How long will we blame George W. Bush for our problems?
By CNN's Jack Cafferty:
It's all Bush's fault.
That's where most Americans still put the blame for our economic problems, even though it's been more than three years since George W. Bush left office.
A new Gallup Poll shows 68% of those surveyed say the former president deserves either a great deal or a moderate amount of blame. Thirty-one percent say he deserves not much or no blame at all.
Compare that to the man who has actually been steering the ship for the last three-plus years.
Fifty-two percent say President Obama deserves the blame for America's economic troubles. Forty-eight percent say he's not to blame.
The relative economic blame given to the two leaders is virtually the same as September 2011.
As is usually the case, there's a partisan divide here, although Republicans are more willing to blame Bush than Democrats are willing to blame President Obama.
As for independents, they are substantially more likely to blame Bush than Obama.
With the economy the top issue for November, all this is very good news for President Obama.
Even though Americans have more negative than positive views of the economy – and the direction it's headed – people are more likely to blame the president's predecessor.
It kind of makes you wonder at what point President Obama will own this nation's problems.
Meanwhile all this comes on the heels of another poll that showed President Bush as the least popular living ex-president.
Mitt Romney may want to keep this in mind as he selects his running mate. Several of his potential vice presidents have close ties to Bush, including folks like Rob Portman, Mitch Daniels and, of course, Jeb Bush.
Here’s my question to you: How long will we blame George W. Bush for our problems?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How high should the retirement age be?
By CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Get ready to work well into the golden years.
A new report suggests governments need to raise the retirement age as life expectancies soar.
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development says that by 2050 the average person will live at least 20 years beyond retirement.
Right now in the United States, the full retirement age is 66. A decade ago it was 65. And in 2022 it will go up again to 67. This is called a trend.
Problem is, governments pay a portion of people's retirement in the form of things like Social Security - and the longer we live, the more it costs to fund our retirement.
Social Security is already in deep trouble.
The trust fund pays out more in benefits than it takes in from workers' payroll taxes. It's estimated there will be a $165 billion shortfall this year and that the program will only be able to pay promised benefits in full through 2033.
Part of the problem is Social Security is an outdated system. Back in the 1930s when it was created, most people didn't live past 60. The point was never to pay Social Security to a retiree for decades.
Plus, experts say that working longer isn't only about paying more into Social Security.
They suggest people in their 60s today are healthier and can be a productive part of our society for longer.
Whether that's true or not, we better get ready to start working longer or move to France.
First thing their new socialist president did was LOWER the retirement age to 60, even though it will cost the government billions of euros a year. Another example of sound European fiscal policy.
Anyway...
Here’s my question to you: How high should the retirement age be?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments