Misleading Headline
Hmm...
The problem with this headline and article is that referring to Bush's proposal as a simple "cut in benefits" is a little misleading. When the media and opponents to Bush's plan (though they seem to be one in the same given the tone of most reporting about the issue) they often leave out one word when referring to the proposed "cuts."
This, from the same article, is more to the point:
The only part of your Social Security benefit that will be cut under the President's plan (unless you are low-income) is the guaranteed benefit. Or, in other words, the part of your benefit that you can't invest. You will have another part of your benefit with which you can do one of a few things. Like invest it in the private stock market and earn a return that will make your overall benefit (guaranteed plus the optional portion) higher than it would have been under the current system.
But do you think anybody in the media is going to focus on that little tid-bit of information? No. Of course not. All we're going to hear about in the next couple of weeks is how the President is going to cut your Social Security benefits. Which, sadly, pays a great disservice to what is otherwise a rather innovative fix to an ailing government program.
Bush Social Security Plan Would Cut Future Benefits
President Bush called on Congress last night to curtail future Social Security benefits for all but low-income retirees in an urgent new effort to address the popular program's shaky finances.
With virtually every Democrat, as well as many Republicans, opposed to his plan for private investment accounts, Bush sought to shift the focus of the Social Security debate to a new proposal that would reduce benefits more as workers' incomes rise.
"I believe the reformed system should protect those who depend on Social Security the most," he said in a nationally televised news conference. "So I propose a Social Security system in the future where benefits for low-income workers will grow faster than benefits for people who are better off." This is the first time Bush has backed a specific plan to reduce future benefits for tens of millions of Americans.
The problem with this headline and article is that referring to Bush's proposal as a simple "cut in benefits" is a little misleading. When the media and opponents to Bush's plan (though they seem to be one in the same given the tone of most reporting about the issue) they often leave out one word when referring to the proposed "cuts."
This, from the same article, is more to the point:
His proposal to reduce guaranteed benefits for everyone but the working poor is designed to provide specific direction to Congress on how to shore up the system -- and pressure Democrats to support a plan that protects those earning the least.
The only part of your Social Security benefit that will be cut under the President's plan (unless you are low-income) is the guaranteed benefit. Or, in other words, the part of your benefit that you can't invest. You will have another part of your benefit with which you can do one of a few things. Like invest it in the private stock market and earn a return that will make your overall benefit (guaranteed plus the optional portion) higher than it would have been under the current system.
But do you think anybody in the media is going to focus on that little tid-bit of information? No. Of course not. All we're going to hear about in the next couple of weeks is how the President is going to cut your Social Security benefits. Which, sadly, pays a great disservice to what is otherwise a rather innovative fix to an ailing government program.
MikeAdamson
robert108
Anarchist Vegetarian
Move_Zig
Rodney Graves
Jennifer
Kenny
Rob
likwidshoe
