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

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

ggh said:

While many people have let SS become their "Retirement Plan", that is not what is was intended to be, it was only supposed to be supplemental income. The vast majority of people who received SS benefits prior to the beginning of the baby boomer retirement did not pay even a small fraction of what they got, even if you were to use a heavy interest component to the money that was "contributed". Prior to 1986 SS was pretty much a pay as you go plan where current employees paid for the benefits of current retirees, however, it became obvious to even the densest politician that this could not continue so they upped the rates and the amount on which you paid taxes so that a so-called "savings fund" which was supposed to be used to pay for the boomers retirement. As usual, they underestimated the amount that SS would pay out before the boomers began to retire as well as how much it would have to pay out to the boomers. To make matters worse, congress and the executive branch embezzled the funds from the SS fund to pay for other goodies to help them get re-elected.

The SS money has already been stolen, both to pay for enhanced benefits for previous workers and to pay for other government giveaways. Unless you were complaining about them doing this previously and unless you voted against the various representatives and presidents that were doing this, you are as guilty of creating the current problem as they are.

Click to expand...

it doesn't matter what it was intended to be.........many people rely on it. we need to raise the contribution cap.

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

ggh said:

While many people have let SS become their "Retirement Plan", that is not what is was intended to be, it was only supposed to be supplemental income. The vast majority of people who received SS benefits prior to the beginning of the baby boomer retirement did not pay even a small fraction of what they got, even if you were to use a heavy interest component to the money that was "contributed". Prior to 1986 SS was pretty much a pay as you go plan where current employees paid for the benefits of current retirees, however, it became obvious to even the densest politician that this could not continue so they upped the rates and the amount on which you paid taxes so that a so-called "savings fund" which was supposed to be used to pay for the boomers retirement. As usual, they underestimated the amount that SS would pay out before the boomers began to retire as well as how much it would have to pay out to the boomers. To make matters worse, congress and the executive branch embezzled the funds from the SS fund to pay for other goodies to help them get re-elected.

The SS money has already been stolen, both to pay for enhanced benefits for previous workers and to pay for other government giveaways. Unless you were complaining about them doing this previously and unless you voted against the various representatives and presidents that were doing this, you are as guilty of creating the current problem as they are.

Click to expand...

Whether the SS funds were used to offset other programs or not has nothing to do with what I expect to receive, the money I paid in for 45 years is mine, it was not a voluntary investment it was automatically deducted from my wages and the wages that every American worker earned, AGAIN SS is not a voluntary investment, if you want to invest in Wall Street remember that your investment does not have a guaranteed return, don't expect that my taxes including the money that I paid into SS will be used to bail out Wall Street, in short keep your hands out of my pockets

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

liblady said:

it doesn't matter what it was intended to be.........many people rely on it. we need to raise the contribution cap.

Click to expand...

Because people have made bad decisions in the past is not a reason to continue to make bad decisions. SS is a ponzi scheme, raising the cap will simply allow the congress & president to embezzle more money and do nothing to help the system.

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

liblady said:

it doesn't matter what it was intended to be.........many people rely on it. we need to raise the contribution cap.

Click to expand...

which unfortunately doesn't change the math. the numbers here make just popping the cap about as effective as fighting the deficit by instituting a 2-cent-a-carton ciggarette tax.

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

EarlzP said:

First I think every one is confused by the term entitlement, SS is not an entitlement SS is a retirement plan that people pay into all of their working lives

Click to expand...

no, it's not. it's a tax. the Supreme Court was quite clear on this; as a retiree, Social Security "owes" you absolutely zilch.

Unlike Wall Street where private investors are gambling with their retirement money SS is a safe investment.

Click to expand...

if by "safe" you mean "unlikely to exist in the future and generates a return that insures poverty in the present"

there isn't a single 40 year period of the stock market that wouldn't outperform the return we are seeing right now on social security; i posted the numbers. even in a worst case scenario the average working poor get's more than twice the return on a partially privatized account than he does on Social (in)Security. Just-So arguments don't change the math.

If SS is ended we will end up with a bunch of the working poor hitting their late years with no money and unable to find enough work to provide for housing and food.

Click to expand...

which is why you would think that democrats would be open to plans to save social security. but apparently they want it run into the dirt.

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

that is ludicrous. If you popped the cap and everyone paid the same percentage of FICA from every dollar they earned, there would be enough SS money for another seven decades without any problems.

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

EarlzP said:

Whether the SS funds were used to offset other programs or not has nothing to do with what I expect to receive

Click to expand...

dude. look at what you just said. you just admitted that your demands in this were unrelated to reality.

, the money I paid in for 45 years is mine

Click to expand...

actually not it's not. it has already been spent on others. it's not like you had a private account accumulating wealth over time. that's my plan.

, it was not a voluntary investment it was automatically deducted from my wages and the wages that every American worker earned, AGAIN SS is not a voluntary investment

Click to expand...

that's because it's not an investment at all. it's a tax.

if you want to invest in Wall Street remember that your investment does not have a guaranteed return

Click to expand...

and neither does social security.

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

haymarket said:

that is ludicrous. If you popped the cap and everyone paid the same percentage of FICA from every dollar they earned, there would be enough SS money for another seven decades without any problems.

Click to expand...

no, because people are rational actors. but I would like to see the static math if you have any. how does popping the cap get us an extra $17.5 Trillion

This week, the federal government published two important reports on long-term budgetary trends. They both show that we are on an unsustainable path that will almost certainly result in massively higher taxes.

The first report is from the trustees of the Social Security system. News reports emphasized that the date when its trust fund will be exhausted is now four years earlier than estimated last year. But in truth, this is an utterly meaningless fact because the trust fund itself is economically meaningless...

Most Americans believe that the Social Security trust fund contains a pot of money that is sitting somewhere earning interest to pay their benefits when they retire. On paper this is true; somewhere in a Treasury Department ledger there are $2.4 trillion worth of assets labeled "Social Security trust fund."

The problem is that by law 100% of these "assets" are invested in Treasury securities. Therefore, the trust fund does not have any actual resources with which to pay Social Security benefits. It's as if you wrote an IOU to yourself; no matter how large the IOU is it doesn't increase your net worth. This fact is documented in the budget, which says on page 345: "The existence of large trust fund balances … does not, by itself, increase the government's ability to pay benefits...

The trust fund is better thought of as budget authority giving the federal government legal permission to use general revenues to pay Social Security benefits when current Social Security taxes are insufficient to pay current benefits--something that will happen in 2016. Effectively, general revenues will finance Social Security when the trust fund redeems its Treasury bonds for cash to pay benefits.

Social Security's actuaries make such a calculation on page 64. It says that Social Security's unfunded liability in perpetuity is $17.5 trillion (treating the trust fund as meaningless). The program would need that much money today in a real trust fund outside the government earning a true return to pay for all the benefits that have been promised over and above future Social Security taxes. In effect, the capital stock of the nation would have to be $17.5 trillion larger than it is right now...

To put it another way, Social Security's unfunded liability equals 1.3% of the gross domestic product. So if we were to fund its deficit with general revenues, income taxes would have to rise by 1.3% of GDP immediately and forever. With the personal income tax raising about 10% of GDP in coming years, according to the Congressional Budget Office, this means that every taxpayer would have to pay 13% more just to make sure that all Social Security benefits currently promised will be paid...

Social Security's problems are trivial compared to Medicare's. Its trustees also issued a report this week. On page 69 we see that just part A of that program, which pays for hospital care, has an unfunded liability of $36.4 trillion in perpetuity. The payroll tax rate would have to rise by 6.5% immediately to cover that shortfall or 2.8% of GDP forever. Thus every taxpayer would face a 28% increase in their income taxes if general revenues were used to pay future Medicare part A benefits that have been promised over and above revenues from the Medicare tax...

