Republicans keep nattering on about how we can fix the deficit by attacking so called “entitlements” of Social Security and Medicare.
Yet, right wing God Ronald Reagan very simply explained the lack of relationship between Social Security and the deficit way back in 1984. He said plain as day, “Social security has nothing to do with the deficit.”
What about this is so hard to get?
At the first Reagan-Mondale debate in 1984, Reagan set the record straight about Social Security. Watch here via Bill Scher and the Campaign for America’s Future‘s Youtube account:
Reagan said, “Social Security, let’s lay it to rest once and for all… Social security has nothing to do with the deficit. Social Security is totally funded by the payroll tax levied on employer and employee. If you reduce the outgo of Social Security, that money would not go into the general fund or reduce the deficit. It would go into the Social Security Trust Fund. So Social Security has nothing to do with balancing a budget or raising or lowering the deficit.”
Why are we still discussing Social Security as relevant to the deficit, and why are the very people who advocate against Social Security the same people who claim to revere Ronald Reagan? We know y’all hate the social safety net, but can we at least agree to deal in real math?
For a real taste of irony for the math impaired, Dan Gross explained that it is the “Republican-designed Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit that threatens to explode entitlement costs, by as much as $1 trillion in 10 years.” You see, Republicans left Medicare Part D unfunded and also left it up to the private sector insurance companies to charge what they wished for the drugs rather than force competition to do its thing.
At least Social Security is funded, which is more than we can say for Republican “entitlements” like wars, corporate subsidies, and tax cuts to the rich. Which party is the fiscally responsible party again?