Buy WILLisms XML Feed Mar. 21, 2005 11:50 AM June 20, 2005 5:36 AM Oct. 31, 2005 12:41 AM Nov. 23, 2005 3:28 PM Nov. 30, 2005 1:33 PM May 12, 2006 6:15 PM Oct. 17, 2006 12:30 AM Dec. 13, 2006 1:01 PM Dec. 18, 2006 6:37 PM Dec. 21, 2006 12:31 PM Dec. 22, 2006 10:22 PM July 25, 2007 4:32 PM May 28, 2008 11:12 PM June 9, 2008 12:25 PM Blogroll Me! July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 March 13, 2008 Due: July 29, 2008 Mar. 14, 2006 Apr. 4, 2008 May 19, 2007 July 9, 2006 July 14, 2006 Powered by Movable Type 3.17 Site Design by Sekimori WILLisms.com June 2008 Book of the Month (certified classy): The WILLisms.com Gift Shop:
This Week's Carnival of Revolutions:
Carnival Home Base:
|
« The Age of Leadership: Generational Transitions. | WILLisms.com | Trivia Tidbit of the Day: Part 3 -- Oil Prices. » Fox News Poll Analysis.Some interesting things from a Fox News Poll, released March 31, 2005 (click here for original .pdf):
Democrats are more pessimistic than Republicans: Similarly, only 29% of Democrats, compared with 81% of Republicans and 49% of Independents, are confident that American policies in Iraq will be successful. 68% of Democrats, 17% of Republicans, and 43% of Independents are "not confident" on Iraq. 91% of Republicans agree that "the world and the United States are safer today without Saddam Hussein in power." Among Democrats, only 53% agree. Among Independents, the number is 70%. II. People perceive the reporting on Social Security to be more biased (negatively) than the reporting on Iraq or George W. Bush:
People want Social Security choice: Overall, 3 out of 5 Americans favor Social Security choice, while more than 3 out of 4 young people support Social Security choice.
People want Social Security reform soon: Nearly 2/3 want reform within the next 5 years. Less than 1/5 want it after 5 years. And about 1/11 never want reform. Roughly 1/12 aren't sure. UPDATE: Patrick Ruffini (via PoliPundit) argues, "Democrats might want to re-cork that champagne. Because they ain't seen nothing yet": So we've got three data points. The low is 53%, the midpoint is 60% and the high is 65%. It looks like support for personal accounts has stayed quite stable, and -- contrary to media reports -- quite popular too. Posted by Will Franklin · 1 April 2005 01:12 PM CommentsASAP!...I would like for Social Security to be illegal!... I would like to see it slapped down and flushed away!... Social security as I see it is stagnated and old and needs to be washed down the drain for our childrens benefit! Posted by: Zsa Zsa at April 1, 2005 03:20 PM Democrats ignore the Social Security Trust Fund Trustees who say the fund "will be exhausted by 2042" and they quote only Congressional Budget Office's predictions that the fund will last until 2052. Who should we listen to: the people who work with the SS trust fund on a daily basis or the CBO? Which has more accurate predictions? Posted by: Jerry McConnell at April 4, 2005 10:19 AM Private accounts are not the issue and the crisis is not in 2017 or 2018. It also is not in 2042. It is today. Between now and 2017, congress can count on SS receipts being greater than the payouts such that they have a slush fund to play with. At that time, payouts exceed income and we are told that the money will come from the SS Trust Fund. In fact, the SSTF is nothing but paper backed by us taxpayers and that is where the money has to come from. The SS surpluses (AKA Trust Fund)have long ago been squandered by your elected representatives. They do not like private accounts because it gives workers a bit of control over a small portion of their payments. Private accounts are about 70 years late coming to help defend us against bookkeeping chicanery. The real question is whether you would like to continue to trust all of your money with a congressman or would you like to trust a small portion of it to the kind of people on Wall Street making the daily news for inappropriate activity. Posted by: Robert Gibbs at April 4, 2005 12:26 PM PRIVATE ACCOUNTS LOOK GOOD. NOW, WHAT IS CONGRESS DOING TO PAY BACK THE MONEY TAKEN FRON THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUST FUND IN THE PAST. I SAY STOP PAYING ANY RETIREMENT TO ALL THOSE WHO, WHILE IN OFFICE WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING THE MONEY OUT IN THE FIRST PLACE. NEXT ITEM: SINCE SOMEONE IN THIS E-MAIL HAS STATED THAT CONGRESS DOES PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY,IS THAT TRUE? DO THEY ALSO PAY INTO THIER PRIVATE RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS LIKE THE REST OF THE FEDERAL WORKERS? OVER THE YEARS CONGRESS HAS COME UP SHORT ON ITS PROMISES TO MILITARY RETIREE'S. THEY ARE JUST NOW COMING UP WITH CHANGES IN THE LAWS TO FULLFIL THOSE THINGS WE THOUGHT WOULD TAKE PLACE WHEN WE RETIRED. GOSH, I HAve said A LOT. I RETIRED FROM THE U.S. NAVY IN 1970.[1945-1970] Posted by: BALLARD C. BROWN at April 4, 2005 05:41 PM I am all for SS reform. I am retired and have supplemental retirement and have a hard time getting by. If something isn't done quick, our children and grand children will not be able to get by on the little bit offered by SS. Posted by: Don Barton at April 5, 2005 07:09 AM Social Security has been generating a $80-100 Billion surplus since the Greenspan Commission hiked FICA taxes in the l980's. The gov't "borrows" the surplus, spends it on non-SS items, and "credits" the "Trust Fund" with the amount borrowed. The gov't calls these credits, which are nothing more than IOUs or Prommissory notes, "Non-Negotiable Treasury Bonds". We all know what non-negotiable means. The gov't even pays interest on these IOUs with more IOUs! The IOUs are backed by the "Full Faith and Trust of the U.S. Gov't, meaning that we are being promised by the polititians and Grunchspan that the gov't will repay every penny. B.S.!!!The gov't will never repay the debt, and 2017, not 2041 is the date of bankruptcy. If the American People understood what was going on, they would all demand personal accounts, and not trust the bandit politicians who are stealing, not borrowing, from the "Trust Fund," All private accounts will do is force the go'vt to issue real Treausury Bonds which the gov't is legally required to redeem, rather than the Bogus, fake IOUs that the gov't is using to provide a slush fund for today's politicians to fund their pork barrel projects. The congress doesn't care--they receive 80% of their salary for the rest of their lives when they retire! If a private individual funded his/her employee pension fund in a pay-as-you-go basis, and borrowed the surplus and spent it, funding the pension with bogus IOUs, they would be arrested and prosecuted by the Justice Dept for Fraud. Posted by: Bob Collins at April 5, 2005 02:50 PM Private Accounts? YES! The Dems say that this will not solve the problem yet I have not heard one alternative from those dopes! Clinton said it was a problem, they agreed, then the payroll tax went up. The left is simply obstructing in this case and I think if you are over 55 you should shut up and collect your money that I am paying for. I want the OPTION to invest MY money in the market for my benefit and the benefit of my children. How do you think the politicians retire? Ask the dems about the thrift savings plan,. Wake up people, the Dems Posted by: Jason Pammer at April 16, 2005 10:53 AM Heh! Ditto Bob Collins and Jason Pammer. It seems that only the Right have the right ideas. Posted by: V.A. Pammer at April 17, 2005 10:06 AM Heh! Ditto Bob Collins and Jason Pammer. It seems that only the Right have the right ideas. Posted by: V.A. Pammer at April 17, 2005 10:07 AM |