Good question, first visit the offical ss website http://www.ssa.gov/

Next look into republicans wanting to privatize social security, remember Google News is your friend, search for stories there.

Bush's record on social security.
"The Privatization Nightmare
Can you afford to foot a $1 trillion bill? In 2001, Bush's Social Security reform commission suggested partial privatization Social Security. Independent analysis of the President's proposals to privatize Social Security have noted than any such plan would cost at least $1 trillion. Bush has not said where this money would come from.4

And for your $1 trillion, you get benefit cuts. Bush's Social Security reform commission released three final plans in December 2001, all promoting privatization. The New York Times reported: 'President Bush's Social Security Commission set out three options today for allowing workers to establish individual investment accounts and acknowledged that the proposals would have to be accompanied by benefit cuts or other painful steps if the retirement system was to avert a long-term financial crisis.'"

Also check out John Kerry's Plan to Strengthen Social Security"

I will get some more stuff together.

Remember when debating:
-Never be on the defense. Rule number one for any debate.
-In this case, focus not only on what democrats plan to do, but what republicans do wrong and what they don't do.
-Here's a great one, when they start saying about what democrats are doing wrong hit them with this: When Bush is challanged on SS issues, rather than state his plan, he can only call the democrats tired and pathetic, a diversion from the real issue. He also implies that people from Massachusetts don't know about ss or healthcare. Another diversion. Ask them how privatizing ss in a volitale market will help anyone but the rich.

Republicans will also say that democrats think ss is fine the way it is. Tell them, this is not true, but democrats feel that we should build off the current system, rather than place ss in the hands of those whom aren't regulated by the government.
Tell them that Bush hasn't lived up to any of his promises on ss.
Tell them that according the CBS Market Watch that privatizing ss is destructive.
"Unfortunately, privatization is a dumb move -- for Wall Street! Money is in the hands of America's richest 10 percent, millionaires who can afford Wall Street's excessive fees, not Main Street investors whose average assets are less than $50,000."
Tell them the richest 2% of the country control 1/3 of it. And that the 98% rest of us can't afford ss being privatized.
Tell them that if Bush wanted to help ss he could have not spent 200 billion dollars in Iraq (based on a lie) and instead invested it in America.

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?siteid=google&dist;=google&guid;=%7B244BB05A%2D7FC3%2D4CA2%2DB163%2D2F360253B3F7%7D

http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?siteid=google&dist;=google&guid;=%7B2BCD9C2E%2D6E00%2D4440%2DB8F0%2D59ACFA58AB63%7D
"We know, for example, consumer debt has doubled in just the past 10 years (now a whopping $2 trillion, roughly $18,700 per household, not including home mortgages). Meanwhile, America's savings rate has dropped from around 8 percent in 1980 to roughly one percent today.

Savings became a problem during the late '90s go-go market. Many investors thought they didn't need to save because portfolios were growing 30 percent annually.

Then during the 2000-2002 bear market nobody wanted to invest. With portfolios losing 45 percent, savings meant throwing good money after bad.

And now in 2004 with a slowing economy, rising oil prices and interest rates, global terrorists' threats, election tensions and an unpredictable economic scene in a flat market, living for the moment feels better than saving on an uncertain tomorrow.

Unfortunately, that myopic thinking is guaranteed to kill your retirement"


http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?siteid=google&dist;=google&guid;=%7BE95AB6F3%2D8990%2D4EE3%2D8AE8%2D9020690E3BA4%7D

Another article

"- sending our kids to die in an illegal, meaningless war in Iraq, a war that had nothing to do with fighting terrorism but actually hindered that fight. You want more of the same, only this time with Iran, vote for Bush.

- failing to fund education for our young people. "No Child Left Behind" is just a meaningless bunch of words because minimal funds have been provided for education, schools are suffering and cities and towns are struggling to find money for education. Want more of this? Vote for Bush.

- failing to provide jobs that pay decent wages. The economy is suffering badly, crappy jobs are the only ones available, pay is low, the government is always trying to bust unions, and the rich get all the benefits at the expense of the survival of the rest of us. Wise up, all you hard-working-for low-pay folks who seem to have a love-affair with Bush. Kiss him off. You don't have a chance in Hell of bettering yourselves under a Republican administration like this one. If Bush wins, it will get worse, far worse, not better.

- failing to protecting social security, the safety net of the poor. Instead of the guaranteed income provided by the Social Security Act, Bush and his rich financial buddies, those who give big bucks to his campaign, want to privatize Social Security. They want poor people to rely on playing the stock market in order to earn money to provide for their retirement. They pick up the big bucks running those privatized funds, while we take all of the risks. Imagine if you had bought Enron or Polaroid stocks as your safety net for retirement instead of having that nice guaranteed Social Security check every month. Instead of working toward improving Social Security, Bush and cohorts want to do away with it. They appear to want to make your retired life one of misery. You love misery? Vote for Bush.

- failing to provide clean, safe, affordable housing. Housing, decent housing, is in short supply. We could be pouring a lot of the billions that were thrown away in Iraq (much of it to Halliburton and other Bush buddies) into better housing and more reasonable housing for working people. We need a housing industry that is continually working on better, cheaper, more energy efficient places for people to live. Our slums are getting larger and in even worse condition. Slums and poverty breed more slums and poverty. Drug use and crime increases. Our jails are full. Minorities suffer the most. "Justice for All" is becoming "Justice for the Rich." Want more of this? Vote for Bush.

- failing to enforce and even undoing all of the regulations enacted to protect the environment. The Bush administration's actions regarding the environment can only be called a disaster. Regulations designed to protect workers from injury have been changed to protect industry not the worker. Regulations regarding cleaning up of pollution have been revised in order to ease the financial burden on businesses. Polluters seem to be encouraged to pollute. Clean water, clean air, clean living conditions are not a concern of this administration. Protecting parks, public facilities where a family can go and enjoy the outdoors is no longer a priority as Bush opens up public lands to the logging industry. Oil is the major priority of this administration with coal a close second. Clean energy is low priority. Clean energy means people breathe clean air, but what's clean air to this administration when it's big money contributors can make another buck? You want big business to continue dumping on you, polluting your air, poisoning your food, making your workplace more dangerous, vote for Bush.

- failing to provide adequate health care for needy citizens. A huge proportion of the population either has no health insurance or inadequate health insurance. Some businesses have legitimate concerns about being able to afford to cover their employees health benefits. A healthy work force is a better work force, a more efficient work force. A healthy student is a better student. Healthy elderly people are less of a drain on medical facilities whose costs are running rampant. In the long run, a healthy population saves business and government billions of dollars in dealing with the effects of poor health. The situation is crying for creative solution, yet the Bush administration offers only the tired solution of privatizing of health care. Why? Because owners of private health care facilities are among the largest supporters of the administration. Drug companies are allowed to run rampant regarding the pricing of their products while Bush works to protect them and tries to prevent citizens from getting their drugs from other sources such as Canada. Too much emphasis is being placed on drugging the population and not enough on eliminating the need for over-medication by focusing on preventive health techniques. We have a sick society, both politically and with respect to the physical and mental health of the population. Want more of the same, vote Bush."

Not all are about ss, but some are. The war in Iraq is just one more diversion to dealing with issues at home. Don't get to carried away on other people, but google around and see what you find. Look at republican arguements and find the flaws--believe me it's not that hard

thanks a lot so far! it's going to help me big time, im sure of that...fortunately i'm in a group of 3(against 2)so we are going to read your messages very carefully and use them in are debate...The only little problem for me is that I really really reeeally don't know anything about this subject so its rather difficult..I hope we will succeed because it's for our exams..

Perhaps the SS FAQ might help.

Another link is Understanding social security

kitana_arsenal Wrote: thanks a lot so far! it's going to help me big time, im sure of that...fortunately i'm in a group of 3(against 2)so we are going to read your messages very carefully and use them in are debate...The only little problem for me is that I really really reeeally don't know anything about this subject so its rather difficult..I hope we will succeed because it's for our exams..

Here is a Q&A on the Future of SS

Here's a 39 Page PDF outlining 4 basic courses of action to fix SS. I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I would print this at a library and go through it, this would be excellent refrence. Go in perpared, get a good grade. It's from July of 01 I believe.

here's a 225 page PDF with 2004 figures. Again, bringing this kind of documentation to support your arguments will, I think, get you a better grade.

ok, here is what really is happening with socail security, and why it was set up:

in the 1930's during the great depression a large number of elderly ppl where starving to death, or barely living at all, so the current president pressured congress to pass cocails ecurity to hel provide the basic nessesaties to senoir citizens, it was nor ever will be a retirement plan.

how socail security works:

evry month everyone who works pays a small amount of there pay check into socail secuirity, at the end of the month, that money is counted, then sent out to the elderly. so what ever was paid into it was paid out within 30 days and it worked perfectly, until the baby boomers.

