Nick Anderson by Nick Anderson

Nick AndersonNo Zoom

Comments (7) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. walruscarver2000

    walruscarver2000 said, over 5 years ago

    The one that has kept SS at the same level for the past 3 years. Or do you think the elderly are overpaid?

  2. believecommonsense

    believecommonsense said, over 5 years ago

    WTF? Soc Security isn’t the cause of the deficit or the debt! With a couple of tweaks, it’s fully funded through 2050 or more.

    Great, let’s rob the Soc Security pensioners to give Halliburton more cost-plus, no-bid contracts with full immunity for all wrongdoing. Or give the uber billionnaires a bigger tax break. Unbelievable.

  3. Bluejayz

    Bluejayz said, over 5 years ago

    BCS, only one tweak is needed. Stop Congress from taking SS profits and surpluses and using them to off-set deficits generated by other programs (like wars in Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan.) The social security program was set up originally as a stand-alone trust fund to provide a retirement security net for the workers who paid into the fund. Left alone and away from the general fund, SS would continue to generate surpluses and would be just fine for many, many years. It still shows a muti-billion dollar surplus - on paper. The threat is that Congress won’t be able (or have the spine) to pay back what they’ve been mis-appropriating for years.The TeaPublicans are trying to reneige on their obligation to ensure SS is fully funded. They cry, “It’s too expensive because we already spent the money for F-22s and aircraft carriers and we can’t pay back what we borrowed.”

  4. believecommonsense

    believecommonsense said, over 5 years ago

    ^ I agree. Only a few people in Congress are advocating that Soc Security be left as the stand-alone it was designed to be. The misappropriated surpluses and interest will never be put back into SS. And Republicans are leading the charge that it become just another program in the budget and are falsely claiming it is another one of those god-awful entitlement programs that force the poor rich, influential and well-connected to contribute something to this “great nation” of patriots and founders who hated slavery. Sheesh. What a bunch of liars and hypocrites leading a bunch of people who act as if history itself doesn’t exist, so whatever the rightwing self-promoters claim is true must be true.

  5. eepatte

    eepatte said, over 5 years ago

    The above commenters are right on the money!

    Back to 2000. Remember when the repubs made fun of Al Gore’s “Lock Box” for social security? What should old people do, beg on the street and die? How does that help the economy?

    Oh yes. We were supposed to invest our money to provide for our retirement? How did the investment market work for you? I shoulda spent all that “investment” money on beer. I coulda then cashed in the aluminum cans and come out much further ahead.

  6. GoComics PRO Member said, over 5 years ago

    Not to mention that it has been used to provide Ritalin for every kid who can’t sit still in their seat in school and SSD for folks who’s bad backs prevent them from working but not from increasing their families (to get more SSD of course).

  7. jkshaw

    jkshaw said, over 5 years ago

    The picture of indolent, luxury that Anderson depicts is a cruel joke. Do you know how much a monthly SS check would amount to for a woman, not married and not well educated, who worked at minimum wage for all her life would amount to? She’d be lucky to have eight or nine hundred dollars a month..

    It looks like Anderson has had a Reagan-Welfare-Queen moment.

  8. Refresh Comments.