Tuesday, January 4, 2011

Fiddling While Rome Burns

Tomorrow, Republicans will start their "showboating" in the House of Reps by reading the Constitution allowed. The whole process while take approximately 30 minutes and then it is off to the races to dismantle Obama's health care plan and slash entitlement spending (Social Security and Medicare). The Republicans are faced with two options: 1) create jobs 2) reduce the deficit. Of these two choices, it appears that the most important one is the latter. What many refuse to believe is that running short term deficits to create jobs and stabilize the economy is far better than doing the draconian practice of cutting the very programs needed to drive the economy anywhere but a ditch. I would like to focus primarily on Social Security. With the exception of defense spending, everything is "on the table" according to the Republicans- chief among which is Social Security. However, what a little reading and researching will reveal is that Social Security does not contribute one cent to the national deficit; it is self-funding. Another misconception is that Social Security is going broke. This is the first year since 1980 that Social Security will pay out more than it takes in. During those intervening years, it has accumulated a $2.5 trillion surplus according to the Congressional Budget Office. The government has borrowed this revenue to pay and fund other projects during that time and now is having trouble paying it back. If anything, having Social Security has been very beneficial for the government in times of revenue restrictions. Ergo, Social Security is not the problem.

Any cuts to Social Security will further weaken an already volatile and susceptible economy. According to the Christian Science Monitor, the Retirement Income Deficit is approximately $6.6 trillion- five times the size of the national. What this estimate means is that Social Security is going to be half the income for 2 out of 3 retirees and the only income for 1 in 5 retirees. Today, only half of workers in the private sector have retirement plans. Cuts in Social Security would result in many more millions of Americans dropping below the poverty level, thus putting more strain on our government and economy. Why reduce benefits on a program that does not even add to the deficit. It is clear that the Republicans, especially the Tea Partiers, are either oblivious to the ramifications of their stances or just don't give a damn. Either way, those who advocate reducing much needed social programs (programs that allow people to buy food and much needed medicine) are not fit to serve as the people's representatives and champions.

Much of the philosophy behind many of these proposed reductions is the belief that government needs to be made smaller and that regulatory approaches are of the devil. This idea makes for very good politics and campaigning does it not? People love to blame the government for a multitude of woes. So the government as the "Boogie Man" is a very appealing label. What if these people got their wish? What are some implications for everyday Americans? Let's do what most Americans do not, take their ideas to their finial conclusions. Don't worry about regulating airline safety, food and drug safety, carbon emissions, vehicle safety guidelines, Wall Street (remember the housing crisis), or a variety of other things that improve the quality of American lives. There may be many people who are in favor of the abolishment of the government's ability to regulate, UNTIL it affects them.

No comments: