View Poll Results: Should Social Security Retirement be increased?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes!

    17 48.57%
  • No!

    7 20.00%
  • It should be eliminated!

    7 20.00%
  • Switch Congressional Retirment to Social Security!

    13 37.14%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 76

Thread: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

  1. #21
    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: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by digsbe View Post
    Social Security is not sustainable. It should be eliminated and allow for individuals to invest in their own retirement throughout their lives. I can understand Medicare, but SS should be eliminated with more tax breaks given to retirement and investments for retirement.
    SS should be reduced over a period of 20 years until it is gone, except for those who truly are incapable of caring for themselves. We should save and invest for our retirement years.
    Investments should be protected by the government from crooks. Said crooks should be forced to relinquish triple the amount gained, even if it means they become poverty stricken, and then they should be put on chain gangs in Arizona in the summer, in Illinois during the winter.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    (none)
    Last Seen
    04-04-15 @ 09:11 PM
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    6,112
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Just give $10,000 to every single citizen and call it, "Potato Power Punch". That way no citizen has advantage over another citizen for being poor, being rich, owning a business, being employed, being unemployed, being old, being young, living in rural areas, living in metropolitan areas, living in the south, living up north or any other opportunity for animosity between each other. Let's make it easier for people to STFU about how government beneficiaries have advantage over those who don't receive subsidies. Most times that isn't even true especially in relation to the poor. If it was so advantageous to be poor the rich people would give away all of their assets and get a minimum wage job. I don't see any rich people doing that. It makes you wonder if they are lying about how great poor people have it.

    That $10,000 is just a made up number. It can be changed to $12,248, $24,612, $75,374 or any other figure that can be imagined. It probably needs to be low enough to encourage people to work but high enough to provide very basic survival.

  3. #23
    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: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    BS=-populist garbage. lots of envy mixed in with that stupidity. why do you claim to be a conservative when you spew populist hate the rich nonsense?
    Many of the rich deserve to be shot immediately after a court convicts them. There are still hundreds of criminals on Wall Street, and in Congress. It IS possible to get rich honestly, those I have no problem with. But the rest of them need to be prosecuted.
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  4. #24
    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: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by vasuderatorrent View Post
    Just give $10,000 to every single citizen and call it, "Potato Power Punch". That way no citizen has advantage over another citizen for being poor, being rich, owning a business, being employed, being unemployed, being old, being young, living in rural areas, living in metropolitan areas, living in the south, living up north or any other opportunity for animosity between each other. Let's make it easier for people to STFU about how government beneficiaries have advantage over those who don't receive subsidies. Most times that isn't even true especially in relation to the poor. If it was so advantageous to be poor the rich people would give away all of their assets and get a minimum wage job. I don't see any rich people doing that. It makes you wonder if they are lying about how great poor people have it.

    That $10,000 is just a made up number. It can be changed to $12,248, $24,612, $75,374 or any other figure that can be imagined. It probably needs to be low enough to encourage people to work but high enough to provide very basic survival.
    GIVE? I prefer EARN....
    Oracle of Utah
    Truth rings hollow in empty heads.

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    (none)
    Last Seen
    04-04-15 @ 09:11 PM
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    6,112
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Said crooks should be forced to relinquish triple the amount gained, even if it means they become poverty stricken
    If you change that to quadruple and you have yourself a Bible lesson.

    Quote Originally Posted by Luke 19:8
    8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord: Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold.

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    (none)
    Last Seen
    04-04-15 @ 09:11 PM
    Lean
    Communist
    Posts
    6,112
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    GIVE? I prefer EARN....
    Everybody prefers to earn money rather than receive it. Preference has nothing to do with it. We have to talk about what works.

    How many unemployed people are you capable/willing to hire? There is no way that I would hire a convicted murder, a homeless man or a single mom with 6 kids. Shoot! I don't even have the money to hire a good person.

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    I prefer EARN....
    How do you propose accomplishing this without a totalitarian government? Not everybody wants to hire losers to work for them. Most employers prefer hiring intelligent, skilled, good and honest people to work for them. Even during good economic times the unemployment rate is at 3%. What do we do with those 3%?

    I hope you run for office some day but I bet you never will because deep down you know that nobody thinks like you.

  7. #27
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,700

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by UtahBill View Post
    Many of the rich deserve to be shot immediately after a court convicts them. There are still hundreds of criminals on Wall Street, and in Congress. It IS possible to get rich honestly, those I have no problem with. But the rest of them need to be prosecuted.
    that's a silly combination of seething envy and moronic populism



  8. #28
    Guru
    Smeagol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 11:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,147

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    It amazes me people approve of their money being taken by the government by force and it amazes me even more that they approve of being called idiots that can't save for their own retirements. I also think it's amazing that people actually want to rob their grandchildren to pay for their retirement.
    The problem is few people actually do it and then potentially become a burden on the taxpayers after its too late to go back, relive the past 50 years and save for retirement. The statistical facts simply do not match our idealism. Then I suppose when a generation has not properly planned for retirement and are beyong productive working years, the idealists will then say let the elderly starve and go homeless for not preparing.

    Americans' retirement savings falling short, new study says - TwinCities.com
    Last edited by Smeagol; 11-21-13 at 04:15 PM.
    Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

  9. #29
    Sage
    Lutherf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Tucson, AZ
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    24,677

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Rich people should not receive social security at all, something that all greedy senior groups disagree with..There is a conservative version of AARP that is worse than they are..Time to means-test the lazy-rich-retired..
    They shouldn't receive benefits but they should pay into it? I just want to make sure I'm clear on your position.

  10. #30
    Discount Philosopher
    specklebang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Last Seen
    06-05-14 @ 08:26 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    11,524

    Re: Social Security Should Be Enhanced, Not Cut, Elizabeth Warren Tells Senate

    There are many good posts (and a few not so useful extremist posts) so I'm going to give you an anecdotal case and you can do as you like with the accurate information.

    In my lifetime I earned about $6M. I paid $180K into SS and another $180K into Medicare. It took me almost 55 yars to do this.

    I retired in my early 50s unofficially and I calimed my Medicare at 65 and my SS at 66. According to SS (those annual statements they send you), I have paid in the MAXIMUM and thus received the MAXIMUM check that a 66 year old could draw which was $2144 (it's gone all the way up to $2177 now). So, assuming that I garnered no interest, it will take me 8 years to recover my "investment". If SS had bought me a T-Bill every year, at the current rate of the time, I figure I would have doubled my money by the time I started to draw. So, it will take 16 years for me to feel like I broke even on the deal.

    That would mean I will be 82 when I hit break-even. As per the actuarial tables, I will die at 77. As per my family history, I will die in my early 90s (my Mom died voluntarily at 93 and my Dad died a natural death at 100). But they hadn't tried pot, smack, crck, speed and other stuff that I, a garbage-can junkie, have put in my system (in the past - I barely and rarely misbehave now

    Now, I earn about $25K a year from investments and I get another $25K from SS. That's 50K a year total income. But I spend more than that - I support my ex-wife, I've gifted my son and I have a bst friend who is like a daughter to me and I've helped her buy a house and a car and such-like. So, I consume my savings at the rate of $25K a year. Tis means I will use up about $500K of my savings before the cats and I go to the Rainbow Bridge.

    I'm not sure how losing my SS might affect me. Would I stop my generosity and live within my means as I did when I worked? Should I lose my SS because I did save more than $500K? If so, would that be because of the $25K I make on my own or because of my assets?

    SS is not means tested which means that Mitt Romney and Specklebang get pretty much the same amount. Rumor has it that Mitt has saved more than I have - should we punish him for this? While I despise the term "slippery slope", it might just be appropriate here.

    In the past, I've advocate a Mandatory Savings Account as an alternative to SS but I know this has about the chances of a snowball in hell. Why? Because those that are good at making money love the idea but those who don't make much are fearful they might not save up enough to get a lifetime of checks.

    OK, I wrote this so either side can know exactly how this works. Hope it was helpful.

Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345 ... 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
  •