Sorry Marcel. But with phrases like "ridiculous assumptions,"
"preposterous." "lefty politicians," and "idealogical (sic) zealots,"
you are the one sounding indoctrinated. Contrary to your message I said
"dip into Medicare monies" not "immediately drained Medicare funding."
To support my statement:
Copyright 2001 The Kansas City Star Co.
THE KANSAS CITY STAR
July 23, 2001,
Monday METROPOLITAN EDITION
SECTION: OPINION; Pg. B4
LENGTH: 430 words
HEADLINE: Taxes and Social Security
BODY:
In the drive to cut taxes this year, President Bush and Congress
ignored the federal tax that hits the vast majority of Americans the
hardest: the payroll tax that supports Social Security and Medicare.
This was an odd omission because this tax (noted as FICA on pay
stubs) has been responsible for most of the federal budget surpluses
that were used to justify the tax cuts.
Instead, Social Security was put on the back burner until after
Bush had won congressional approval for his plan to cut the regular
federal income tax and the estate tax.
Now the president's special commission on Social Security reform
is finally getting under way. As a result, the hazards of approving
regular income tax cuts first and looking at Social Security reform
later became painfully apparent late last week.
On Friday - the day Vice President Dick Cheney made a
high-profile visit to Kansas City to tout the new cuts in the regular
federal income tax - The Kansas City Star carried a story raising the
possibility that Social Security taxes could soon be going up.
The story was the first in what will no doubt be a series of
dismal reports from Bush's bipartisan Social Security commission. In
a preliminary report, that panel said Social Security is facing "a
fiscal crisis" and cannot meet its promises to future retirees
without cutting benefits, borrowing huge amounts of money or raising
taxes.
If benefits are cut, by definition it means Social Security will
not be "meeting all of its promises." The second option, massive
borrowing by the federal government until all the retired baby
boomers die, would be irresponsible and probably impossible. That
leaves the third option: tax increases.
Bush hopes that the federal entitlement system can be fixed by
establishing personal retirement accounts and cutting back on some
"guaranteed" Social Security benefits.
It is difficult to see how this idea alone, however, could bail
the government out of trouble when so many older baby boomers are
within just a few years of retirement. So more money will probably be
needed from somewhere.
Social Security's approaching crisis got little attention as
Cheney and other politicians were celebrating the mailing of the tax
refund checks during his Kansas City visit.
But that celebration is likely to grate on the millions of
federal taxpayers who did not get a tax cut - particularly if they
hear more talk in Washington this year about possible increases in
the federal tax that hits them the hardest.
Jerry
