consensus among American “elites” on Social Security. Most CEOs, pundits, and elected officials favor cutting and / or privatizing it, claiming that doing so will reduce the deficit. That claim is a lie, since Social Security is fully funded through 2037, pays for itself 100%, and doesn’t add one dime to the deficit.
We can’t expect these CEOs, Republicans, pundits and Blue Dogs to stop propagating their lies about Social Security. Instead, if we are going to stop this alliance of elites from cutting Social Security, the first thing we must do is promise ourselves we won’t ever buy into their lies.
That’s why at Daily Kos we’re asking you to sign a pledge, to yourself, promising you will never support cutting or privatizing Social Security. Click here to sign the pledge.
With the elite consensus in place, the only reason Social Security hasn’t been cut or privatized already is because the public is overwhelmingly opposed. If, for whatever reason, a significant number of progressives start supporting Social Security cuts, then the elites will have the cover they need and the battle will be lost.
You are the first and last line of defense for Social Security. No matter what happens in the coming weeks and months, and no matter who ends up supporting cuts in Social Security, we must stand united in our opposition.
It is imperative that you promise yourself to never support cutting or privatizing Social Security. Take the pledge now.
Solidarity,
Chris Bowers
Campaign Director, Daily Kos
|
|
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.