" Actually a whole lot of what is wrong with the Social Security system could be fixed without raising a single tax for anyone. All that lawmakers would have to do is stop raping the Social Security trust fund to pay for things that it was never INTENDED to pay for... Like the $5000 - $6000 per child bonus to states when children are adopted out of foster care. "

" Dear Michelle: The lax regulatory standards at FANNIE MAE and FREDDIE MAC were indeed failures of congressional oversight, more specifically Barney Frank. I dont see where Senator Chris Dodd did anything wrong. If you see him in action on CSPAN, he comes across as very knowledge and VERY involved in all things banking related. The supposed "sweetheart" deal that he got on his mortgage with Countrywide perhaps had the apperance of impropriety, but the deal he got wasnt any better than any other person could get. Yes is was certainly inappropriate for him to have called an executive of Countrywide to arrange for his mortgage, but again I dont see a "smoking gun" here.
Please also remember that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were but ONE PART of the whole sub prime mortgage mess.
Everyone involved in this phenomenon, not just the government agencies referenced above, played a part.
Corporate and political greed permeated EVERYONE here.
Its a shame that FOX News continually tilts right all the time and refuses to fess up to their conservative Republican allies mistakes. They do occur. At least Bill Clinton showed some courage by admitting to the liberal side of things.
But Fox News and their monied allies never admit to any mistakes.
Its time that everyone admitted to their mistakes in this whole problem.
There is simply WAY too much partisanship occurring here. "

" I know you're all discussing social security and I'll probably respond to that too, however, I want to respond to a comment by Cutty concerning the 700 billion dollars of taxpayers monies that were stolen.
I don't deny that corporate greed played a role, but if people are going to point fingers perhaps they should start where the majority of the blame lies. See here is the truth, that the corporations wouldn't have had the opportunity to take all that money if Barney Frank, Chris Dodd had done their jobs and if Charles Rangle wasn't sticking his hand in the cookie jar. Not to mention the hoards of money that they made off of sweetheart deals in the meantime. As for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac the crisis could have been avoided had they not ignored the tools that were still in place to monitor those companies, however, actually doing what they were elected to do seems to be lost on them. I'm not a huge proponent of major regulation in a capitalist free market, but if you want to blame someone for a lack of regulation you can start by blaming Bill Clinton who removed the oversight on the housing markets in the 1990's, and if you don't believe me perhaps you'll believe him when he said in a Sep 25th Interview on ABC'S "Good Morning America"

"I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress, or even by me when I was president, to put some stricter standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, I think it's time we all start admitting where we went wrong so that we can figure out how to fix it." -Former President Bill Clinton.

For the first time in my life I think I would have to agree with him...must be a cold day?

Strangely enough though, Liberals don't even believe their own kind when they finally admit they're wrong, perhaps its because most liberals never believe they're wrong about anything, after all like Obama "The messiah has said, we conservatives are just "bitter people, clinging to our guns and religion"

Well despite all the liberals with their ideological blinders on, I still think It's nice to see Former President Clinton actually accepting responsibility for something in his colorful life, perhaps he's getting a little wiser with age, and perhaps you can teach and "OLD DOG" new tricks, because if anyone ever fit into that category it would be most definitly be him.
See the best part about debating politics with people is that if you actually do your homework you can find Liberal Democrats always bury themselves far better with their own words than conservatives ever need to. "

" I agree with you bjgaylord, Social Security is a minor portion of the retirement "nest egg". I fortunately received good advice and followed it. My monthly deposit from "Uncle" is a small part of my retirement income. My point is that I'd like to be able to manage it as I do the other funds I have saved for retirement. I'd also like to pass on the unused portion to my heirs. Afterall it's money I earned. Also, it is interesting that not one new thing has been done to improve SS since that very revealing discussion with the Comptroller General. Neither party has the guts (or brains) to due anything positive with SS. They always wait till a crisis happens and then it's Band Aid time. Too bad because there seems to be no real Economic Leadership for this country in the next four years. "

" The problems with Social Security began when the Dems took Social Security money from the Trust Fund, and put it in the General Fund, so Congress could spend it, and when The Carter Addministration allowed imigrants, who never paid into the system, to collect Social Security, and when Al Gore, as Vice President, cast the tie-breaking vote to start taxing Social Security annuities.
The Dems have had a 40+ year history of spending the money all workers pay into Social Security, by privatising it, we can get it out of the Dems hands, besides, the Social Security system has been in trouble since the seventies, and the baby boomers are about to put a very large burden on this system, so if it is going to survive, something needs to change. "

" I am with Cutty on this one Rambler. I can see that the option of giving your money to a bank to use/invest would SEEM to be a great solution. However, who would create the rules that would govern this proposition? The federal government. Um, NO THANKS!
I too saw the predictions posed by the Comptroller General you referred to, please note that that gentleman, the only man in federal service who dared to speak the truth, was FIRED because of his predictions being too "alarmist". Punished for doing his job. I have NO trust in our federal government handling my retirement. I just look at my FICA witholdings as another tax which is used to provide government services. I invest in my 401K to address my retirement needs. It is about personal accountability. No one should rely upon the government to provide for their retirement. SSA was never intended to provide your sole source of income in retirement. It was intended as a safety net. Do changes need to be made to the system to make it more solvent, yes. But privatization of the program operating under rules established by our fine federal officials is not a change any of us can afford. "

" Cutty, I would feel much more secure in turning my retirement income over to one of the banks or Credit Unions in Gaylord than I would in trusting it to the Federal Government. Small banks and Credit Unions are the most sound financial institutions in the entire country. If Obama is elected a small bank or Credit Union will be far more solvent than the Federal Government. Oh, I forgot the government has bailout privileges. "

" There are several difficulties with "the ramblers" analysis here. First, the salary or wage history for your working years wont always translate to others, particularly to younger workers these days whose wages are substantially less than they have been in the past. Because of globalization and outsourcing, the average wages of those earning less than $100,000 per year have not kept up with inflation.
Therefore your calculations are based exclusively on what happened in the past with you and are not at all translateable to anyone else.
Second, given the current banking crisis, and the fact that the banking community is likely to be struggling for some time now, any reasonable person would be highly reticent to turn their retirement savings over to any bank at this time.
Third, and this relates to my first point, as long as the middle class continues to be under assault, as long as we have "free" trade without "fair" trade, as long as countries like China can manipulate their currency so that they can "dump" their goods at artificially low prices while our exports to them remain overpriced, the only solution is the traditional scheme of social security.
Social security as it is presently structured is the only way to go. It gives some minimal degree of a social safety net to the middle class and to the poor.
The only threat to social security is federal deficit spending and where such deficits are financed out of the social security trust fund. The major cause of these deficits are the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and the tax cuts that Mr. Bush gave the wealthy in 2001.
In addition to having the Chinese as our major creditors, we have dipped into the retirement funds of the middle class to finance our wars and our giveways to corporate america (700 billion more to come as well).
The demographics issue is overblown. Since the "millenial" generation, those born between 1980 and 2001, the offspring of the baby boomers, actually outnumbers the baby boomers, there should be enough workers in the future to keep social security solvent.
The only problem in this regard concerns having an economy that gives relatively full employment, along with wages that allow the United States to remain an industrialized nation and not become simply another Third World nation mired in poverty due to corporate greed and political corruption. "

" Privatization, properly done, would be a major benefit for the working man or woman. In Maech 2004 I watched an all day session in which the House Ways and Means Comm. interviewed the US Controller General about the problems and future of Social Security. He gave many suggestions on how to improve and strengthen Social Security. None of which have been attempted by either party. He suggested some ways that privatization would work. One was simply putting the entire FICA tax payment (employers share as well as the workers share) into a regular CD account at a bank or Credit Union. I have been retired since 2003 but have all my payroll records for my entire working days. I figured out what my acoount would have been worth at retirement if all my FICA tax had been put into CDs for all my working day earnings. At retirement I would have had between $830,000 and $840,000. The current 60 month CD rate at my bank would give me a monthly check that is 42% greater than my current Social Security. The best part is that I would have the $830,000 plus in my bank account. The program could be structured that the FICA tax is deposited into nyour account and the bank must hold the money until you reach retirement age and then a decision is made how to distribute it. Just think how much money this would give your local bank or Credit Union to loan in YOUR community. I lke the fact I would have that additional $830,000 plus in my account. "

" John McCain supports everything that Bush supports... that much is obvious! Havc you recognized John McCain's campaign of fear for what it is?? It's discouraging when I hear so many disillusioned and uneducated voters talking about how "scared" they are of Obama. Please, take the time to view the videos available at www.therealmccain.com! It's all in his own words. "

" AMEN Brother!!
Unfortunately too many of our fellow citizens are too hopped up on whats being broadcast on Fox News to really appreciate whats happened to the middle class in this country.
If all anyone ever did was watch Fox News all day, they would be fixated upon "Bill Ayers" or "Reverend Wright" and not notice the thieving corporations who have basically stolen 700 billion dollars worth of taxpayers monies. "