Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 131

Thread: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a future Am

  1. #121
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,082

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by EarlzP View Post
    Our SS money was borrowed not stolen, the government borrowed our Federal income tax dollars to save Wall Street and the Banks
    actually they've been borrowing it for decades. it went to buy the Congressman Smith Highway Overpass that nobody in your town uses.

    and we want every cent of that back with interest
    well, assuming that aliens don't land and bring us magical technology that doubles the size of our economy overnight, you're not going to get it.

  2. #122
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    The solution to our nation's Social Security problem is jobs, Jobs, JOBS! More specific, get MORE people paying into the system than those receiving benefits from it coupled with STOPPING Congress from borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund, and Social Security will be solvent for a long time to come. But as long as there are more people receive Social Security (Disability/SSI) who don't pay into it, there will continue to be problems with the system and those individuals who, like myself, have paid into the system including those young individuals who are just now entering the workforce, will continue to bear the brunt of the burden to our government's misdeeds.

    Sidenote: This is probably one of the few areas I agree with Conservatives on. Leave my Social Security entitlement alone! I've paid into it for well over 25 years. I've lived a very health life and hope to be just as healthy throughout my golden years. I want MY MONEY when I decide it's time for me to retire, and when it comes time for me to collect I want what I'm entitled to. Don't means test me!! It's not up to the government to decide whether or not I am worthy of the funds I've allowed the government to hold for me until I retire. So, no!!! Don't mess with my Social Security.

  3. #123
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    The solution to our nation's Social Security problem is jobs, Jobs, JOBS! More specific, get MORE people paying into the system than those receiving benefits from it coupled with STOPPING Congress from borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund, and Social Security will be solvent for a long time to come. But as long as there are more people receive Social Security (Disability/SSI) who don't pay into it, there will continue to be problems with the system and those individuals who, like myself, have paid into the system including those young individuals who are just now entering the workforce, will continue to bear the brunt of the burden to our government's misdeeds.

    Sidenote: This is probably one of the few areas I agree with Conservatives on. Leave my Social Security entitlement alone! I've paid into it for well over 25 years. I've lived a very health life and hope to be just as healthy throughout my golden years. I want MY MONEY when I decide it's time for me to retire, and when it comes time for me to collect I want what I'm entitled to. Don't means test me!! It's not up to the government to decide whether or not I am worthy of the funds I've allowed the government to hold for me until I retire. So, no!!! Don't mess with my Social Security.
    and the more years you pay in, the more you will feel this way....
    I started paying in 1963....
    BUT, as long as they grandfather current payers, we need to abandon it for new workers as they come of age. A certain "floor" or safety net needs to remain in place to help cover bad years for the economy, but if employers will pay their 7.5% to the employee, and the employee gets to put their savings in a taxfree account (now and later), more people will save for their own future.
    Question is, how do we deal with those who will just spend it instead of save?
    One possible way, make them report the amount of savings put into their accounts every year, on their tax return. IF they don't contribute to their retirement account, they pay a penalty...
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  4. #124
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    actually they've been borrowing it for decades. it went to buy the Congressman Smith Highway Overpass that nobody in your town uses.



    well, assuming that aliens don't land and bring us magical technology that doubles the size of our economy overnight, you're not going to get it.
    those aliens come here and probe our butts, why can't they share a bit of their technology with us? OTOH, maybe they are probing us for OUR knowledge? Based on how we live, they might be thinking our brains are up our butts????
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  5. #125
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    and the more years you pay in, the more you will feel this way....
    I started paying in 1963....
    BUT, as long as they grandfather current payers, we need to abandon it for new workers as they come of age. A certain "floor" or safety net needs to remain in place to help cover bad years for the economy, but if employers will pay their 7.5% to the employee, and the employee gets to put their savings in a taxfree account (now and later), more people will save for their own future.
    Question is, how do we deal with those who will just spend it instead of save?
    One possible way, make them report the amount of savings put into their accounts every year, on their tax return. IF they don't contribute to their retirement account, they pay a penalty...
    Hmmmm...where have we heard this "take responsibility for yourself or pay a penalty" line from recently?

    Oh, yeah...health care reform law and the individual mandate.

    Sarcasm aside, I suppose there could be a shared responsibility between government and private citizens over social security, but any attempt to privatize same entirely would never work primarly due to the high risk associated with volitile markets. If the 2008 recession taught retirees anything it was not to put all their eggs in one basket. That said, 401K plans already come with a penalty for early withdrawl. I suppose if people were given the opportunity to invest up to half of their social security deduction maybe more people would take the risk. I'd say you'd have to have the safety net of a 401K plan or guaranteed pension plan to remove the fear people would have in allowing the stock market to absorb their investment dollars and see nothing in return due to their enormous risk taking. Maybe market investors should be made to invest with caution when using retirement funds and held liable for taking undue risk. I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that most laymen who don't know that much about the stock market or investing and, as such, will never take the gamble if it's a "all or nothing" approach w/privatizing social security. Risk aversion is the key.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 04-17-11 at 01:15 PM.

