Social Security Kept 27 Million Americans Out of Poverty in 2013

[sabrina 1]

I posted this article in GD http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025915356

The New Deal programs are not as popular on DU as they used to be.

I believe any Populist movement MUST fight strongly those who are attempting to dismantle the New Deal Social Safety Net.

Social Security Kept 27 Million Americans Out of Poverty in 2013

Government programs can effectively reduce poverty in the United States. Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM)—a more comprehensive measure of economic security than traditional poverty thresholds—the figure below illustrates the strength of the government to mitigate the incidence of poverty.

Social Security is, by far, the most effective anti-poverty program in the United States. Without Social Security, an additional 8.6 percent of Americans, or nearly 27 million, would fall below the SPM poverty threshold. Refundable tax credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, kept 2.9 percent of Americans, or 9 million, above the SPM poverty threshold. Other programs, such as SNAP (food stamps), Supplemental Security Income, housing subsidies, and unemployment insurance, also have a significant impact on the ability of families to stay afloat.

Thanks to the Democratic Party, led by FDR, the party that cared about the people enough to initiate these Social Safety Nets, now under attack, not only from the Right, but also sadly from some in our own party.

The Chained CPI would cut SS benefits.

The Chained CPI was 'taken off the table' during election season. Probably with the hope it would not be a liability for Democrats, which it certainly would and should be.

I suppose they think that we won't remember these things if they just hide them when they need our votes.

FDR's work for the American people is almost unprecedented.

I cannot imagine anyone calling themselves a Democrat wanting to touch these programs other than to make them even better.

But sadly as we know, it was a Democrat who put SS 'on the deficit table'.

Would FDR have done that? Or LBJ even?

Not in a million years.

[Prophet 451]

1. Of course the PtB want it cut

Put simply, the corporatist endgame is to have a populace so poor and so desperate that they will work sixteen hour days for pennies, or a meal, or a dosshouse bed for the night. Fighting to keep or improve programs like Social Security and teh rest of teh USA's pitiful safety net, should be a litmus test for liberal politicians.

[sabrina 1]

3. That's exactly right. They probably have resented for decades the labor laws finally put in place,

the social programs which they had to contribute to, some semblance of fair wages etc. So they have been working on how to punish the country for actually trying to create a decent society.

That's why they, symbolically, pouted, took their businesses overseas where there were no labor laws etc, the kind countries they want this one to be so they can exploit workers, AGAIN.

Equality to them means everyone starves, but feed them just enough so they be used as commodities to maximize profits.

These are evil people, greedy, and imo, psychopathic with zero ability to empathize with anyone except for their own 'type'.

FDR's New Deal is a nightmare to them, all that money going to the little people when they could be investing it on Wall St.

I love when people tell us here how well the Stock Market is doing. I don't know about anyone else, but that is of no interest to me or anyone else I know. We don't benefit from it.

They have no loyalties, not to this country or any other. And now they are pushing their latest attempt to 'equalize' workers Globally, the Secret Trade Deal.

[Enthusiast]

2. Mostly on DU the ones we hear advocating cuts to SS

are younger posters of a more libertarian bent.

I would ask them, "How would you replace Social Security? And with what?"

I mean, most of today's workers are unable to put enough away for future retirement. When we allow the banks to take their profit cut these private programs aren't very promising.

I guess we are all supposed to just do without, which would mean death from starvation or exposure.

[sabrina 1]

4. I'm not sure who those people are who support things like the Chained CPI eg.

No Democrat would do so, young or old. If your parents are life long Dems they would have told you how important these programs are. So anyone who is willing to try to 'explain' why SS 'needs reform' isn't a Democrat imo, young or old.

Some are probably just trying to tell themselves that their favorite politician would never do something that was going to have a negative impact on the people, so he's 'just playing chess'. Do you understand what they are saying I wonder? Playing chess with people's LIVES? That is almost even worse than the reality. It would be a cynical gamble with what belongs to the people.

And others are probably part of the decades long effort to privatize all these programs by scaring people into thinking it 'won't last' if we 'don't do something'. Well, they've saying that for six decades.

I know this any Dem who votes for the Chained CPI and/or the TPP, is no Dem and needs to be kicked out of this party.

[TBF]

5. Not only libertarians but the "centrists"

who work on Wall Street (or similar) and expect the democratic party to listen to their pleas for privatized social security accounts now that they have started shoveling $$$ into elections.

[Enthusiast]

6. If they get their way

millions of the elderly will end up destitute like they were before social security.

And how will we create a fund for the disabled and provide survivors benefits? There just isn't any sound way to replace social security. And there certainly isn't any way to replace medicare in the Paul Ryan way. These issues simply are not up for discussion.

[sabrina 1]

8. You are correct, I really have come to the conclusion that we have

people in public office who would like to return to the old workhouse days where child labor was okay and the elderly died of starvation.

[AtomicKitten]

7. I was going to take early retirement next year.

But I have watched my SS decline at a rapid clip such that it's virtually HALF of what it was a decade ago.

[sabrina 1]

9. I'm sorry, really. That should not be the case.

But how did it decline, are you talking about the cost of living, which certainly makes those checks insufficient to live on?