Social security, a landmark liberal achievement

PostmodernProphet said:
but tell me this about your lib'rul acheivement.........why does George Soros and a grandmother with no other income receive the same monthly check?.....
Click to expand...

Because they paid in the same amount. If they didn't, they don't get the same check. It is not a means tested welfare program although most receive more in benefits than they paid into the system.

But, if we don't make some changes soon it will be able to pay only 70% of benefits.
 
Flash said:
Because they paid in the same amount. If they didn't, they don't get the same check. It is not a means tested welfare program although most receive more in benefits than they paid into the system.

But, if we don't make some changes soon it will be able to pay only 70% of benefits.
Click to expand...

It can be easily fixed



The republicans fight every actual fix


Because they want it destroyed
 
Nordberg said:
A chunk of SS supports the disabled and those unable to work. It will also help those whose wage earner dies young. Paul Ryan's father died young and SS helped him get by and go to college. He spent his career trying to end SS. I suppose rightys hate it because they really do not care about the people at the bottom or the old.
SS is over 80 years old and has never missed a check. They are run on a slice of their revenue.
SS cannot go broke because it pays benefits from the existing workers. If the workforce cannot cover it, its benefits will be cut to match. It is not allowed to touch the treasury for shortages.
When the baby boomers came along, there were going to be shortages. They increased the paycheck rates to cover them. In short, the boomers paid ahead for their own SS. They built a 3 billion dollar pool to cover them.
Click to expand...

SS is a pawn program used to do several things, one of which is to cause panic and terror among the recipients any time there's a government crisis.......as evidenced by fuckstick politicians claiming that if such and such doesn't happen, there will be no money for SS.......

also, the support for disabled and unable to work isn't always the case. my wife has been disabled for 15 years now but the gov won't even entertain paying her anything because of my annual income.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
also, the support for disabled and unable to work isn't always the case. my wife has been disabled for 15 years now but the gov won't even entertain paying her anything because of my annual income.
Click to expand...

If your wife has a work history, she already paid into SSDI and should get SSDI irrespective of your income.

If your wife never worked, it means you are applying for SSI which is more of a pure welfare program for people who didn't pay into SSDI - and it is intended for the disabled who didn't pay into SSDI, but are facing true financial hardship.

I'm surprised a hardcore libertarian like you has a family applying for welfare.
 
Cypress said:
If your wife has a work history, she already paid into SSDI and should get SSDI irrespective of your income.

If your wife never worked, it means you are applying for SSI which is more of a pure welfare program for people who didn't pay into SSDI - and it is intended for the disabled who didn't pay into SSDI, but are facing true financial hardship.

I'm surprised a hardcore libertarian like you has a family applying for welfare.
Click to expand...

she does have a work history. she's had the gov and lawyers telling her that she will not get anything due to my income. Anyone who has paid in to the system and applies for it is not seeking welfare, you politically ignorant moron.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
she does have a work history. she's had the gov and lawyers telling her that she will not get anything due to my income. Anyone who has paid in to the system and applies for it is not seeking welfare, you politically ignorant moron.
Click to expand...

the minute she takes more out than she contributed she would be a hypocrite
 
SmarterthanYou said:
she does have a work history. she's had the gov and lawyers telling her that she will not get anything due to my income. Anyone who has paid in to the system and applies for it is not seeking welfare, you politically ignorant moron.
Click to expand...

Either you or her lawyers are doing something wrong.

If she has her own work history, paid into the SSDI insurance program, and has a qualifying disability, your income shouldn't matter.
 
Flash said:
Because they paid in the same amount. If they didn't, they don't get the same check. It is not a means tested welfare program although most receive more in benefits than they paid into the system.

But, if we don't make some changes soon it will be able to pay only 70% of benefits.
Click to expand...

Easy to solve. Increase revenue. Take the cap off.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ThatOwlWoman said:
Republicans try to appeal to younger voters by painting SS and Medicare as "entitlements" that were not earned, but given to them by currently-employed workers. There is just enough truth in that to appeal to the stupider ones.

The problem with turning SS into a 401(k) type scheme is the vagaries of the markets. What happens if the markets -- and all that money the government invested for you -- are down at the time you decide to retire? Either you accept less pay-out, or you continue working. The current scheme has concrete payouts which allows employees more freedom in deciding when to hang it up. There is no risk-taking. And you don't end up having to move in with one of your kids.

\
Click to expand...

Social Security and Medicare are labeled "Entitlements" by the government. That is a budgetary term meaning everybody who qualifies receives the benefit and they are not limited by government appropriations. Congress does not appropriate X number of dollars for SS each year as they do for defense, education, etc.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
This tells us right off why the Repukes are so interested in abolishing the plans. Employers would LOVE it, and pocket all that extra cash.
Click to expand...

Isn't that also true if government provided health care? Employers would no longer be paying all those healthcare costs.
 
Nordberg said:
Flash said:
Because they paid in the same amount. If they didn't, they don't get the same check. It is not a means tested welfare program although most receive more in benefits than they paid into the system.

But, if we don't make some changes soon it will be able to pay only 70% of benefits.
Click to expand...

Easy to solve. Increase revenue. Take the cap off.
Click to expand...

Most of the increased revenue will go to increased benefits.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zymurgy said:
"easy solution - fuck over a smaller percent of the population so we can get it approved"

modern day liberalism in a nutshell
Click to expand...

Fuck over? They have been underpaying for decades.
You have a typical right-wing attitude. poor poor pitiful me.
 
Flash said:
Average monthly benefit for retired workers: $1,830 (SSA)

https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/quickfacts/stat_snapshot/
Click to expand...

The numbers I posted are SSA's estimates for my benefits based on my work history. I paid more in FICA taxes during my work history than average.

I suspect a substantial number of people elect to collect SS benefits earlier, forgoing the full benefits they could have had if they waited. The nice thing about it is that it's like a pension with a lifetime benefit.
 
zymurgy said:
underpaying? LMAO

you have an entitlement mentality - you clearly think they have something that belong to you
Click to expand...

Are you retired??? What about your Parents???? Just think someday you will be retired, if not already and you will benefit from SS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top