Social security

[dreamrunnerjt]

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.

 

[SLB_SA]

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.

If you follow the news, you probably notice that some are proposing cuts to the social security benefits of current SS retirees (e.g. For the Good of the Country, Older Americans Should Work More and Take Less and Older Americans Are Winning the Economic War of the Generations). Some people are objecting to this idea (and these two opinion pieces in particular Debunking the Latest Attack on Social Security). A September article titled Major Social Security cuts “back on the table” by GOP lawmakers this week— Arizonans respond provides some seniors responses. I have seen other articles recently on cutting SS benefits, as you might have as well. Everyone not in the top 10% (or 1%) should be objecting; many politicians have been protecting the tax cuts introduced over the last 40 years rather than protecting the "lower 90%" of the people. Imagine the poverty that would result if SS and Medicare were cut or eliminated. Each of you has the right to investigate politicians and vote according to your beliefs. I do not intent this to be a partisan political post (and members of both parties have been "kicking the can down the road" for decades). However political interest and action by workers, retirees, dependent families, disabled workers and the "lower 90%" may be needed to save social security and medicare and I believe this issue is important to many readers here.

 

[rockloper]

Until they pass a law to collect FICA on every dollar earned, Congress is NOT taking the problem seriously. They're just, wait for it, protecting the rich as always.

 

[WanderingRose]

Yes, rockloper.

 

[SLB_SA]

You probably saw this news item this morning: 'MAGA Mike Johnson' Wants Commission to Cut Social Security Formed 'Immediately'

 

[WanderingRose]

Fortunately, he does not have unilateral power, which he knows, and instead is just posturing and throwing his weight around a lot to get attention.

I do believe the risk of those currently receiving SS of any sort having their benefits substantially reduced is very, very slim, and it is tilting at windmills to spend much time worrying about it.

There are bigger issues out there needing out attention.

IMHO

 

[rockloper]

We have met the enemy and he is us. Elections should have consequences!

 

[SLB_SA]

Fortunately, he does not have unilateral power, which he knows, and instead is just posturing and throwing his weight around a lot to get attention.

I do believe the risk of those currently receiving SS of any sort having their benefits substantially reduced is very, very slim, and it is tilting at windmills to spend much time worrying about it.

There are bigger issues out there needing out attention.

IMHO

Speaker Johnson eyes debt commission with goal of righting country’s fiscal ship
I cannot agree with the statement "I do believe the risk of those currently receiving SS of any sort having their benefits substantially reduced is very, very slim." Cuts to current benefits could arise suddenly from a closed door debt commission. If such cuts are presented to Congress, it will probably be too late for the public to affect such cuts. I cannot think of a "bigger issue out there needing out attention" than cuts to SS and medicare.

 

[SLB_SA]

Current social security benefits can be and have been affected by "commissions" like the Greenspan Commission which made SS benefits taxable.

Research Note #12: Taxation of Social Security Benefits
Since a pair of 1938 Treasury Department Tax Rulings, and another in 1941, Social Security benefits have been explicitly excluded from federal income taxation. (A revision was issued in 1970, but it made no changes in the existing policy.) This changed for the first time with the passage of the 1983 Amendments to the Social Security Act. Beginning in 1984, a portion of Social Security benefits have been subject to federal income taxes.

The 1979 Advisory Council was charged with studying the financing and benefit provisions of the Social Security program. The Council wrote extensively on the issue of taxation of Social Security benefits: .....
This recommendation by the Advisory Council encountered widespread resistance in the Congress. In an effort to make the idea more palatable, it was suggested that exclusionary thresholds could be added so that beneficiaries of low to moderate incomes would not be affected. This was similar to the procedure in use for the taxation of unemployment compensation benefits, which began in 1978. .....
Following the 1979 Advisory Council, the National Commission on Social Security Reform (informally known as the Greenspan Commission after its Chairman) was appointed by the Congress and the President in 1981 to study and make recommendations regarding the short-term financing crisis that Social Security faced at that time. Estimates were that the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund would run out of money, possibly as early as August 1983. This bipartisan Commission was to make recommendations to Congress on how to solve the problems facing Social Security. Their report, issued in January 1983, was the basis for Congress' consideration of the Social Security reform proposals which ultimately resulted in the 1983 Social Security Amendments. ......
Congress passed and President Reagan signed into law the 1983 Amendments. Under the '83 Amendments, up to one-half of the value of the Social Security benefit was made potentially taxable income. The specific rules adopted in 1983 were: .....

 

[WanderingRose]

Speaker Johnson eyes debt commission with goal of righting country’s fiscal ship
I cannot agree with the statement "I do believe the risk of those currently receiving SS of any sort having their benefits substantially reduced is very, very slim." Cuts to current benefits could arise suddenly from a closed door debt commission. If such cuts are presented to Congress, it will probably be too late for the public to affect such cuts. I cannot think of a "bigger issue out there needing out attention" than cuts to SS and medicare.

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the level of risk here.

Johnson can’t do this by himself, nor can a posse of one party do it by themselves, and making “up to one-half of the value of the Social Security benefit” potentially taxable income 40 years ago does not equate with substantial reductions in SS and Medicare today. IMHO

It is important for us all to remain vigilant, read credible news sources and be prepared to act on whatever.

There are millions of us out there, on SS and voting.

 

[SLB_SA]

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the level of risk here.

