Social security

[user 22017]

What bothers me about this subject is that there is no lack of money in this country from which to fund SS - or anything else we might want to. Especially things like education that might actually return more for our economy than it costs. I think the problem is just collecting it from those that have a lot of it vs. from those that have so little that some people want to cut even that. Consider how we tax capital gains and income from investments, for example. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-difference-in-how-the-wealthy-make-money-and-pay-taxes/

If we could tap into just some of that wealth to support SS there would be no problem. And right now our new House Leader want to cut funding for the IRS, so they will be able to discover even less tax fraud. That is money would we SHOULD be spending!

I agree. Sometimes people think it is un-American to tax the wealthy or expect them to chip in more, but they are neglecting the fact that it's not just tax breaks and SS where the rich profit.

They benefit from the our immense natural resources (Eg, ranchers, mining companies, and oil companies) and from our university system where research is done for all kinds of things (medical, pharmaceutical, engineering, computing, science, etc.) They take taxpayer funded research and patent it... then profit. Then price gouge us into poverty.

Taxpayers pay for wars so that we can secure/steal the natural resources belonging to other countries FOR our corporations. On & on there is grift taking place for the rich. So they can become even more rich. Elon Musk is one example, of many. This has been going on since our country was formed.

There have been corrections and we are overdue for another. Tax the rich.... including corporations. After all, corporations are people

 

[SLB_SA]

What House Speaker Mike Johnson has said about Social Security and Medicare!

 

[WanderingRose]

It’s kind of bizarre that throughout this narration what shows on the screen are shots of Christopher Ray, and only Wray.

And, again, Johnson does not have unilateral power now that he is Speaker.

 

[bullfrog !]

Must be afraid of people being able to identify him after all he has attempted to do! Lol!!!

 

[RonDean]

What I hate about posting video links is that first you have to sit through an ad, and then you have to watch the whole thing to see if it addresses what you think it might.

So... here is a text site:
"In 2019, Johnson and his committee proposed sharply scaling back the future cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security benefits for higher-income and even middle-income people. He also proposed a total overhaul of Medicare, switching it over to private insurance companies and drastically cutting how much the federal government spends on better-off seniors... Johnson and his committee also proposed raising the age of eligibility for both Social Security and Medicare by several years and ensuring that age would keep rising in the future as U.S. life expectancies rise."
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/w...d-about-social-security-and-medicare-babdf384

 

[WanderingRose]

And, you know, those basic premises sound pretty reasonable to me.

Basically “scaling back what is spent on higher income Americans”.

Not “give them nothing”, but adjustments made based on income.

Along with the proposition that all income should be subject to FICA, those might just resolve the problem.

 

[bullfrog !]

Not to me, seeing as there is no middle class any more. Just make all income earned taxed at the same rate no matter how much income is earned. If you made more a lot of that is because you live in a country gives you the freedom to do that. That freedom isn’t free and you need to pay a portion of the gains you made because of it. Social Security is a small portion of what is owed. Just because you make a lot of money shouldn’t make your obligations any less if anything it should increase them as you have benefited more and are more able to use those gains to profit with less real risk.

 

[Scobos42]

We seniors are constantly being told that we are such a large group that the future generations will not be able to support SS for us. If our group is that big we should be able to make some changes. unfortunately we are also tired.

I get THAT. Especially for the last 8 years. Holy guacamole, it's been a madhouse. I feel like Charlton Heston did in the Planet of the Apes! Screaming, "It's a MADHOUSE, MADHOUSE!!"

 

[SLB_SA]

What I hate about posting video links is that first you have to sit through an ad, and then you have to watch the whole thing to see if it addresses what you think it might.

So... here is a text site:
"In 2019, Johnson and his committee proposed sharply scaling back the future cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security benefits for higher-income and even middle-income people. He also proposed a total overhaul of Medicare, switching it over to private insurance companies and drastically cutting how much the federal government spends on better-off seniors... Johnson and his committee also proposed raising the age of eligibility for both Social Security and Medicare by several years and ensuring that age would keep rising in the future as U.S. life expectancies rise."
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/w...d-about-social-security-and-medicare-babdf384

As the linked text states: And his ideas are likely to have a key role in the coming political battle over both programs. This suggests that while he cannot change these programs by himself, his views are likely to be influential and important.

I would guess that this part, And they proposed excluding the rising costs of housing, which includes rents, from the inflation figures, because, they said, “the vast majority of retirees own their homes, [so] this is not a cost increase many experience,” might concern some people on this forum. Some people here rent or have no fixed home.

He supports means testing for SS (In 2019, Johnson and his committee proposed sharply scaling back the future cost-of-living adjustments to Social Security benefits for higher-income and even middle-income people.) and medicare (He also proposed a total overhaul of Medicare, switching it over to private insurance companies and drastically cutting how much the federal government spends on better-off seniors).

 

[SLB_SA]

Not to me, seeing as there is no middle class any more. Just make all income earned taxed at the same rate no matter how much income is earned. If you made more a lot of that is because you live in a country gives you the freedom to do that. That freedom isn’t free and you need to pay a portion of the gains you made because of it. Social Security is a small portion of what is owed. Just because you make a lot of money shouldn’t make your obligations any less if anything it should increase them as you have benefited more and are more able to use those gains to profit with less real risk.

Jeff Bezos' salary is only $81,840. (As Founder and Executive Chair, Director at AMAZON COM INC, Jeffrey P. Bezos made $1,681,840 in total compensation. Of this total $81,840 was received as a salary, $0 was received as a bonus, $0 was received in stock options, $0 was awarded as stock and $1,600,000 came from other types of compensation. This information is according to proxy statements filed for the 2022 fiscal year.LINK) I'm sure he would be happy to pay a fixed tax rate on $81,840. Sound fair to you???

 

[bullfrog !]

^^^Nope but I guess I think that way because I never received any money other than money I worked for that was counted as income and had Social Security and taxes taken out. I think he should pay on the other $1,600,000 as well as the $81,840. Tax laws are made it seems for the wealthy to avoid paying and need to change in my opinion.

 

[WanderingRose]

https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...ting-up-battle-over-medicare-social-security/
Johnson sounds a bit rabid, according to this article.

 

[SLB_SA]

https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...ting-up-battle-over-medicare-social-security/
Johnson sounds a bit rabid, according to this article.

If all the people currently receiving SS or medicare benefits or eligible to begin receiving these benefits within ten years were to contact their members of Congress, I think this would impact the current discussion and eventual outcome. All any of us can do individually is to make our voices heard by writing, calling, emailing, etc. and expressing our concerns. Or we can be passive and hope for the best. Speaker Johnson had the power of blackmail ("Pass my bill or the government shuts down until January of 2025"); only a rabid ideologue would act this way and Johnson might be that guy.

 

[Morgana]

They play this game of budget chicken all the time. It's a ridiculous way to run a government.

 

[RonDean]

If all the people currently receiving SS or medicare benefits or eligible to begin receiving these benefits within ten years were to contact their members of Congress, I think this would impact the current discussion and eventual outcome. All any of us can do individually is to make our voices heard by writing, calling, emailing, etc. and expressing our concerns. Or we can be passive and hope for the best. Speaker Johnson had the power of blackmail ("Pass my bill or the government shuts down until January of 2025"); only a rabid ideologue would act this way and Johnson might be that guy.

I would like to think our reps would respond to our calls and letters, but I am less than convinced. "Today, thanks Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United, big money dominates U.S. political campaigns to a degree not seen in decades. Super PACs allow billionaires to pour unlimited amounts into campaigns, drowning out the voices of ordinary Americans..."
https://www.brennancenter.org/issues/reform-money-politics/influence-big-money
I have also seen charts that show the laws that actually pass are overwhelmingly favored by big money contributors vs actual voters. The numbers actually show that "as more and more average citizens support action on an issue, they’re not any more likely to get what they want." https://www.vox.com/2014/7/30/5949581/money-in-politics-charts-explain

But, by all means we should try anyway!

 

[Camper]

155 posts on Social Security.... ROFL

Glad I got my check coming years ago.

 

[maki2]

155 posts on Social Security.... ROFL

Glad I got my check coming years ago.

You know how it is, Social Security is one of those topics where people have a common interest in it. So of course there will be a lot of responses to that subject matter.

 

[SLB_SA]

Haley’s proposals include changing how Social Security’s annual cost-of-living adjustments, which are currently tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI), are calculated. She instead would link those increases to another measure, chained CPI, which is lower because it reflects that consumers often switch to cheaper options of similar goods when prices jump. Nikki Haley wants to reform Social Security and Medicare. Donors are paying attention

 

[SLB_SA]

Haley Call for Social Security Reform Draws Donors: ‘We Need a Complete Reevaluation of Entitlements’
Haley has also said that although Social Security and Medicare are "the last thing the political class" wants to address's any candidate who refuses to do so "should be disqualified" because "they’ll take your vote and leave you broke.” The presidential candidate has also been recently endorsed by Emily Seidel, a top official associated with billionaire Charles Koch, who commended "courage" for taking on the "entitlement system."

 

[SLB_SA]

This Nikki Haley Is Coming for Your Retirement is worth a read. Here is one part:
The first thing you should know about Social Security is that the actual numbers don’t justify the apocalyptic rhetoric one often hears, not just from the right but also from self-proclaimed centrists who want to sound serious. No, the exhaustion of the system’s trust fund, currently projected to occur in roughly a decade, wouldn’t mean that benefits disappear.

It would mean that the system would need additional revenue to continue paying scheduled benefits in full. But the extra revenue required would be smaller than you probably think. The most recent long-term projections from the Congressional Budget Office show Social Security outlays rising to 6.2 percent of gross domestic product in 2053 from 5.1 percent this year, not exactly an earth-shattering increase.

...........................................

Anyone who says, as Haley does, that the retirement age should rise in line with increasing life expectancy is being oblivious, perhaps willfully, to the grim inequality of modern America. Until Covid struck, average life expectancy at 65, the relevant number, was indeed rising. But these gains were concentrated among Americans with relatively high incomes. Less affluent Americans — those who depend most on Social Security — have seen little increase in life expectancy and, in some cases, declines.

So anyone invoking rising life expectancy as a reason to delay Social Security benefits is, in effect, saying that aging janitors must keep working (or be cast into extreme poverty) because bankers are living longer.