• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The results are in on social security

Some people seem to have difficulty with the concept of society. It is called SOCIAL SECURITY because it is a program for society and not just an individual. Even if an individual does not need it for their future retirement, they still benefit greatly from it by having the overwhelming majority in society safe and secure in their Golden Years because of it. There is a societal benefit and all as members of society benefit because of it.
 
donc said:
Kinda looks like we have twenty five years to find the fix, then they more than likely will say cut the cap.
<Even without any changes, Social Security payroll taxes could pay 100 percent of benefits for the next 25 years, and 75 percent to 80 percent of benefits for decades thereafter.>
Click to expand...

I trust nothing that comes from AARP. They are part of the problem. They are the greedy geezers. Let's try to find someone whose numbers can be trusted. Or not. I think it may be too late already.
 
haymarket said:
Some people seem to have difficulty with the concept of society. It is called SOCIAL SECURITY because it is a program for society and not just an individual. Even if an individual does not need it for their future retirement, they still benefit greatly from it by having the overwhelming majority in society safe and secure in their Golden Years because of it. There is a societal benefit and all as members of society benefit because of it.
Click to expand...

It was a scam designed to help more and more people accept their dependence upon government. It was also intended to create a hunger for bigger government and greater numbers of government services. And, when one digs just a little deeper one might think the real reason was to help keep democrats in power. It has nothing to do with benefiting "society" and plenty to do with enslavement. Imagine that! I am required to pay for my chains and participate in locking myself into them.
 
xpiher said:
Tax cuts do not stimulate the economy unless those tax cuts result in actual demand increase. The type of the tax cuts being purposed are not the type that actual stimulate demand. All those type of tax cuts will result in is increase CEO bonuses because more profits will be had.
Click to expand...
Then we ought to do it because it is morally right to take the least amount of wealth from those who create it in order to provide the Constitutionally-limited government services we have agreed to.
 
Misterveritis said:
I trust nothing that comes from AARP. They are part of the problem. They are the greedy geezers. Let's try to find someone whose numbers can be trusted. Or not. I think it may be too late already.
Click to expand...

Who gives **** who you trust? When you come up with something other than a lameass opinin let me know.:2wave:
 
QUOTE=Misterveritis;

You have a troubled, ugly spirit.
Click to expand...

More opinions eh?


Why do you even post here?
Click to expand...

Because i have friends here.Whats your reason for being here ?
 
Misterveritis said:
What? Help me to follow your, uh, oh, er, "reasoning". I say that there is no money in that social security locked box. There are only completely worthless IOUs. And somehow that leads you to believe that I am saying don't pay our debts?

Kooky.
Click to expand...
You have a right to be wrong.

Trust Fund FAQs

By law, income to the trust funds must be invested, on a daily basis, in securities guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the Federal government. All securities held by the trust funds are "special issues" of the United States Treasury. Such securities are available only to the trust funds.
Click to expand...
 
Misterveritis said:
Then we ought to do it because it is morally right to take the least amount of wealth from those who create it in order to provide the Constitutionally-limited government services we have agreed to.
Click to expand...

Limited government is a good thing, nonfunctional government is not. Texas is a great example why we should be wary of huge tax and spending cuts, the very basic services of government are, from what I can tell through the news (Faux included), completely worthless and education has especially been hard hit by Texas budget restraints.

As I said, and you ignored, the opposite of the laffer curve holds true as well.
 
pbrauer said:
You have a right to be wrong.

Trust Fund FAQs
Click to expand...
And those are worthless IOUs. The Congress took the real money. They used it for other things. Then they put US securities (IOUs) on the ledger. There is no wealth to back the promise. They lied. And you believe them. Still. After all of this.
 
pbrauer said:
You have a right to be wrong.

Trust Fund FAQs
Click to expand...

um. you realized you just proved him right? IF we were running surpluses to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars; then those bills might be worth something. you see us running a balanced budget any time soon, much less a massive surplus?
 
donc said:
Kinda looks like we have twenty five years to find the fix, then they more than likely will say cut the cap.
Click to expand...

no. we have 25 years if we assume that:

1. Medicare has no unfunded liability
2. Medicaid has no unfunded liability
3. there is no national debt
4. the budget is currently balanced
5. the budget starting next year will begin to run heavy surpluses.


if those 5 things are true, then yes, we have 25 years. if they aren't true, then our time window get's significantly shorter.



there is a reason the AARP just signaled that they are willing to discuss reductions in Social Security Benefits. Because the math is obvious to anyone who doesn't desperately want it not to be true.
 
xpiher said:
Tax cuts do not stimulate the economy unless those tax cuts result in actual demand increase
Click to expand...

this is incorrect - tax cuts designed to stimulate demand have inevitably failed. permanent low flat rates to encourage productive behavior, however, have been demonstrated to succeed.

The type of the tax cuts being purposed are not the type that actual stimulate demand. All those type of tax cuts will result in is increase CEO bonuses because more profits will be had.
Click to expand...

who is proposing tax cuts? of what nature?

We also must come to terms with the fact that the opposite of laffer curve is true. That when revenues drop to a negligable level, the government becomes ineffective even in the sectors were nearly everyone agrees the government should be involved in and this in return causes deficit to grow and endanger the economy.
Click to expand...

true. but we are nowhere near that level. call me when revenue is 2% of GDP.
 
cpwill said:
no. we have 25 years if we assume that:


there is a reason the AARP just signaled that they are willing to discuss reductions in Social Security Benefits. Because the math is obvious to anyone who doesn't desperately want it not to be true.
Click to expand...