  6. #126
    Sage
    UtahBill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 01:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,687

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    Hmmmm...where have we heard this "take responsibility for yourself or pay a penalty" line from recently?

    Oh, yeah...health care reform law and the individual mandate.

    Sarcasm aside, I suppose there could be a shared responsibility between government and private citizens over social security, but any attempt to privatize same entirely would never work primarly due to the high risk associated with volitile markets. If the 2008 recession taught retirees anything it was not to put all their eggs in one basket. That said, 401K plans already come with a penalty for early withdrawl. I suppose if people were given the opportunity to invest up to half of their social security deduction maybe more people would take the risk. I'd say you'd have to have the safety net of a 401K plan or guaranteed pension plan to remove the fear people would have in allowing the stock market to absorb their investment dollars and see nothing in return due to their enormous risk taking. Maybe market investors should be made to invest with caution when using retirement funds and held liable for taking undue risk. I don't know what the answer is, but I do know that most laymen who don't know that much about the stock market or investing and, as such, will never take the gamble if it's a "all or nothing" approach w/privatizing social security. Risk aversion is the key.
    oh, I have an answer to the volatile market thing, take out the volatile part that has to do with greed.....
    Nearly all market busts, serious busts, were caused by greed. Make betrayal of the public trust a crime punishable by very long prison terms, and forfeiture of all gained thru such betrayal. The law would apply to politicians as well as Wall Street.
    Politicians get one term at a generous salary, but no "stock options", aka personal gain thru bribery.
    Insider trading would be a minimum of 2 years for first offense under a certain dollar amount, and barred from ever handling other people's funds.
    Major amounts of money, an extra 2 years for every million dollars involved.
    Federal level Lobbyists have to register in ALL states since what they do affects all taxpayers. Lobbying fees should be a million dollars, per state, per year.
    I would throw in a public whipping post for more serious offenders.

    Economics and govt are current half year subjects in most high schools. Each should be a year, and required for graduation. Every student should have to write at least one subject related paper per semester, and present it orally to the class.

    We can't say ignorance is no excuse if we purposely keep them ignorant....
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  7. #127
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    and the more years you pay in, the more you will feel this way....
    I started paying in 1963....
    BUT, as long as they grandfather current payers, we need to abandon it for new workers as they come of age. A certain "floor" or safety net needs to remain in place to help cover bad years for the economy, but if employers will pay their 7.5% to the employee, and the employee gets to put their savings in a taxfree account (now and later), more people will save for their own future.
    Question is, how do we deal with those who will just spend it instead of save?
    One possible way, make them report the amount of savings put into their accounts every year, on their tax return. IF they don't contribute to their retirement account, they pay a penalty...
    A locked brokerage account, with a specific ID number for the individual.
    Can't take anything out and even when retirement comes, it will be dispersed in equal payments.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  8. #128
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    A locked brokerage account, with a specific ID number for the individual.
    Can't take anything out and even when retirement comes, it will be dispersed in equal payments.
    In short, a "lock-box".

  9. #129
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    In short, a "lock-box".
    Pretty much, with the political process removed from the equation.
    Those guys, regardless of party, will find any reason to justify raiding it.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  10. #130
    Professor

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Last Seen
    04-26-13 @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,404
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Schakowsky tears into Cantor for saying Social Security ‘cannot exist’ in a futur

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    oh, I have an answer to the volatile market thing, take out the volatile part that has to do with greed.....
    Nearly all market busts, serious busts, were caused by greed. Make betrayal of the public trust a crime punishable by very long prison terms, and forfeiture of all gained thru such betrayal. The law would apply to politicians as well as Wall Street.
    Politicians get one term at a generous salary, but no "stock options", aka personal gain thru bribery.
    Insider trading would be a minimum of 2 years for first offense under a certain dollar amount, and barred from ever handling other people's funds.
    Major amounts of money, an extra 2 years for every million dollars involved.
    Federal level Lobbyists have to register in ALL states since what they do affects all taxpayers. Lobbying fees should be a million dollars, per state, per year.
    I would throw in a public whipping post for more serious offenders.

    Economics and govt are current half year subjects in most high schools. Each should be a year, and required for graduation. Every student should have to write at least one subject related paper per semester, and present it orally to the class.

    We can't say ignorance is no excuse if we purposely keep them ignorant....
    I have a better idea make lobbying illegal, make public television the media used for campaigning. Put the power back into the hands of the people not the highest bidder

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •