Then their employers should bear the cost, not tax payers.
I keep saying that because handing Wall Street Trillions of public funds to manage would end in disaster. People who don’t trust government… I trust Wall Street even less.
As for planning like it isn’t going to be there… It may be there and if it is it is gravy, but I will never underestimate the power of the American political system to ignore a completely avoidable crises in the future because it might cost a little more today. Better to wait and then the future people can pay a lot more.
If you retire at a younger age, fine, you get a lot less money. The average age of death is going up and up, even for blue collar workers, higher than it used to be, and that must be reflected. Just taxing the rich more and increasing the benefit makes it a welfare program, something it was never meant to be. Everybody has to have their skin in the game.
Everyone does have skin in the game. The skin though is currently cut off when someone earns their 142,8001st dollar of the year. raising that cap would go a long way to keeping the whole system solvent.
Sure, raising the cap some will help, eliminating it with increasing the benefits makes it welfare. I’m for increasing the rates for everybody paying into it, some for everybody.
fair enough
Yes we could save social security. It’s easy. Congress needs to pledge that they will lead by example and cut their own retirement before they cut ours. Do this and social security will be fixed in a week.
We’re talking about SS and retirement age.
If congress tied their own retirement age to the S.S. retirement age, this thing would be fixed tomorrow. Everybody knows it.
1 Like
Without a doubt.
The solution that nobody wants to talk about. They won’t budge without pressure. Yet we refuse to apply that pressure.
Pretty sad.
Lefties are not the ones who have been trying to privatize/get rid of SS. It’s a jewel of the New Deal.
But the American Right has never made peace with it. Even the post you were responding to was about privatizing it.
You can investigate any number or proposals and strategies to get rid of it, but here’s one of the most revealing from the CATO Institute going back decades. Part of the right’s goal is to degrade people’s trust in SS (it’s socialism, after all)—get people saying, “Well, I never see any money from it!” and get younger people mad at older people, and means-test it so that it becomes one of those so-called “freebies” you talk about, which means “welfare” for those people, etc. Much easier to get rid of it that way.
Also, the article’s use of the phrase “run out of money” in this context is kind of misleading.
Just raise the ■■■■■■■ income cap on earnings already.
And, yeah, I know this post was a total waste of time.
1 Like
The million dollar question is: What pressure do you or I have to do that? What pressure do we collectively have?
It starts like this.
"Mr. Congressman, are you willing to share the sacrifice of the American people and reduce your own retirement benefits by the same number you are reducing theirs? If not, why not."
Then wait for the reply.
That would be a good first step. Right?
Well, it’s doing something. Totally gonna be ignored. But yeah, it’s doing something.
So just give up and don’t bother asking?
It doesn’t have to be. Ask until an answer is given. When Rand Paul is on Fox, ask him.
Or let them totally off the hook. Which do you prefer?
Well, my question was asking for what pressure we can exert.
Writing a letter that will be ignored (and I think you agree that it will be) is not pressure.
I’m not disagreeing with the issue you raised. I’m just looking for something effective. Many people are.
I think we just start. We don’t need to wait months or years for something effective. Just freaking start and watch it spread like wildfire. You can’t start a fire without a spark.
Here’s the spark.
"Mr. Congressman, are you willing to share the sacrifice of the American people and reduce your own retirement benefits by the same number you are reducing theirs? If not, why not."
1 Like
Laments about the GOP trying to turn people against social security by calling it welfare, immediately offers a plan to turn it into a welfare plan leading anyone earning over the current cap to oppose it as a welfare plan. Good work
Not at all: Everyone will receive social security. It’s just that the income cap on earnings will be raised. That doesn’t make it any more of a “welfare plan” than it is now. I was talking about means testing.