To summarize, we see that taxpayers are on the hook for Social Security and Medicare by these amounts: Social Security, 1.3% of GDP; Medicare part A, 2.8% of GDP; Medicare part B, 2.8% of GDP; and Medicare part D, 1.2% of GDP. This adds up to 8.1% of GDP. Thus federal income taxes for every taxpayer would have to rise by roughly 81% to pay all of the benefits promised by these programs under current law over and above the payroll tax...

To put it another way, the total unfunded indebtedness of Social Security and Medicare comes to $106.4 trillion. That is how much larger the nation's capital stock would have to be today, all of it owned by the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, to generate enough income to pay all the benefits that have been promised over and above future payroll taxes. But the nation's total private net worth is only $51.5 trillion, according to the Federal Reserve. In effect, we have promised the elderly benefits equal to more than twice the nation's total wealth on top of the payroll tax.

Click to expand...

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

cpwill said:

no, because people are rational actors. but I would like to see the static math if you have any. how does popping the cap get us an extra $17.5 Trillion

Click to expand...

You may think that every one is blind to your agenda and maybe some will buy into your plan to continue to steal money. You can toot your horn about wall street all you want to but the facts are undisputable, tax dollars were just spent to bail out wall street, tell me if you can were did all that wall street money go, did it just turn to dust? Wall street and the bankers got rich by stealing from the investor and now you say what invest in wall street? How stupid do you think people are? Wall Street is and has been the largest manipulated ponzi scheme ever known and should be shut down and burned to the ground.

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

EarlzP said:

You may think that every one is blind to your agenda and maybe some will buy into your plan to continue to steal money.

Click to expand...

dude, the theft comes from the people running an annual deficit. you see the guys calling for a balanced budget amendment? they're the ones trying to stop the stealing.

You can toot your horn about wall street all you want to but the facts are undisputable

Click to expand...

that they are. Social (in)Security is broke, but can (with my plan) be modified to become an incredible wealth building tool for our poor, eventually making our low-income working families into millionaires.

, tax dollars were just spent to bail out wall street, tell me if you can were did all that wall street money go, did it just turn to dust

Click to expand...

nope. much of it went to the unions, and much of the TARP money seems to have gone to foriegn banks (probably German ones). In general it was a giant waste.

Wall street and the bankers got rich by stealing from the investor and now you say what invest in wall street?

Click to expand...

no, government stole from the taxpayers and then gave it to unions and banks.

How stupid do you think people are?

Click to expand...

well i used to have hopes, but the general reaction of the "i gotta get mine!" types on this forum are depressing me in this regards.

Wall Street is and has been the largest manipulated ponzi scheme ever known

Click to expand...

i would like to see any evidence you have that all of wall street is, in fact, a giant ponzi scheme?

i mean, Social Security and Medicare are ponzi schemes, and together they add up to a (current) loss of $106.5 Trillion. Wall Street would have to be pretty hefty to match that.


I find it extremely telling, btw, that your side is unable to discuss the numbers; and is left with hyperbole.

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

cpwill said:

dude, the theft comes from the people running an annual deficit. you see the guys calling for a balanced budget amendment? they're the ones trying to stop the stealing.



that they are. Social (in)Security is broke, but can (with my plan) be modified to become an incredible wealth building tool for our poor, eventually making our low-income working families into millionaires.



nope. much of it went to the unions, and much of the TARP money seems to have gone to foriegn banks (probably German ones). In general it was a giant waste.



no, government stole from the taxpayers and then gave it to unions and banks.



well i used to have hopes, but the general reaction of the "i gotta get mine!" types on this forum are depressing me in this regards.



i would like to see any evidence you have that all of wall street is, in fact, a giant ponzi scheme?

i mean, Social Security and Medicare are ponzi schemes, and together they add up to a (current) loss of $106.5 Trillion. Wall Street would have to be pretty hefty to match that.


I find it extremely telling, btw, that your side is unable to discuss the numbers; and is left with hyperbole.

Click to expand...

"Dude" The republicans and tea baggers apparently can sell their constituents on things like President Obama's eligibility to run for President using the tell a lie often enough and it will become a fact but I doubt you are going to sell your Ponzi Wall Street Scheme again this quickly. Wall Street and the American economy were both on the verge of collapse when President Obama took office, your hero ex President Bush instead of taking care of the business of the United States had involved us in two wars going so far as to borrow money from the Chinese to finance his need to be a war president . Within a month of telling the American people that the state of our economy was strong our nations economy was on the edge of collapse. Wall Street and the Bankers were bailed out using tax payer dollars and now you think that people are going to trust Wall Street with their retirement, maybe you can sell that bunk to the birthers they have already showed how gullible they are but the average American will see that scheme for exactly what it is, a chance to pick the pockets of hard working Americans. Wall Street is nothing but a Ponzi Scheme the banks are nothing more then a modern day version of the mafia and you DUDE are just trying to ensure that Wall Street can suck the last drop of blood out of the American tax payer.

$29 Billion Stimulus Package – Wall Street Bailout
The Federal Reserve stepped in to prevent the collapse of Bear Stearns (one of the world’s largest investment banks and brokerage firms) by guaranteeing $29 billion worth of potential losses in its battered portfolio. This provided enough economic stimulus for JP Morgan Chase to take over the beleaguered firm.

$200 Billion Stimulus Package – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Bailout
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (privately owned mortgage companies that are backed by the federal government) were about to fail, due to declining house prices and rising foreclosures. The Bush Administration stepped in with a $200 billion economic stimulus package and placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their $5 trillion in home loans in “temporary conservatorship,” to be supervised by the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

September – November 2008
$150 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
With the world’s largest insurance company in dire straits and 74 million clients at risk, the American government chipped in and gave AIG (American Insurance Group) $150 billion in a stimulus package that included: loans, purchase of toxic assets, and purchase of preferred shares.

October 2008
$700 Billion Stimulus Package – Banks Bailout
The Bush Administration, under the umbrella of the U.S. Treasury, committed $700 billion in economic stimulus money under TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). By many accounts, if this economic stimulus money hadn’t been injected, credit between banks would have frozen overnight, and not only the American economy, but also the global economy, would have seized up.

March 2009
$30 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
The federal government intervened once again to help insurance giant AIG, this time in the form of a $30 billion loan from TARP funds. (See above in the September-November 2008 entry, for more information on other AIG bailouts.)

March 2009
$1 Trillion "Toxic Asset" Program – Banks Bailout
The Obama Administration launched a public-private economic stimulus venture (involving the U.S. Treasury and FDIC) to try to get toxic assets off the balance sheets of banks so that they can return to normal lending practicesMarch 2009.

Good luck "Dude" not every one is going to be as gullible as the birthers

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

EarlzP said:

"Dude" The republicans and tea baggers apparently can sell their constituents on things like President Obama's eligibility to run for President using the tell a lie often enough and it will become a fact but I doubt you are going to sell your Ponzi Wall Street Scheme again this quickly. Wall Street and the American economy were both on the verge of collapse when President Obama took office, your hero ex President Bush instead of taking care of the business of the United States had involved us in two wars going so far as to borrow money from the Chinese to finance his need to be a war president . Within a month of telling the American people that the state of our economy was strong our nations economy was on the edge of collapse. Wall Street and the Bankers were bailed out using tax payer dollars and now you think that people are going to trust Wall Street with their retirement, maybe you can sell that bunk to the birthers they have already showed how gullible they are but the average American will see that scheme for exactly what it is, a chance to pick the pockets of hard working Americans. Wall Street is nothing but a Ponzi Scheme the banks are nothing more then a modern day version of the mafia and you DUDE are just trying to ensure that Wall Street can suck the last drop of blood out of the American tax payer.

$29 Billion Stimulus Package – Wall Street Bailout
The Federal Reserve stepped in to prevent the collapse of Bear Stearns (one of the world’s largest investment banks and brokerage firms) by guaranteeing $29 billion worth of potential losses in its battered portfolio. This provided enough economic stimulus for JP Morgan Chase to take over the beleaguered firm.

$200 Billion Stimulus Package – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Bailout
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (privately owned mortgage companies that are backed by the federal government) were about to fail, due to declining house prices and rising foreclosures. The Bush Administration stepped in with a $200 billion economic stimulus package and placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their $5 trillion in home loans in “temporary conservatorship,” to be supervised by the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

September – November 2008
$150 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
With the world’s largest insurance company in dire straits and 74 million clients at risk, the American government chipped in and gave AIG (American Insurance Group) $150 billion in a stimulus package that included: loans, purchase of toxic assets, and purchase of preferred shares.

October 2008
$700 Billion Stimulus Package – Banks Bailout
The Bush Administration, under the umbrella of the U.S. Treasury, committed $700 billion in economic stimulus money under TARP (Troubled Asset Relief Program). By many accounts, if this economic stimulus money hadn’t been injected, credit between banks would have frozen overnight, and not only the American economy, but also the global economy, would have seized up.

March 2009
$30 Billion Stimulus Package – AIG Bailout
The federal government intervened once again to help insurance giant AIG, this time in the form of a $30 billion loan from TARP funds. (See above in the September-November 2008 entry, for more information on other AIG bailouts.)

March 2009
$1 Trillion "Toxic Asset" Program – Banks Bailout
The Obama Administration launched a public-private economic stimulus venture (involving the U.S. Treasury and FDIC) to try to get toxic assets off the balance sheets of banks so that they can return to normal lending practicesMarch 2009.

Good luck "Dude" not every one is going to be as gullible as the birthers

Click to expand...

Just noticed this post. Not sure if this was meant to be serious or is some type of joke. Numbers and explanations are flawed, no appanent logic. Not even sure how the last sentence has anything to do with the post above.

As a democrat I get embarrased reading stuff like this on a political debate site. Perhaps there should be a seperate site for economic discussions, so people who uderstand the economy and numbers can have rational discussion.

Does anyone here know of such a site?

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

washunut said:

Just noticed this post. Not sure if this was meant to be serious or is some type of joke. Numbers and explanations are flawed, no appanent logic. Not even sure how the last sentence has anything to do with the post above.

As a democrat I get embarrased reading stuff like this on a political debate site. Perhaps there should be a seperate site for economic discussions, so people who uderstand the economy and numbers can have rational discussion.

Does anyone here know of such a site?

Click to expand...

Apparently you either can not read or choose not to

Stimulus Package Details | Economic Stimulus Package Timelines | Stimulus Package

Good luck finding the site you are looking for

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

EarlzP said:

Apparently you either can not read or choose not to

Stimulus Package Details | Economic Stimulus Package Timelines | Stimulus Package

Good luck finding the site you are looking for

Click to expand...

I did read your post and as I said I find it silly to the point of being insulting.

For example, there should be no one on a site such as this one who has one bullet for the 700 billion TARP, and then break out on seperate lines AIG which was part of TARP. I would also expect someone to know that a bunch of the money that went to AIG has already been repaid. They should also know that what you call toxic assets, the fed has refused to sell back to AIG what they paid for them because they will sell it on the open market (some to AIG) at a profit.

If you truely don't know the above I won't waste my time trying to explain the relationship of Fannie and Freddie to the government well before Bush.

Like I said, I would welcome informed debate, just not at this level.

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

washunut said:

I did read your post and as I said I find it silly to the point of being insulting.

For example, there should be no one on a site such as this one who has one bullet for the 700 billion TARP, and then break out on seperate lines AIG which was part of TARP. I would also expect someone to know that a bunch of the money that went to AIG has already been repaid. They should also know that what you call toxic assets, the fed has refused to sell back to AIG what they paid for them because they will sell it on the open market (some to AIG) at a profit.

If you truely don't know the above I won't waste my time trying to explain the relationship of Fannie and Freddie to the government well before Bush.

Like I said, I would welcome informed debate, just not at this level.

Click to expand...

Apparently my uninformed debating skills have struck a nerve with you. You must have forgotten that President Bush was in office when the wheels came off and now you are trying to pass the buck off to the President's prior to and after his Presidency. Facts seem to escape you in your effort to support a President "Bush" who either lied about the state of the economy in 2008 or was too busy waging war to know what was going on.

When I am charge the buck stops at my feet I take responsibility for my actions as well as my inactions. The fact is that President Bush had been in office for over 7 years before our economy tanked, the fact is he has/had access to financial advisors and the fact is the economy tanked on his watch, the facts are that Wall Street was in the tank, the facts are that the money involved ended up in some ones pocket and the facts are I did not see the rich jumping out of tenth floor windows, the facts are that the gap between the rich and the poor continued to and continues to widen.

Go ahead now and debate any thing I have typed above or try to lay the responsibility off on anyone before or after President Bush

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

EarlzP said:

Apparently my uninformed debating skills have struck a nerve with you. You must have forgotten that President Bush was in office when the wheels came off and now you are trying to pass the buck off to the President's prior to and after his Presidency. Facts seem to escape you in your effort to support a President "Bush" who either lied about the state of the economy in 2008 or was too busy waging war to know what was going on.

When I am charge the buck stops at my feet I take responsibility for my actions as well as my inactions. The fact is that President Bush had been in office for over 7 years before our economy tanked, the fact is he has/had access to financial advisors and the fact is the economy tanked on his watch, the facts are that Wall Street was in the tank, the facts are that the money involved ended up in some ones pocket and the facts are I did not see the rich jumping out of tenth floor windows, the facts are that the gap between the rich and the poor continued to and continues to widen.

Go ahead now and debate any thing I have typed above or try to lay the responsibility off on anyone before or after President Bush

Click to expand...

I could care less about Bush, never voted for him and think most of what he did was lousy. That does not excuse the kind of mistakes in your analysis. Debate on facts not emotion.

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

washunut said:

I could care less about Bush, never voted for him and think most of what he did was lousy. That does not excuse the kind of mistakes in your analysis. Debate on facts not emotion.

Click to expand...

You have yet to present a fact nor have you addressed one fact that I have presented, so let me give you another fact, you and I and every other American of legal voting age are responsible for the economic mess "OUR" country is in WE are the government, We are responsible for the economic mess now confronting OUR country, WE elect those that represent our wishes and protect OUR country.

OUR country America is still in trouble and without drastic measures will continue to decay until there are only two classes left the ultra rich and the poor. As I said I am not oin favor of setting up a private retirement plan using Wall Street to administer it. the changes in SS will not effect me I am retired drawing two pensions, My only child is a doctor and doing fine. So my concern is for the poor of OUR country who only have enough to on and their share of the American dream is becoming increasingly smaller.

Now try to put your emotions away and debate the facts that I have provided for you

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

EarlzP said:

You have yet to present a fact nor have you addressed one fact that I have presented, so let me give you another fact, you and I and every other American of legal voting age are responsible for the economic mess "OUR" country is in WE are the government, We are responsible for the economic mess now confronting OUR country, WE elect those that represent our wishes and protect OUR country.

OUR country America is still in trouble and without drastic measures will continue to decay until there are only two classes left the ultra rich and the poor. As I said I am not oin favor of setting up a private retirement plan using Wall Street to administer it. the changes in SS will not effect me I am retired drawing two pensions, My only child is a doctor and doing fine. So my concern is for the poor of OUR country who only have enough to on and their share of the American dream is becoming increasingly smaller.