in the 1970's, or was it 60's? no wait the 70's, someone looked at socail security, and how it seemed to work out perfectly, then realized that in about 2010 or so when the baby boomers start to retire, the population paying into socail security wront be able o pay enough cash for the ppl who will be receiving it

so they opened an account to put money into it, by double-ing the amount of money taking from the paychecks, and it worked, or started to work.

then the democrates and republicans, both parties did this, i mean both parties, passed a messure to allow the goverment to borrow from the funds, but the funds where never put back into it.

why an account: the money was to be used to help pay for the growing elderly population until a permanent solution could be set up, which is what is being done now

the main problem with socail security:

all the old ppl who are on it where either to stupid to figure out why socail security was set up, or never bothered to look into it, and now that they have no good retirement plan, they expected socail security to pay all there bills and such, and not what it really does

PAY FOR THE BASSIC NECESSATIES, i.e. food, some medicine, maybe help pay for rent.

why i dont like it:

it sets up a socailist mentality to where the goverment should pay for everything, which causes the goverment to go deep into debt, and takes money away from every other project the goverment does, like schools, roads, police, fire departments, colleges, and so forth.

from the democrates point of veiw:

republicans are the devil and the cause of all lifes problems, if u dont vote democrate socail security will collapse, medicare will collapes, the earth will be invaded by lizard men from the moon, the sun will implode, and ppl will break into your home and kill you unless all guns, which is the cause of all crime, are banned, magically solving all crime and ending it permantly

so do what the democrates do when there not in office: blaim everything on the republicans to make old ppl hate the republicans and then vote democrate

wha a crock, typical right winged bullshit, instead of focusing on their policies, they attack dems...

mrinsulto Wrote: ok, here is what really is happening with socail security, and why it was set up: in the 1930's during the great depression a large number of elderly ppl where starving to death, or barely living at all, so the current president pressured congress to pass cocails ecurity to hel provide the basic nessesaties to senoir citizens, it was nor ever will be a retirement plan. how socail security works: evry month everyone who works pays a small amount of there pay check into socail secuirity, at the end of the month, that money is counted, then sent out to the elderly. so what ever was paid into it was paid out within 30 days and it worked perfectly, until the baby boomers. in the 1970's, or was it 60's? no wait the 70's, someone looked at socail security, and how it seemed to work out perfectly, then realized that in about 2010 or so when the baby boomers start to retire, the population paying into socail security wront be able o pay enough cash for the ppl who will be receiving it so they opened an account to put money into it, by double-ing the amount of money taking from the paychecks, and it worked, or started to work. then the democrates and republicans, both parties did this, i mean both parties, passed a messure to allow the goverment to borrow from the funds, but the funds where never put back into it. why an account: the money was to be used to help pay for the growing elderly population until a permanent solution could be set up, which is what is being done now the main problem with socail security: all the old ppl who are on it where either to stupid to figure out why socail security was set up, or never bothered to look into it, and now that they have no good retirement plan, they expected socail security to pay all there bills and such, and not what it really does PAY FOR THE BASSIC NECESSATIES, i.e. food, some medicine, maybe help pay for rent. why i dont like it: it sets up a socailist mentality to where the goverment should pay for everything, which causes the goverment to go deep into debt, and takes money away from every other project the goverment does, like schools, roads, police, fire departments, colleges, and so forth. from the democrates point of veiw: republicans are the devil and the cause of all lifes problems, if u dont vote democrate socail security will collapse, medicare will collapes, the earth will be invaded by lizard men from the moon, the sun will implode, and ppl will break into your home and kill you unless all guns, which is the cause of all crime, are banned, magically solving all crime and ending it permantly so do what the democrates do when there not in office: blaim everything on the republicans to make old ppl hate the republicans and then vote democrate

Since I'm majoring in Economics, I know about SS.

One key fact about Democrats and Republicans is that they wont even touch SS, or change anything about it. That is because it is the elderly that are majority of the voters in the USA, and although SS acounts for more than 50% of the federal budget(not welfare or military, but Social Security) and they would lose tons of votes if they lowered the SS spending.

Another thing is that the SS tax favors Republicans, because the more you make, the lower the percentage they take out of your check, and the less you make, the more percentage they take.

Obviously, you can tell what point of view born again vampire is fond of, but since you have to argue that side of the spectrum, you should probably take heed to everything b-a-v says.
I've seen/been involved in a couple of discussions with b-a-v and one thing is for sure. There is knowledge there. Right or wrong? That's up to you, but like I said, that is the side your arguing for.

thanks again everyone! tomorrow we're going to practice and next tuesday we have to do the debate..I hope were going to kick some (male)ass

let us know how you do :)