There is no Social Security crisis that could not be solved by rescinding

the tax cuts for those making over $300,000. And Bush has the gall to run around with his hair on fire trying to con the American people into believing otherwise. What a complete and total, morally bankrupt soul! We Americans need to really restore "honor and dignity to the White House."

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7108135/

Partial transcript from Meet the Press...

SEN. DURBIN:  If the president takes privatization off, if he makes a commitment to the future of Social Security, we're ready to sit down on a bipartisan basis and put everything on the table.

MR. RUSSERT:  Everything?

SEN. DURBIN:  That's the only way to start a good-faith negotiation.  But let me add something else.  If we decided to take the president's proposed tax cuts for people making over $300,000 a year, if we took those away and put those resources into Social Security, we wouldn't be sitting here today.  So the tax cuts that are not permanent law the president wants for people making over $300,000 a year.  The money that takes out of the Treasury is enough to make Social Security solid for 75 years.

MR. RUSSERT:  What would raising taxes do to economic development in the country?

SEN. DURBIN:  I think if the people who make the decisions based on our economy see that we are not going to go $2 to $5 trillion in debt for some privatization or personal account approach, if they see that we're going to get our house in order and not continue cutting taxes in the midst of a war, I think it's going to restore some confidence in our economy and I think it's going to help us grow.

MR. RUSSERT:  Would the president consider doing away with his tax cuts in order to deal with Social Security?  Is that on the table?

SEN. McCONNELL:  Look, I'm encouraged by the fact that the Democrats have been out for the last two days talking about Social Security.  I'm not here to announce anything the president may or may not do.  I think the tax cuts have been very, very helpful, very, very important in stimulating this economy and getting our growth back in line.  I don't think that has anything to do, personally, with this discussion about Social Security.  But I think I hear Dick saying that maybe he's willing to sit down and talk.  I don't think there ought to be any conditions whatsoever on beginning a bipartisan discussion to save Social Security for our children and our grandchildren.  Why would we want to condition...

MR. RUSSERT:  Including putting tax cuts on the table?

________________

No answer, of course!

SEN. DURBIN: That's the only way to start a good-faith negotiation.

HELLO? You cannot negotiate in good faith with lying theiving scumbags.

Durbin's heart is in the right place and he makes some really good points, like if we rolled back the tax cuts there is NO PROBLEM FOR 75 YEARS, but as usual a Democrat has a hard time making even this simple point. THERE IS NO CRISIS. The Party Of Enron is trying to kill SS.

Durbin knows this.

Start by increasing the Federal Minimum Wage, follow by reducing the standard work-week to 36 hours, and then force the accounting of executive compensation as an 'after-tax distribution of income' (rather than deductible employee compensation).

Fair compensation for labor is essential - no 'payroll tax' can yield a damned penny when there's no payroll.

With the baby boomers outnumbering GenX, it looks like a crisis but as baby boomers die and GenX gets older the retiree/worker ratio changes in favor of the workers. Nothing more except raiding of SS funds.

That's a pretty naive assumption in my opinion. The only reason social security has remained solvent is because it is funded through a dedicated payroll tax. I think there are plenty of reasons to scrap the Bush tax cuts, but using that money to shore up SS is no easy task.