http://blackcommentator.com/125/125_twilight_zone_pf.html



Interesting article--more at URL.

You know, I have some very personal feelings on this topic and I'm not sure I can put them into to words so that the members here in this forum can fully understand. But I will say this; if it is true that African-Americans don't live as long as their white counterparts, then why do you suppose the Administration is floating this "trial balloon" of an idea that Soc Sec may need to be need to have a ethnicity component to it? I think they (Bush & Company) know that this is not gonna sit well with the majority of Americans so they are testing the waters to see the level of acceptance; plus, you know how the Adminstration plays the "racecard" anytime they think it will make them look good; and if what they are proposing becomes a reality, don't be surprised if their is a major shift in how people vote in 2006 or 2008.

Myself being an American with a African ancestory, my ears initially perked up when I heard what was being proposed but I can see the firestorm coming from some conservative groups that feel some group is getting another "leg up" or "handout" or "preference" (as if corporate american or the wealthy don't get their fair share of favorable treatment) and I can see some minority organizations championing the policy and some asking why they just don't fix the underlying problems they lead to certain segments of this country's citizens dying early be they desperaties in health services given, distrust of healthcare system when a person gets ill or good old fashion USA style racism or whatever.

But what I find really disturbing is that the Administration admitted that the mortality rate of certain citizens IS a problem. Well, when you have a problem, what do you do? You ask questions about why the problem is a problem and you FIX THE PROBLEM. What the Administration wants to do is do what it does best; avoid answering the TOUGH questions of "why things are the way they are". Now I suppose if you are an American of African ancestory or Spanish ancestory and the Government is going to let you get your $$$$ early, maybe you should go ahead and take it. But from what I've seen, when minority groups in this country get any kind of preference, it DOES NOT go over well with many people in the majority population. And can you imagine all the people who classify themselves in Goverment records as "WHITE" who now decide to classify themselves as "BLACK" or "HISPANIC" so they get their money early? I can see lots of problems coming if this change in Soc Sec is instituted.

I think a big can of worms is being opened up with this idea and the conclusion, whatever it is, is not gonna be good.

MattLiarLauer, you have made some excellent points.

What I thought of first when I read about this is, if blacks are dying very early--in childhood and as young adults, why are we not giving decent care to EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN so people will have a better chance TO have a better life and make a decent wage so they can save for retirement?

Why do we have blacks in pretty much concentration camps which is what many of our city neighborhoods have become?

If blacks are dying at a very early age, which is why the demographics are what they are, toying with Social Security is not going to help them.

And of course, as you mentioned, Rs are great at playing the race card. Make it look as though you care and many people will believe you care. Blacks will be delighted, racists will be outraged.

This is a huge can of worms, indeed, especially since the Social Security system does not need to be 'fixed' at all, merely tweeked to make it work for generations to come.

Meanwhile, fix the medical care problems in this country!

Thanks, dori; somebody understood where I was coming from.

What gets me is that I was at work talking to a guy (a hardcore Repub) and we have talked about a number of things in the news (Abu Ghraib, Soc Sec, No WMDs, No Eminent Threat, Hatred of USA Around The World). This guy is soooooooo partisan and gives the Repub Partyline for each topic. I'm not trying to change his mind but when you try to get him to explain why he feels the way he does, he "flip-flops" or evades the questsions. He has a fulltime gob (don't know what he does and not gonna ask) and has a part-time job as a security guard which is where I see him. It's really difficult to talk to him because he just dispises anything that sounds anti Repub, thinks Bill Clinton was bad for the US and thinks George W is a man of his word (oh please). It seem like he thinks you have to take the Rep or Dem side of the issue. I don't do that. One think we did agree on is that these next 4 years of George W & the Administration will NOT be boring; good or bad.

Case in point: We were discussing Soc Sec and the Prez floating the trial balloon of the possibility of letting Americans invest part of the Soc Sec Tax they pay into a Private Account. I told him, I'm not so sure I would want to participate in one. I possibly would IF the Government would insure it up to a certain amount like they insure bank deposits but even if they did that I'm still not so sure I would do it. He then goes on a rant about how nobody should be getting Soc Sec and that the system should be scrapped. He said that people now days have access to all types of ways to invest money and IT IS UP TO THEM to make sure after they retire they have the money to take care of themselves. He said the only people who should get Soc Sec are the "mentally ill" and "disabled". I asked him; who will make the determination as to who is mentally ill and who is disabled? He said the Government would. I asked how are they going to do that and he said he didn't know.

