SmithAntics

In case you haven’t noticed, exposing the massive fraud that is BushCo’s plan to “reform” Social Security has become the central battlefront on the left blogosphere. And for good reason: the criminal thugs intend to hand over your retirement security to Wall Street, and they are getting a major assist from the mainstream media (MSM), who are only too happy to advance the White House/GOP narrative.

Indeed, the Soviet-style “reporting” on the phonied-up Social Security crisis has been nothing short of stunning—and blood-boiling (seen Meet the Press lately?).

That said, this blog will not become enmeshed in the fiscal complexities of the Great Social Security Scam—namely because I am about the last person on earth who should be commenting on economics. And I think most of you come here for reasonably concise expressions of anger, disgust, and humor.

Anyway, to me it’s very simple: the liars are lying again. This time it’s not about the threat of WMD from afar, but about the impending collapse of the system that provides your guaranteed-by-law old-age pension.

Dick Cheney is fucking with your golden years.

But if you want to get into the details of this thing, I recommend you follow the excellent coverage by Josh Marshall, Atrios, Kevin Drum, and Daily Kos.

If you want one-stop shopping for your Social Security fraud coverage, look no further than Professor Krugman (requires free NYT registration), who is nailing these fuckers about three times a week. Here’s a sample:

President Bush isn't trying to reform Social Security. He isn't even trying to "partially privatize" it. His plan is, in essence, to dismantle the program, replacing it with a system that may be social but doesn't provide security. And the goal, as with his tax cuts, is to undermine the legacy of Franklin Roosevelt.

Why do I say that the Bush plan would dismantle Social Security? Because for Americans who entered the work force after the plan went into effect and who chose to open private accounts, guaranteed benefits - income you receive after retirement even if everything else goes wrong - would be nearly eliminated.

Here's how it would work. First, workers with private accounts would be subject to a "clawback": in effect, they would have to mortgage their future benefits in order to put money into their accounts.

Second, since private accounts would do nothing to improve Social Security's finances - something the administration has finally admitted - there would be large benefit cuts in addition to the clawback.

Jason Furman of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that the guaranteed benefits left to an average worker born in 1990, after the clawback and the additional cuts, would be only 8 percent of that worker's prior earnings, compared with 35 percent today. This means that under Mr. Bush's plan, workers with private accounts that fared poorly would find themselves destitute.

Why expose workers to that much risk? Ideology. "Social Security is the soft underbelly of the welfare state," declares Stephen Moore of the Club for Growth and the Cato Institute. "If you can jab your spear through that, you can undermine the whole welfare state."

By the welfare state, Mr. Moore means Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid - social insurance programs whose purpose, above all, is to protect Americans against the extreme economic insecurity that prevailed before the New Deal. The hard right has never forgiven F.D.R. (and later L.B.J.) for his efforts to reduce that insecurity, and now that the right is running Washington, it's trying to turn the clock back to 1932.

Medicaid is also in the cross hairs. And if Mr. Bush can take down Social Security, Medicare will be next.

I'm sure the media script is already being drafted.