1. Come and join our community by registering for free here and start discussing politics! HOP - the political discussion forum

64%...

Discussion in 'U.S. News' started by Gipper, Mar 12, 2011.

  1. Cosmo New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He's probably disabled - which, in right wing terms, means "lazy slacker who should go get a job and stop living off the government."
  2. Gipper Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Message Count:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Winter Wonderland

    Geez...I wonder...duh...how it is that entitlements are bankrupting the nation when all citizens pay into it...

    Duh???

    That's a tough one....:rolleyes:
  3. Cosmo New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They're not.
  4. BigRob Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,913
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    USA
    If they are only getting back what they paid in, then the money ought to be there right?

    That aside, why not pursue an idea along these lines:

    50 and older: Social Security remains the same
    30 to 49: You receive a one time buy out, and are no longer able to collect
    0-29: Social Security is eliminated
  5. BigRob Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,913
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    USA
    If you truly cared about helping people and maintaining a sense of communal responsibility, you would be screaming for Social Security reform... without it, the system will collapse and no one will get anything.

    Then I suppose we can all be communally screwed...
  6. Cosmo New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have you any evidence for your assertion that "the system will collapse"?
  7. BigRob Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,913
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    USA
    Social Security Report

    There will be minor changes in these numbers are the economy changes, but the overall point remains the same...when the baby boomers all retire, we are going to have some serious problems...

    Perhaps "collapse" was the wrong word..perhaps I should have said "dramatically change with a large reduction in benefits."
  8. Cosmo New Member

    Member Since:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    46
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The SS trust fund has a $2.6 trillion surplus. It has paid out every nickel owed since its inception and it will already continue do so for the next 27 years. I repeat. SS is 100% solvent for the next 27 years. There is literally no reason to discuss it right now with everything else we need to address. It's just right wingers who have always hated SS bringing it up out of nowhere and demanding cuts. After that it can pay 75% of benefits for another 50 years. This talk is completely ludicrous. It can be made even more solvent by simply raising the tax cap slightly. There is no need whatsoever to make cuts now or ever or to even talk about them. It's a total red herring.

    Given that we are involved in an escalated war in Afghanistan, we have untold millions of Americans unemployed or underemployed, we have healthcare costs that continue to skyrocket, we have rising levels of poverty, we have an existential crisis in climate change, we have rapidly rising food and gas prices, we have a crumbling national infrastructure, we have millions of Americans still in the midst of the foreclosure crisis, we have enormous challenges in education, etc etc etc........ is this really the time to panic over a program that is 100% solvent for the next 27 years?
  9. PLC1 Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Apr 20, 2007
    Message Count:
    8,342
    Likes Received:
    210
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    The Golden State
    For decades, the SS system has been used as a cash cow to fund everything from welfare to wars. Now that the baby boomers are starting to retire, and SS payments are beginning to equal and soon surpass the money collected to fund it, we start hearing screams of , "end entitlement spending! SS is welfare! Socialism!" What a crock. it's time to start paying back those IUOs. The era of the free lunch is over.
  10. BigRob Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,913
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    USA
    A ponzi scheme is a ponzi scheme regardless of what stage it is in.

    We are going to have to address the issue at some point, why not now?

    We have and will always have other problems, but the existence of another problem is no reason to ignore other issues.
  11. BigRob Super Moderator

    Member Since:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,913
    Likes Received:
    201
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    USA
    Social Security is not welfare...it is just a horrible investment that I want no part of.
  12. Gipper Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Message Count:
    5,743
    Likes Received:
    313
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Winter Wonderland
    Do you think Mr. K has it wrong?
  13. Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,410
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Horse Country

    Definition of entitlement:

    "An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation"

    From wiki.


    And yes social security is largely an entitlement because the benefits are guaranteed by law.

    It is also a welfare program because since its inception it has been changed to pay people who have not paid in, or to pay them more than it should.
  14. Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,410
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Horse Country
    Before the government took over that role the people of this country did indeed take care of people.

    Now the government as assumed that role and the people are no better cared for. What has changed is that the system "steals" money from taxpayers and redistributes it under the direction of politicians who manipulate it for votes and power.

    Before it was imperfect and ethical now it is imperfect and unethical.
  15. Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,410
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Horse Country
    SSI and SSDI are both parts of social security that pays money to children who are disabled so that their parents can put them into an institution and not take care of them themselves and they are huge huge programs - normal.
  16. Dr.Who Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jul 11, 2007
    Message Count:
    6,410
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Horse Country
    Yes people do have grand ideas and those grand ideas been tried and worked just as well as the government programs.


    Then we went and messed with something that was not broken. We took something that was ethical and turned it into "stealing" and coerced redistribution.

Share This Page