Social security
- Thread starter SLB_SA
- Start date
Help Support Van Living Forum:
Driving a few minutes ago, I heard on NPR this As federal debt grows, a bipartisan push for another commission to address it article. There is an ongoing and increasing push to "fix" the debt. Is it a transparent and honest effort? This (boldface) line suggests (to me) that the answer is "No"!
The group would have a year to write a plan to fix the debt. If, after that time, they were able to reach an agreement on a proposal, Congress would be required to vote on it. But not until the brief period of time after the 2024 election and before the next Congress starts, a time known as the lame duck. The goal is to allow people who are finishing up their term to vote.
The pressure to cut SS and medicare benefits has been and will be increasing. If people wait until the lame duck session of Congress to object to parts of the "debt commission" plan, it may be too late to have an effect. If a debt deal is reached, an honest effort would announce it before the 2024 election and let the voters have some input!!
The group would have a year to write a plan to fix the debt. If, after that time, they were able to reach an agreement on a proposal, Congress would be required to vote on it. But not until the brief period of time after the 2024 election and before the next Congress starts, a time known as the lame duck. The goal is to allow people who are finishing up their term to vote.
The pressure to cut SS and medicare benefits has been and will be increasing. If people wait until the lame duck session of Congress to object to parts of the "debt commission" plan, it may be too late to have an effect. If a debt deal is reached, an honest effort would announce it before the 2024 election and let the voters have some input!!
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2018
- Messages
- 2,530
- Reaction score
- 1,280
That article is about two people who want a commission: Peters and Huizenga.
It also says Biden and Trump do not want any cuts to social security and they are the front runners. Niki Haley is way behind Trump (if you are the one who mentioned Haley).
If Peters mentioned the "wars" (in quote below) then he is part of the problem. The cuts should come from the military, but too many politicians use military dollars to stay in office (jobs for constituents).
Peters stressed that the the government is paying more on interest on the debt than on Medicaid and programs for children. That means it has less to invest in things like education, and less flexibility for foreign policy matters, like wars in Ukraine and Israel.
Michigan Rep. Bill Huizenga is the Republican leading the push in the House. He said his own colleagues are ignoring the problem.
I hope readers here will read the NPR article and reach their own conclusions, rather than rely on my characterizations or those of Carla618 or anyone else. However I will respond to the previous post.
That article is about two people who want a commission: Peters and Huizenga. The current Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, proposed a debt commission after being elected Speaker link The Heritage Foundation loves it. link So the issue in question is not just "two people who want a commission" even if the article references two members of Congress.
It also says Biden and Trump do not want any cuts to social security and they are the front runners. The NY Times
article states:
At this point, both conventional wisdom and prediction markets say that Trump has a virtual lock on the nomination. But Wall Street isn’t completely resigned to Trump’s inevitability; there has been a late surge in big-money support for Nikki Haley, a former governor of South Carolina. And there is, to be fair, still a chance that Trump — who is facing many criminal charges and whose public rants have become utterly unhinged — will manage to crash and burn before securing the nomination. So it seems worth looking at what Haley stands for.
That article is about two people who want a commission: Peters and Huizenga. The current Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, proposed a debt commission after being elected Speaker link The Heritage Foundation loves it. link So the issue in question is not just "two people who want a commission" even if the article references two members of Congress.
It also says Biden and Trump do not want any cuts to social security and they are the front runners. The NY Times
article states:
At this point, both conventional wisdom and prediction markets say that Trump has a virtual lock on the nomination. But Wall Street isn’t completely resigned to Trump’s inevitability; there has been a late surge in big-money support for Nikki Haley, a former governor of South Carolina. And there is, to be fair, still a chance that Trump — who is facing many criminal charges and whose public rants have become utterly unhinged — will manage to crash and burn before securing the nomination. So it seems worth looking at what Haley stands for.
““What the hell is a guy like me (doing) getting $3,500 a month from the government?” Langone, whose net worth Forbes pegs at more than $7 billion, said of his monthly Social Security benefits. “That’s outrageous. I shouldn’t get a nickel.”
Haley has called for several changes to the nation’s safety net programs, including increasing the age at which today’s younger workers would become eligible for Social Security retirement benefits and limiting the growth of benefits the wealthy receive.”
These are direct quotes from the CNN article cited here yesterday.
These do not sound irrational nor unreasonable, but like possible solutions to dealing with the debt crisis.
Something needs to be done.
Haley has called for several changes to the nation’s safety net programs, including increasing the age at which today’s younger workers would become eligible for Social Security retirement benefits and limiting the growth of benefits the wealthy receive.”
These are direct quotes from the CNN article cited here yesterday.
These do not sound irrational nor unreasonable, but like possible solutions to dealing with the debt crisis.
Something needs to be done.
There are additional "solutions" available. Apply FICA taxes to all earned income (rather than just the first $168,600 in 2024), apply FICA taxes to distributions from Roth accounts, give medicare more power to negotiate with medical and drug providers, tie benefits to each individual's expected lifespan (as insurance companies do), etc.
As for reducing COLA increases, what about Social Security benefits have lost 36% of buying power since 2000 ?
Has anyone considered the cost of caring for elderly people whose social security benefits have decreased in purchasing power so much that they are completely destitute? Plan 75? Thalaikoothal? Logan's Run?
As for reducing COLA increases, what about Social Security benefits have lost 36% of buying power since 2000 ?
Has anyone considered the cost of caring for elderly people whose social security benefits have decreased in purchasing power so much that they are completely destitute? Plan 75? Thalaikoothal? Logan's Run?
Regarding the WEALTHY, not across the board, for all recipients, unless the funds empty for lack of action.
In which case we are all in serious trouble.
And I agree with those additional solutions.
Something needs to be done, and we all need to remain alert and aware of who wants what, but none of these folks talking about change are a one man band, with unilateral authority to enact their own preferences.
It would be a process, and one that we would have input into.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2021
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 1,088
Lots to digest here.
I distrust most politicians that cry "WOLF!' The assertion that SS needs extreme change to stay solvent is questionable, as some others have pointed out. Too often, I think many of these "problems" are more about charging up their base and getting more $$ donations. In the case of SS, I would not fight any reasonable means-testing that only affected those at a higher income/wealth scale. Social Security is an insurance program for people that need financial retirement security and is not an investment plan. When we pay other insurances like fire, accident, health, etc. we do not expect to collect the money paid in unless those catastrophes actually happen. Perhaps if we just stopped sending out SS checks to the wealthy the SS system would be just fine. If not, we could take a look at other more modest solutions - such as raising the amount collected from those still working rather than reducing benefits from those that are now retired and depending on SS to live a reasonably adequate life.
I distrust most politicians that cry "WOLF!' The assertion that SS needs extreme change to stay solvent is questionable, as some others have pointed out. Too often, I think many of these "problems" are more about charging up their base and getting more $$ donations. In the case of SS, I would not fight any reasonable means-testing that only affected those at a higher income/wealth scale. Social Security is an insurance program for people that need financial retirement security and is not an investment plan. When we pay other insurances like fire, accident, health, etc. we do not expect to collect the money paid in unless those catastrophes actually happen. Perhaps if we just stopped sending out SS checks to the wealthy the SS system would be just fine. If not, we could take a look at other more modest solutions - such as raising the amount collected from those still working rather than reducing benefits from those that are now retired and depending on SS to live a reasonably adequate life.
bullfrog !
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2021
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 1,512
I think the fact that this forum got created shows many if not most are not able to live an “adequate life” on Social Security without additional income, cheap housing and a very healthy lifestyle! Lol!!!
...and in many ways it can be a better quality of life... compared to Maine, this area is better for me at this stage of life.....
This is my point!! And if the process is not transparent (e.g. voting during a lamb duck session with a plan possibly not revealed until after the 2024 election), then we can have effective input!!!
As I have mentioned before, I have a personal stake in this. I waited from 62 until 69 to take social security benefits. My SS benefits are slightly higher than the "maximum" due to the 24% bonus from the delayed retirement credits I earned by waiting. Waiting only cost me over 2/3 of the value my retirement accounts and I will not recoup that money until I live to 79 or 80, if I do. Am I wealthy because I have a large SS benefit? Was I a fool to follow the advice of financial advisors?
PS SSA is trying to screw me out of some of my delayed retirement credits, according to my 2024 COLA statement. I filed an appeal; who knows what will happen.
PS SSA is trying to screw me out of some of my delayed retirement credits, according to my 2024 COLA statement. I filed an appeal; who knows what will happen.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2021
- Messages
- 760
- Reaction score
- 1,088
Should I have said "minimum" instead of adequate? I'm sure I didn't need to say plush. SLB SA says he has a "personal stake" because he waited longer before starting to collect SS. Circumstances forced me to start at 62, but I don't feel any less vested. Nor, I am sure do very many others. And although I probably could have muddled through, I have picked up more than one short term job since. Any of us that depend on SS for all, or the bulk of our income should be watching this closely.
Historically, poverty in old age was endemic and if some politicians are allowed to have their way it could become so again in the US. I don't know if they really are so uncaring, or they are just too far removed from the realities of lower income people to understand actual realities. But, for myself, THIS is one of those issues I will base my voting on.
I agree that poverty was endemic, tho many if not most moved in with family when they could not support nor care for themselves.
Those that couldn’t often went to Poor Farms.
I believe that many politicians and those upper-crust, monied sorts, haven’t a clue how the other half lives, as they have never lived at the bottom of the food chain nor spent any time with those that do.
They believe if people just worked hard enough, applied themselves, pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, etc., they could get ahead, take care of themselves and save enough money to live comfortably in retirement.
Ad nauseum, and which is why we who do know have to speak up.
All of us have a stake in this issue! I agree that a long term solution is needed but not one that cuts benefits or reduces COLA increases. An open debt commission might be a first step toward a solution but not a closed door commission followed by a lame duck vote! I don't think politicians really understand (or don't care if they do understand) the huge increase in poor health and poverty which would occur if medicare disappeared or was underfunded or if SS benefits were cut. A fair, bipartisan solution is needed and both parties need to cooperate on this.
bullfrog !
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2021
- Messages
- 1,308
- Reaction score
- 1,512
I don’t think they understand the poor state of the health care system nor the poverty it has created. Many people that want to work are just not able to do so productively due to lack of health, housing and training. Working your tail off just to afford medical costs later on isn’t really an incentive!
mpruet
Well-known member
(A previous comment stated…)
”I believe that many politicians and those upper-crust, monied sorts, haven’t a clue how the other half lives, as they have never lived at the bottom of the food chain nor spent any time with those that do.”
“They believe if people just worked hard enough, applied themselves, pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, etc., they could get ahead, take care of themselves and save enough money to live comfortably in retirement.”
——————————
There have been many studies about the history and behaviors of Millionairs. I’ll admit that one million is not what it used to be, but it’s a good indication of wealth.
A couple of facts from the studies…
About 7.6% of the US population are millionairs.
About 1,700 U.S. millionaires are made every day.
About 78% of the millionaires in the U.S. Started out as lower middle class/poor.
So to say that those with money have no idea what it is like to not have money is not true. I know of several folks from my high school (rural Alabama) that started out dirt poor and now are quite successful. I also know that there were some common attitudes and behaviors with all of those who became successful. The key was that they realized early on that it would be totally up to them to make what they could of themselves. Key among them was that they tend to save an average of 23% of their income, and they do whatever they can to make the savings work for them.
A couple of other points - most take 32 years to hit the million mark. About 80% don’t reach $1M until over 50 years old. And 86% made their own wealth and didn‘t inherit it.
Oh yes - 67% watch less than 1 hour daily and 63% spend less than 1 hour on the internet.
”I believe that many politicians and those upper-crust, monied sorts, haven’t a clue how the other half lives, as they have never lived at the bottom of the food chain nor spent any time with those that do.”
“They believe if people just worked hard enough, applied themselves, pulled themselves up by their bootstraps, etc., they could get ahead, take care of themselves and save enough money to live comfortably in retirement.”
——————————
There have been many studies about the history and behaviors of Millionairs. I’ll admit that one million is not what it used to be, but it’s a good indication of wealth.
A couple of facts from the studies…
About 7.6% of the US population are millionairs.
About 1,700 U.S. millionaires are made every day.
About 78% of the millionaires in the U.S. Started out as lower middle class/poor.
So to say that those with money have no idea what it is like to not have money is not true. I know of several folks from my high school (rural Alabama) that started out dirt poor and now are quite successful. I also know that there were some common attitudes and behaviors with all of those who became successful. The key was that they realized early on that it would be totally up to them to make what they could of themselves. Key among them was that they tend to save an average of 23% of their income, and they do whatever they can to make the savings work for them.
A couple of other points - most take 32 years to hit the million mark. About 80% don’t reach $1M until over 50 years old. And 86% made their own wealth and didn‘t inherit it.
Oh yes - 67% watch less than 1 hour daily and 63% spend less than 1 hour on the internet.
Last edited:
I did say “many”, not “all” nor even “most”, nor did I refer anywhere to millionaires.
You don’t cite your source, which I would like to read, tho I struggle a bit to relate the “facts” you report to attitudes toward those who are perceived to not have enough, make enough, save enough.
You don’t cite your source, which I would like to read, tho I struggle a bit to relate the “facts” you report to attitudes toward those who are perceived to not have enough, make enough, save enough.
mpruet
Well-known member
Similar threads