The only reason AARP"signaled that they are willing to SIT AT THE TABLE" was to make sure that the seniors weren't getting the screwing that Freddy Munster and the ryanscheme has in store for them.:2wave:
 
they want to take part in guiding the process because they realize that reductions in our entitlements will happen - and they will either happen in a manner of our choosing, or in a manner of our creditors choosing a'la Greece. We do not "have 25 years", and as the AARP admits, popping the cap would make up less than half of the gap.

at this point, pretending that we are not rapidly approaching the failure point is irresponsibility.
 
donc said:
Kinda looks like all the doom and gloom was for naught as for as Social Security was concerned.:2wave:

THE RESULTS ARE IN ON SOCIAL SECURITY

Do you ever worry that Social Security might not be there for you when you need it? On May 13, the Trustees of the Social Security Trust Fund released their annual report that affirmatively answers that question: yes, Social Security is alive and well. Below you will find some highlights from the Trustee’s report and important facts about Social Security:

Amount of annual surplus in 2011: $69 billion

Projected Trust Fund Balance for 2011: $2.7 trillion

Number of years Social Security is projected to be able to pay full benefits, without any shortfall: 25 years

Cost of administering Social Security as percentage of total expenditures: 0.9%

Average monthly Social Security benefit received by retired Americans: $1,164

Drop in value of private retirement accounts during the Great Recession: $2.8 trillion

Drop in value of Social Security benefits during the Great Recession: $0

Number of recessions Social Security has weathered without failing to pay benefits: 13

Number of times Social Security has failed to pay an earned benefit: 0

In response to the Trustee’s report Rep. Becerra, the highest ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Social Security, said: “Today’s report confirms what we already know: Social Security will weather the storm once again. You simply can’t buy the kind of retirement, disability and life-insurance protection on the private market that Social Security provides.”

The Becerra Bulletin, May 2011
Click to expand...

glad the misinformation is being proven a lie
Bernie Sanders has shed some significant light on it, too:
 
justabubba said:
glad the misinformation is being proven a lie
Bernie Sanders has shed some significant light on it, too:
Click to expand...


Ten-four on the misinformation/lies. Notice that most of the kool-aid coming from the wingers looks like they are C and P from a scrip? Kinda makes one wonder.:2wave:
 
justabubba said:
glad the misinformation is being proven a lie
Bernie Sanders has shed some significant light on it, too:
Click to expand...


Even if the information is false, why are any of the fixes that are purposed bad? The social security trust fund does have a bunch of AAA rated IOUs in there. If the government does get its finical situation in order, it will default on obligations. Where do you think they are going to default first?
 
donc said:
Ten-four on the misinformation/lies. Notice that most of the kool-aid coming from the wingers looks like they are C and P from a scrip? Kinda makes one wonder.:2wave:
Click to expand...

:doh

they're all saying the same thing because it's true. Social Security expenditures will be reduced, and considering the original intent of the program, an excellent way to do so is to slowly raise the retirement age.

if you and others on this forum are willing to accept for a moment the possibility that we need not run for our tin-foil hats (hilarious how the same people who make fun of Glenn Beck for saying the same thing about George Soros get their panties in such a wad about the Koch Bros), perhaps you could wonder why THE PRESIDENT'S OWN BI-PARTISAN DEBT REDUCTION COMMISSION SAID THE EXACT SAME THING?




:lamo OH NO!!! The Koch Brothers have BOUGHT OFF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUSTEES! :lamo






everyone who thought that Bernie Sanders spitting into a television camera had the ability to change mathematics? heeeres your sign. ;)
 
Last edited:
cpwill said:
they want to take part in guiding the process because they realize that reductions in our entitlements will happen - and they will either happen in a manner of our choosing, or in a manner of our creditors choosing a'la Greece. We do not "have 25 years", and as the AARP admits, popping the cap would make up less than half of the gap.

at this point, pretending that we are not rapidly approaching the failure point is irresponsibility.
Click to expand...

justabubba said:
glad the misinformation is being proven a lie
Bernie Sanders has shed some significant light on it, too:
Click to expand...

donc said:
Ten-four on the misinformation/lies. Notice that most of the kool-aid coming from the wingers looks like they are C and P from a scrip? Kinda makes one wonder.:2wave:
Click to expand...

yeah.... that's about right.


but wishful thinking doesn't get you $17 Trillion.
 
cpwill said:
:doh

they're all saying the same thing because it's true. Social Security expenditures will be reduced, and considering the original intent of the program, an excellent way to do so is to slowly raise the retirement age.

if you and others on this forum are willing to accept for a moment the possibility that we need not run for our tin-foil hats (hilarious how the same people who make fun of Glenn Beck for saying the same thing about George Soros get their panties in such a wad about the Koch Bros), perhaps you could wonder why THE PRESIDENT'S OWN BI-PARTISAN DEBT REDUCTION COMMISSION SAID THE EXACT SAME THING?




:lamo OH NO!!! The Koch Brothers have BOUGHT OFF THE SOCIAL SECURITY TRUSTEES! :lamo






everyone who thought that Bernie Sanders spitting into a television camera had the ability to change mathematics? heeeres your sign. ;)
Click to expand...

the exact same thing you insist
please point out where the Bowles Commission recommended that social security funds be invested in the stock market
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom