Social Security is a hoorible deal. especiallt for poor people

Bullseye said:

Even more jabberwocky. "yadda, yadda, right winger, yadda, yadda, right winger". The only thing worse than your economic ideology is your political ideology. By the way you should acknowledge your beloved Obama added nearly half that debt to the clock.

Click to expand...

Isn't it humorous when the liberals get twisted in a knot because the national debt increased a bit under Trump but they conveniently forget who created the most debt (dollar wise) in US history.

Joecool44 said:

Isn't it humorous when the liberals get twisted in a knot because the national debt increased a bit under Trump but they conveniently forget who created the most debt (dollar wise) in US history.

Click to expand...

Yeah, they conveniently forget that CBO predicted trillion-dollar deficits around this time early in Obama's second term, but let Trump push to reduce tax rates and it's a national disaster.

Nickyjo said:

Fine, let’s alter the system to make it better.

Click to expand...

All for it.

I started receiving benefits at 62, and have gotten more than I put in. Others won’t. That’s the nature of insurance.

Click to expand...

Well, no, it's the nature of a pyramid scheme. The last suckers to pay in are usually the ones who get back the least, or get screwed entirely. The creators of SS admitted the comparison was apt (I used to have the link), but argued that it didn't matter, because Social Security was guaranteed to work, because everyone had to participate, and everyone had 4 or so kids. And they were right... up until the point where everyone didn't have 4 or so kids.

But I do not want to read the “comparison matrix” or whatever it is. The rest of your post made my head hurt. I am happy that SS has produced a base that keeps me alive, that keeps a paralyzed friend receiving benefits, and that helped me as an older parent provide for my son. If you have a better idea, put it into legislation form and float it to your Senators and Congressperson. Til then, I respect, even praise the system that has helped so many. SS isn’t going anywhere. Fix it if you will.

Click to expand...

SS is going to get cut. That's in current law, and the money to keep it from being so is going to go to shore up Medicare/Medicaid for a couple more years before that thing gets beyond our ability to continue to fund. The old-age Entitlements are going to get cut. The question is whether we start reforming them now, so that we can protect the folks like your friend (and I, too, am glad that your friend received help).... or put it off as long as we can by pretending it's not a problem, getting mad at anyone who tries to tell us that it is, and then getting surprised one day . I fear we are going to choose the latter.

If you'd like to read my proposed changes, I'd be happy to direct you to them, but if the rest of my post was too much, I don't think you'll like that thread any better .

Double

Bullseye said:

Your "ergo" is idiotic. Privatization of SS is not a universal goal of conservatives, which you frequently confuse with Republicans.

Your link is interesting, but, I think misleading; while it makes a good point that SS will have SOME income from FICA and tax on benefits which means, technically it will never go bankrupt, which is true, it makes no judgement on the AMOUNT of benefit it can pay. THAT's the catch. SS Trustees estimate when the assets in the "trust fund" are depleted it will only be able to pay about 75-80% of current benefits.

Click to expand...

That may be true but has little to do with the concept.

Since the '83 Reagan/Greenspan Soc, Sec. 'reform' congress has squandered the $3 trillion in overpayment.

That has made Soc. Sec. the largest US creditor.

The question is, if push comes to shove, does the US congress throw soc. sec. under the bus ?

If they kill Social Security, they need to clear the account by continuing to pay out those who are currently receiving theirs and cut a check to those citizens who are still paying to cut them off. They should clear the account.

Besides, don't most big businesses present retirement plans through investment portfolios now anyway? Of course, government would have to actually try to prevent big business and big banks from creating Great Depressions and Great Recessions so that citizens don't lose that retirement. So far so good!

MSgt said:

If they kill Social Security, they need to clear the account by continuing to pay out those who are currently receiving theirs and cut a check to those citizens who are still paying to cut them off. They should clear the account.

Besides, don't most big businesses present retirement plans through investment portfolios now anyway? Of course, government would have to actually try to prevent big business and big banks from creating Great Depressions and Great Recessions so that citizens don't lose that retirement. So far so good!

Click to expand...

Interesting how the left ignores results meaning the true costs of SS and how SS money has been used for social spending since 1960's leaving quite a hole in the so called lock box but that never matters to radicals who resist any changes to any federal programs that just might benefit the American people in the long run. Any changes to SS would not affect current payees but would gradually convert others to 401k's and would take billions out of the hands of bureaucrats. Don't understand the negativity of that

MSgt said:

If they kill Social Security, they need to clear the account by continuing to pay out those who are currently receiving theirs and cut a check to those citizens who are still paying to cut them off. They should clear the account.

Besides, don't most big businesses present retirement plans through investment portfolios now anyway? Of course, government would have to actually try to prevent big business and big banks from creating Great Depressions and Great Recessions so that citizens don't lose that retirement. So far so good!

Click to expand...

if you don't think Wall Street would see that huge pile of money as a great temptation.....

they would figure out a way to steal it.

much like corporate pension plans. The workers plans go bankrupt or are underfunded. But for the executive level those pension funds are fat and fully funded.

Pedestrian said:

That may be true but has little to do with the concept.

Since the '83 Reagan/Greenspan Soc, Sec. 'reform' congress has squandered the $3 trillion in overpayment.

That has made Soc. Sec. the largest US creditor.

The question is, if push comes to shove, does the US congress throw soc. sec. under the bus ?

Click to expand...

Not sure I understand how Congress could do that. Refuse to redeem Trust Fund Bonds?