Mr. Deez-
To address a couple of your points:
Most of us recognize that there is a "trust fund" that has been funded by FICA withholding throughj the years, and there is a "balance" in that fund, even if it is only on paper because the funds have been raided for other uses. We also know that this "trust fund" balance will not be sufficient to pay for future benefits unless something is done to either increase the contributions or decrease and/or delay the benefits that are anticipated.
Why do I care whether the benefits come from income tax or FICA? Because there are many more people who have FICA taken from their pay checks than there are people who pay income taxes. In my opinion, that is one of the greatest problems that we need to correct, is the fact that half of our population pays no income tax.
You emphasize that the fact that the "trust fund" dollars have been spent in the past, and continue to be spent now, for things other than the original intent, and I think most of us would agree with that statement. That is one of the things that needs to be changed with this program.
Since when does a conservative claim to be worried about their children's future based upon the availability of a Government program? This program is not a tax per se, it is forced retirement funding, much like a private pension would be. Steps have been taken by the Government to insure that evil old companies do not deprive their employees of their pension benefits if they go broke, and similar steps need to be taken to insure that SS benefits are available for those who have paid into the fund througout their working lives.
As far as people using the FICA money for their private retirement funding, do you believe that most people would set that amount aside in a plan that would earn interest and/or equity sufficient to provide for their retirement, or would they use it to improve their present quality of life (or waste it), and arrive at their old age with no means of support? I voted for GWB twice, but I think if he had been successful in privatizing SS when he tried, many people would have been wiped out by the stock market in the subsequent years. Maybe protecting a lot of the population from themselves is necessary to some extent-that is what SS represents to me.
Finally, the payroll tax reduction, like the Bush tax cuts, was meant to be a temporary stimulus to the economy, not a permanent change. Now when it comes time to revert back to the prior levels, it is labeled a tax increase and whoever brings it up is against the middle class. WTF is that about?
