PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS BEEN
MAKING OVER THE COURSE OF THE LAST YEAR UNSUPPORTED PROMISES
TO SUPPORT THE INTEGRITY OF SOCIAL SECURITY, BUT BERNIE
SANDERS IS DOING SOMETHING TO TRY TO A COMPASS THAT GOAL. INTRODUCED A BILL DESIGNED TO MAKE IT SOLVENT FOR ADDITIONAL
DECADES. HE PUT FORWARD THIS BILL — THAT
IS NOT A LOT PER WEEK OR MONTH BUT WOULD HELP. YOU MIGHT ASK, HOW HE IS GOING TO PAY FOR
THE ADDITIONAL MONEY THAT’S GOING OUT TO THOSE WHO NEED IT
MOST — CURRENTLY THAT IS NOT THE WAY
IT WORKS, THERE IS A CAP ON YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO SOCIAL SECURITY
ABOVE WHICH YOU DON’T PAY ANY ADDITIONAL MONEY. VERY
IRRATIONALLY, A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK IF YOU WANT TO INCREASE
SOLVENCY THAT IS HOW TO DO IT, IT’S ALSO A COMPLETE NONSTARTER
ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE. LET’S TALK ABOUT THE STAKES — THERE IS ALWAYS A NUMBER
THROWN AROUND WHERE AFTER THAT IT COULD PAY OUT 79% OF THE
CURRENT AMOUNT — I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THAT IS WHAT THEY’VE SETTLED
ON WHEN YOU COULD STOP BY YOUR EARLIER AND PAY A SLIGHTLY
HIGHER AMOUNT, IT’S WEIRD BUT WE’VE JUST AGREED ON
THAT AS A CULTURE — SANDERS’ LEGISLATION EXTENDS
SOLVENCY THROUGH 2078 ACCORDING TO A STATEMENT BY THE
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION. THIS IS A GREAT EXAMPLE OF
WHERE REPUBLICANS HAVE NO EXCUSE, THEY ARE JUST THE PARTY
OF THE RICH. PERIOD. BECAUSE THE PAYROLL TAX IS THE MOST
REGRESSIVE TAX THERE IS, IT APPLIES MORE TO THE POOR AND THE
MIDDLE CLASS — ACTUALLY MAINLY THE MIDDLE-CLASS — THAN TO THE
RICH. THAT’S WHY SINCE THE 1950S THE SHARE OF CORPORATE TAXES HAS
GONE FROM ABOUT 30 OR 35% OF ALL THE TAXES BEING PAID TO ABOUT
10% OF ALL TAXES BEING PAID, THAT’S HOW THEY RIG THE SYSTEM
SO MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS DON’T PAY TAXES ANYMORE, AND THE
PAYROLL TAX HAS GONE IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION, A SMALL
PORTION OF TAX BEING PAID TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, NOW IT’S
ABOUT A THIRD OF ALL THE TAXES COLLECTED BECAUSE IT GOES TO THE
MIDDLE CLASS AND NOT THE RICH. YOU SAY YOU WANT TO PROTECT
SOCIAL SECURITY, I HAVE GREAT IDEAS FOR PROTECTING SOCIAL
SECURITY, LET’S CUT IT? OR MAKE YOU WORK LONGER AND RETIRE AT A
LATER AGE AND IF YOU DIE BEFORE YOU GET THE BENEFITS, HA HA, I
PROTECTED IT? OR WE COULD JUST TAX PEOPLE ABOVE 250,000 THE
SAME WAY WE TAX ANYONE ELSE FOR THE PAYROLL TAX, PROBLEM SOLVED. AND REPUBLICANS WILL FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL FOR THE RICH,
WITH NO OTHER EXCUSE. THERE ARE HISTORICAL REASONS
FOR ALL OF THIS. THE REASON THEY PRESENTED THE WAY THEY DO IS
BECAUSE THEY PREFACE IT WITH IF NOTHING IS DONE. IF NOTHING IS
DONE, IF NO ACTION IS TAKEN, IT WILL RUN OUT OF MONEY IN 2034,
THE NUMBER VARIES A LITTLE BIT — THAT’S WHY THEY FRAME IT THAT
WAY. THE REASON WHY IT WAS CAPPED ORIGINALLY WAS BECAUSE
IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AN INSURANCE SYSTEM, A CORRELATION
BETWEEN WHAT YOU PAY AND WHAT YOU GET OUT, THAT’S WHY IT NEVER
WENT ALL THE WAY UP. BUT IT WAS DESIGNED SO THAT 90% OF ALL
INCOME IS SUBJECT TO THE PAYROLL TAX. THEY DIDN’T ANTICIPATE THAT
MILLIONAIRES AND BILLIONAIRES WOULD CAPTURE SO MUCH MORE OF
THE NATIONAL INCOME THAT SUDDENLY WE ARE ONLY TEXTING 80
SOMETHING PERCENT. HISTORICALLY THEY ARE PLAYING BY THE OLD
RULES, KIND OF CHEATING, AS OPPOSED TO SAYING THERE IS HUGE
WEALTH INEQUALITY NOW SO LET’S LIFT THE CAP. THAT IS THE REAL
REASON TO LIFT THE CAP. AND THEY SAY SOCIAL SECURITY IS JUST IOUs
— DON’T YOU PAY YOUR IOUs? ARE YOU A WELSHER? YOU WANT TO WELSH ON GRANDMA? THAT’S OF COURSE WHAT THEY WANT
TO DO. PRESS COULD EXPLOIT A WEDGE
IN THE REPUBLIC AND PARTY, PAUL RYAN’S VISION OF ENTITLEMENT
SPENDING IS A SENSIBLY DIFFERENT THAN TRUMP’S BECAUSE TRUMP RAN
HIS CAMPAIGN AT LEAST RHETORICALLY SAYING HE WOULD
PROTECT SOCIAL SECURITY, WHEREAS THAT IS DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSITE
TO WHAT PAUL RYAN HAS BEEN PROMOTING HIS ENTIRE CAREER, HE
KIND OF LIVES TO CUT PROGRAMS, THAT’S WHAT GIVES HIS LIFE
MEANING IN A WAY. SANDERS HAS TAKEN THE RIGHT TECH HERE, BY
SAYING IF YOU ARE SINCERE IN YOUR PLEDGES TO PROTECT THESE
PROGRAMS I WILL WORK WITH YOU TO TRY TO DO IT, MAYBE EVEN FIND
ADDITIONAL FUNDING, THAT WAY YOU WILL MAYBE FORCE A DESIRABLE
DIVIDE WITHIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. I JUST WANT TO BACK UP TWO
THINGS CENK RAISED — ONE IS THAT WE’VE COVERED HOW MANY
TIMES THE SHARE OF TAXES BEING PAID BY CORPORATIONS VERSUS
PEOPLE IN VARIOUS WEALTH QUINTILES — THE CORPORATE SHARE
HAS BEEN GOING DOWN AND DOWN THE PAST FEW DECADES, THERE IN MIND
WE’VE ALSO COVERED THE DETAILS OF TRUMP’S PROPOSED TAX PLAN
DURING THE CAMPAIGN WHERE HE WOULD CUT CORPORATE TAXES BY TWO
THIRDS. SO EXPECT THAT IF HE GETS AWAY WITH THAT, THAT SHARE
WILL EFFECTIVELY GO DOWN TO NEARLY NOTHING. AND CENK MADE
REFERENCE TO THE REPUBLICAN ALTERNATIVE TO BERNIE’S PLAN,
THE IDEAS THEY ARE OKAY WITH, AND THESE ARE NOT OUR STRAWMAN
VERSION OF WHAT THEY WANT — THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT
APPROACHES YOU CAN TAKE. YOU CAN INCREASE THE BENEFITS TO THOSE
WHO ARE WORSE OFF, YOU COULD DO THAT THEORETICALLY, BUT IN SO
DOING YOU DO HAVE TO TAX THE WEALTHIEST PEOPLE A LITTLE BIT,
AND THAT IS BAD BECAUSE IF YOU WERE TO TAX THEM A LITTLE BIT
MORE THEY WOULD STILL ONLY HAVE A BETTER STANDARD OF LIVING THAN
ANY OTHER HUMAN IN THE HISTORY OF OUR SPECIES — OR YOU COULD
MAKE PEOPLE WAIT A COUPLE MORE YEARS WHEN THEY RETIRE AND
GIVE THEM LESS MONEY EVERY MONTH FOR THE REST OF THEIR
LIFE. THAT MEANS TESTED IDEA COMES
FROM THE CONCORD COALITION AND THE KOCH BROTHERS WHO WHEN THEY
INITIALLY DRAFTED THE PROPOSAL SAID WHAT YOU THINK IS THE LEVEL
OF WEALTH WHERE WE SHOULD START CUTTING IT? THEY SAID AN AVERAGE
INCOME OF $20,000 A YEAR. SO WHEN THEY SAID CUTTING IT FOR
RICH PEOPLE THEY REALLY MEAN CUTTING IT FOR EVERYBODY. AND
NUMBER TWO, DON’T FORGET MULVANEY, TRUMP’S PICK FOR THE
DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, WHO IS ON
RECORD SAYING WE HAVE TO END MEDICARE AS WE KNOW IT, AND ON
RECORD AS RAISING THE AGE, THINKING IT’S A GOOD IDEA TO
RAISE THE AGE OF SOCIAL SECURITY OR CUT ENTITLEMENTS IN SOME
OTHER WAY. EVERY YEAR THEY RAISE THE
RETIREMENT AGE COST YOU TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS. IT IS THE
GREATEST ROBBERY IN AMERICAN HISTORY. EVERY TIME THEY RAISE
THE AGE. THAT IS MONEY YOU WILL NEVER GET BACK. AND THAT MONEY
— THEY CALL IT SAVING $14 TRILLION — WHO IS SAVING IT? THE RICH ARE, IT’S GOING TO THEM. I WANT TO END ON THIS IDEA
WHICH IS WHAT MICHAEL STARTED WITH — THEY SAID BERNIE SANDERS
WAS IMPRACTICAL. THAT WAS THE MAIN CHARGE AGAINST HIM BY
DEMOCRATS IN THE PRIMARIES. HE DOESN’T KNOW HOW TO GET THINGS
DONE POLITICALLY. ARE YOU KIDDING? THIS IS THE MOST SAVVY,
PRACTICAL POLITICAL MOVE THERE IS. HE MAKES THIS DISTINCTION
CLEAR. IF YOU WANT TO RAISE THE RETIREMENT AGE AND YOU GET LESS
MONEY WHEN YOU RETIRE, VOTE WITH REPUBLICANS. IF YOU LIKE SOCIAL
SECURITY AND WANT TO PROTECT IT AND GET A LITTLE MORE MONEY,
VOTE WITH DEMOCRATS. IT IS THE MOST POPULAR PROGRAM IN AMERICAN
HISTORY. IT POLLS THAT OVER 80%, ROUGHLY 84% POPULARITY. BERNIE
SANDERS HAS JUST CLARIFIED THAT REPUBLICANS ARE AGAINST 84% OF
AMERICAN PEOPLE. THAT IS PRACTICAL, THAT’S GOOD POLITICS,
THAT’S HOW YOU WIN.