Now try to put your emotions away and debate the facts that I have provided for you

Click to expand...

I to am retired and do not need social security for my basic needs. It will probably pay for my lost golf balls when I am elegible to start collecting.

That being said, the government has done a lousy job of investing our social security funds. While I agree that most people should not have private accounts, the government should not have a monopoly and put our money into treasuries which they may or may not ever pay on.

I would like to see the trust fund handled the way major university endowments are handled. Their long term track record on investment returns is materially better than simply putting money into treasuries. Then however it gets accounted for either as a statement for each individual based upon contributions or as a pot as we do now I am not sure which I like better.Clearly on a selfish basis it would have been better for someone like me who paid the max just about every year I paid into the system getting an individual statement would get me a higher payout.

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

washunut said:

I to am retired and do not need social security for my basic needs. It will probably pay for my lost golf balls when I am elegible to start collecting.

That being said, the government has done a lousy job of investing our social security funds. While I agree that most people should not have private accounts, the government should not have a monopoly and put our money into treasuries which they may or may not ever pay on.

I would like to see the trust fund handled the way major university endowments are handled. Their long term track record on investment returns is materially better than simply putting money into treasuries. Then however it gets accounted for either as a statement for each individual based upon contributions or as a pot as we do now I am not sure which I like better.Clearly on a selfish basis it would have been better for someone like me who paid the max just about every year I paid into the system getting an individual statement would get me a higher payout.

Click to expand...

I am retired and also do not require SS for my basic needs, however, I do recognize that there are far more people that do need it to survive than do not.
The govt has robbed the social security fund forget about it poorly investing it. Social Security needs fixing and so does medicare but giving a 25% income tax cut to the richest americans and corporations does nothing to achieve that.

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

lpast said:

I am retired and also do not require SS for my basic needs, however, I do recognize that there are far more people that do need it to survive than do not.
The govt has robbed the social security fund forget about it poorly investing it. Social Security needs fixing and so does medicare but giving a 25% income tax cut to the richest americans and corporations does nothing to achieve that.

Click to expand...

When did anyone give the "richest" americans a 25% tax cut? When did corporations get a tax cut. Please respond ASAP.I am filling out by tax return but it must have th tax brackets wrong on my form.

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

cpwill said:

but i've seen these lines out of several of our seasoned posters. is the AARP sending out propaganda or something?

Click to expand...

Its REALLY not appropriate for you to be asking if there's propaganda around, memeherd.

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

SE102 said:

Not that I have too many cards coming into this discussion. But how exactly is what you said above true?

Click to expand...

Basically the return SS provides is much less than the average return on the stock market, year over year.
Not to mention that if you die before attaining retirement age, all of your SS dollars are lost, well all except a measly $255 death benefit.

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

Harry Guerrilla said:

Basically the return SS provides is much less than the average return on the stock market, year over year.
Not to mention that if you die before attaining retirement age, all of your SS dollars are lost, well all except a measly $255 death benefit.

Click to expand...

Not to mention that social security dollars are being used for purposes not originally intended. A big outlay now goes into disability costs. With the bad economy, more people are claiming and receiving disability money. Taking money out of the fund for a reason not originally intended.

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

washunut said:

When did anyone give the "richest" americans a 25% tax cut? When did corporations get a tax cut. Please respond ASAP.I am filling out by tax return but it must have th tax brackets wrong on my form.

Click to expand...

Paul Ryan proposed a 25% tax cut for the richest americans...corporations were given a tax cut by reagan ...from 46% down to 34%

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

washunut said:

Not to mention that social security dollars are being used for purposes not originally intended. A big outlay now goes into disability costs. With the bad economy, more people are claiming and receiving disability money. Taking money out of the fund for a reason not originally intended.

Click to expand...

It's a wash, time to dump it for something else.