I told him I think the $90,000 limit might need to be raised so that people like Bill Gates or others who can well afford to can pay more of their income. Or maybe there should be no cap at all and we all pay the same % of our income. He didn't think that was fair to make the rich pay for the lower classes. What he failed to see (or did but see and was evasive) was that the people who make more than $90,000, the amount over $90,000 is not subject to be assessed the Soc Tax (I think that's how it works). So those earners are not even paying the full % of their income. But he thinks that's not fair. I even said maybe the system should be "means tested" and people like Bill Gates should not recieve Soc Sec at all. He then said that Bill Gates paid into the system so he should be able to get Soc Sec. That's when I realized this guy has not thought this stuff out. Not that I have it all down pat (which I do not) but he just contradicted himself and started rambling on forgetting what he had just told me a scant 5 mintues earlier.

I did not remind him that earlier he said only the mentally ill and disabled should get Soc Sec; I guess Bill fits that category. I also did not ask him if when he turns 65 and if Soc Sec is still in place, will he take the benefits. I will ask him that when I get to work next week or will he tell his friends and family they are wrong for taking it when they should have prepared for the future THEMSELVES and not take the Government's money. He will probaby say "they have free will and can do whatever they want".

In these days and times, being partisan is not the way to go (in my opinion). When I vote, I don't vote a straight ticket and I don't vote all one party. There have been times when I have gone in the booth and voted for 1 person and then went on my way. I consider myself an Independent and NOT a partisan. There are good and bad people in each party but this guy from work, just from the 5 or 6 discussions I've had with him, he is just so partisan. I think in 2005, there is no place for that. A lot is at stake to be partisan.

People need to stop giving the party line and think and discuss.

I also work with a very partisan Republican. We used to discuss politics quite a bit, when the impeachment procedings were in full swing, and then the debacle of the 2000 "election".

I've given up on him, as I have written off all Republicans. I don't need to hear the GOP party line over and over from him. I no longer respect his views, and I avoid any political talk with him. We are still good friends, but we no longer talk politics.

They are hopeless. They have been propagandized to the point of no return. I argue with Republicans on the internet. But, that is merely for my own amusement, as I enjoy embarressing them. I don't think to influence such Bush worshipping sycophants.

As a few people on this forum already know, I never voted for a Democrat in my life until 1998. Now, I vote straight Democratic ticket. It's not that I agree with everything they do. It's that the Republicans are clearly insane, and they must be stopped.

How people can absorb the R line is still amazing to me, but they do. When talking with them, they don't answer because they CAN'T answer. The facts are on our side, and people who spout the R line are not at all familiar with them. All they have is the propaganda that is so satisfying to them but IS NOT REALITY.

I can't blame them for not wanting to believe the truth--I don't want to either but there it is. PNAC is real. Squeezing the middle class and dumping on the poor is real. Shipping our jobs out of the country is real. Setting up a Medicare perscription plan that is a boondoggle for the pharmaceutical companies is real. Stiffing our vets is real. Not protecting our country is real. The list is so long it would take an entire thread to write it, and that is only the things we KNOW about.

People just want to be comfortable, and to believe the TRUTH is not comfortable. We just have to keep putting the word out that most people in this country--including the ones who back Bush, are being cheated. The sooner they find out, the sooner we can stop this mess and start to clean it up.

In the first place, I do wonder where the statistic regarding Afro American longevity came from. I don't recall that this was made public before. I do seem to get the idea that black people live as long as or longer than the rest of Anericans. The article is right; when Mr. Bush has a problem with one of his projects, he plays the fear card or the race card. He is playing both the fear and race card to locate some kind of political block support for his Social Security PRIVITIZATION Program. His own GOP has turned him down and will not support him. He is actually insulting black people by hoping that they are stupid enough to support his plan to rob the Social Security fund. I am sorry if you all are offended by this post, but I did say to one business man in 2002, "Don't let G. Bush get a hold on that Fund or your retirement fund will disappear" Hate to say "I told you so"

Your post was not offensive to me, j2ts2. In fact, you make good points.

Most of the people on this board know that SS isn't in any kind of crisis, and we also know one thing to be prefectly TRUE:

IF GEORGE BUSH SAYS IT'S TRUE, IT'S NOT. IF HE SAYS IT'S NOT, IT IS.


Catherine

Catharine,
I could be wrong here. I promise not to pretend I know anything about teaching if you promise not to try to speak for the military vets again. I'm sure you and your ilk were the ones spitting on our guys and calling them baby killers as they arrived home from the war ( a war that some of them are still fighting...in some part thanks to you and your ilk) But as a teacher ( probably not a Sunday school teacher) you never paid one dime into social security but you have these strong opinions on how they should be administered. Could you enlighten me on how people could eat up what Bill Clinton ,Al Gore and about 20 other democrats said about ss in the past being in a state of disarray but now that gwb says it and tried to do something about it all of the sudden there is no crises. Those damn sound bites will get you every time.

The reason I asked was that I was listening to a show that had more than 40 sound bites that said the ss was in a crises but thoes same people now say that it is not.....it was a hoot!!!!!!And very typical of the party of the WEAK and uninformed....... thats right the dumbocrats!!!!!!!

Aparently our word for today is 'ilk'.

'child, yes your are definately wrong. WRONG. OH, SO WRONG!!!

We have plenty of military vets here so don't be such a snob. You don't know a darn thing they don't know so stop pretending you do.

And you bring up the old chestnut 'spitting on the vets'. Where did that happen? It didn't. People who were against the war felt sad enough for the people who were fighting it, they had no desire to add to the vets misery.

And misery it is! When people are in war they are subjected not only to the danger of being caught, injured or killed, they are subjected to the harmful psychological effects of battle and the poisonous substances that go into their lungs and skin from contamination from the weapons used. War is hell indeed!



Why don't you try to enlighten yourself before calling others out. Bill Clinton did do 'something' about Social Security--he built the country up with jobs, put our country's finances into an ever climbing surplus and the Social Security surplus into a lockbox.

George W Bush immediately paid companies to ship jobs out of the United States, sent our financial situation into a spiralling downward plunge, looted the Social Security funds and then claimed we had a 'Social Security crisis'.

No, what we have is a crisis of leadership. Your hero is leading us into hell without so much as the handbasket to go with it.

How many trillion in debt do you want Bush to leave to your grandchildren for your 'private account'? Why don't you start up a private account on your own? Are you too lazy? Are you too cheap? Are you too stupid? Do you really believe you are going to 'own' that account? If so, the laugh is on you--it is going to be owned by another huge bureaucracy that is going to skim a large amount off the top for themselves.

And when that account is used up, you had better be ready to die because the government is not going to give you a damn thing beyond what it gives now to 'poor people'. Are you ready to become a poor person?

Republicans have been trying since FDR put Social Security into place to kill it. This is their chance. They are going to spend a fortune trying to convince people of their 'crisis' and some will believe as you aparently do. It is going to take people like Catherine and the rest of us on this board to get the word out that this country is being run by a gang of criminals whose whole concept of a 'good time' is making life miserable for people who are not rich and socially connected to the mob.

Considering your foul means of 'communicating', I have no desire whatsoever to be part of your little gang of thieves.

About the only thing I will add to dori's excellent and correct reply to you, CHILD is that you have just shown your complete and total ignorance about who pays into Social Security. You've made some pretty stupid posts at TVNL, but this one takes the prize!

I was a career educator who paid into Social Security each and every month of my career. Since you're still such a babe in the woods, I don't see that it's my responsibility to educate you, nor does anyone else here that I've seen, except perhaps dori, and I'd bet my next pension check that she's through with you, too.

Obviously, you're about the most ignorant poster we've had on this board in many months. Your seriously misinformed and idiotic rants belong in the Funny Forum or perhaps you should just go back to watching Cartoon Network.

It's much better cast and much more enlightening than anything you've been watching or listening to lately.

I've ignored you so far as the troll I think you are, and I will ignore you from this point forward.

I don't waste my time on dull children.


Catherine

One more thing Catherine. This is an example of what rightwing media has done to the population of the United States--which now contains the dumbest people in the world.

The depth of stupidity in many American people is awesome just as it is repulsive.

That a cadre of greed infested antisocial people would spend so much time and money to run think tanks to come up with the best way to 'train' the American people to be appallingly stupid is a horror period in our history. But here we are, and here they are, and it will take a miracle for the United States to survive.

All to satisfy 1% of our population's lust for money, power and status.

Our shame is even worse than the time of Nazi leadership in Germany.

Catherine

Yup. A troll.

This one is so bad at it it just made me yawn. Shouldn't there be an IQ test before you can be a troll?

Good question, dori! However, not being sure if this troll is in Depends or Diapers, I'd have to say that the latest post he/she made in this thread leaves no doubt that he/she would score at or near the high-end moron level on an ITFT.

(Intelligence Test For Trolls)



Catherine