Johnson can’t do this by himself, nor can a posse of one party do it by themselves, and making “up to one-half of the value of the Social Security benefit” potentially taxable income 40 years ago does not equate with substantial reductions in SS and Medicare today. IMHO

It is important for us all to remain vigilant, read credible news sources and be prepared to act on whatever.

There are millions of us out there, on SS and voting.

I do not believe any of us want to imagine cuts to SS benefits but taking this risk seriously and (as you say) being vigilant is far better than "hiding one's head in the sand.'' I hope there is no risk to social security and medicare!!!

 

[user 25174]

If you follow the news, you probably notice that some are proposing cuts to the social security benefits of current SS retirees (e.g. For the Good of the Country, Older Americans Should Work More and Take Less and Older Americans Are Winning the Economic War of the Generations). Some people are objecting to this idea (and these two opinion pieces in particular Debunking the Latest Attack on Social Security). A September article titled Major Social Security cuts “back on the table” by GOP lawmakers this week— Arizonans respond provides some seniors responses. I have seen other articles recently on cutting SS benefits, as you might have as well. Everyone not in the top 10% (or 1%) should be objecting; many politicians have been protecting the tax cuts introduced over the last 40 years rather than protecting the "lower 90%" of the people. Imagine the poverty that would result if SS and Medicare were cut or eliminated. Each of you has the right to investigate politicians and vote according to your beliefs. I do not intent this to be a partisan political post (and members of both parties have been "kicking the can down the road" for decades). However political interest and action by workers, retirees, dependent families, disabled workers and the "lower 90%" may be needed to save social security and medicare and I believe this issue is important to many readers here.

Quoted from AARP who are not (supposed to be) political: "Social Security for decades has collected more than it paid out, building a surplus that stood at $2.83 trillion at the end of 2022".
"The facts: The two trust funds that pay out Social Security benefits — one for retirees and their survivors, the other for people with disabilities — have never been part of the federal government's general fund. Social Security is a separate, self-funded program".

 

[SLB_SA]

Quoted from AARP who are not (supposed to be) political: "Social Security for decades has collected more than it paid out, building a surplus that stood at $2.83 trillion at the end of 2022".
"The facts: The two trust funds that pay out Social Security benefits — one for retirees and their survivors, the other for people with disabilities — have never been part of the federal government's general fund. Social Security is a separate, self-funded program".

Yep. But this has not stopped some politicians from advocating for a cash grab.

 

[user 25174]

Yep. But this has not stopped some politicians from advocating for a cash grab.

Advocating.
Seems there's far less doing what's best (for American citizens) and far more advocating these days.
Kinda' trendy some might say.

 

[WanderingRose]

Yep, they’re playing to their audience, even if they can’t actually accomplish what they are promoting.

 

[RvNaut]

The reality of the current situation is that millions of Americans depend on their SS checks to get by in their "golden years".
.
.
The last cap was set in 2011 and needs to be raised.
.
Here is a very good explanation of the Max Cap and how it has changed through the years.
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/policybriefs/pb2011-02.html

 

[RonDean]

Advocating.
Seems there's far less doing what's best (for American citizens) and far more advocating these days.
Kinda' trendy some might say.

Let's remember that the folks collecting SS ARE US Citizens. And they were US citizens when they paid into the system and were told that the money would be there for them when the time came. So, I don't see the problem with advocating that we should hold the government to their word. Not to mention the question of what would happen if we removed that safety net. Not everyone was able to invest for their old age or possible disability. Maybe that was because of their own choices or maybe it was because of the economic system they were born into. Regardless, it is where they found themselves and right now there is no other viable option.

 

[user 22017]

Do people believe SS is already dead or close to it? I knew fear mongering about SS has been common practice for decades, but didn't realize people were believing it was close to dead.

Excerpt from July 30, 2022 Wall Street Journal's online edition's R.O.I. or Return on Investment, daily. Opinion piece by Brett Arends.

Brett Arends is an American journalist covering finance and investing. Since 2007, Arends has been a columnist for The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) and other Dow Jones publications, such as MarketWatch.[1] He was a contributing editor and wrote a weekly column for WSJ's personal finance magazine, SmartMoney, until it closed in 2012.[2] He now writes for the Wall Street Journal's online edition's R.O.I. or Return on Investment, daily.[3]

Opinion: The propaganda campaign to wreck Social Security is right on track​

The propaganda scam against Social Security is proving to be a master class. It is and has always been a massively popular government program, right from when it was started. Politicians used to call Social Security the third rail of American politics: “Touch it and die.” So how do you persuade people to kill off a popular program? Simple: You persuade them it’s already dead!

Genius!

This is how people like senators Lindsey Graham and Mitt Romney can hold out the prospect of cutting back on Social Security benefits if their party wins the midterm elections and apparently nobody cares.

After all, it’s already dead, right?

(There is something especially ironic about being told that Social Security can’t be saved by a multi, multimillionaire senator who pays 14% tax, while people busing tables pay 15.3% FICA, plus whatever in income tax.)

Actually, this isn’t reality at all. Social Security is still on track to pay about 80% of expected benefits. And even this anticipated funding shortfall is purely political. It could be avoided by ending the cap on incomes subject to payroll taxes, taxing the gigantic sums of untaxed capital gains, or just investing Social Security in stocks like any normal pension plan.

Saving the program would interfere with the campaign to persuade people it’s already dead. And we can’t have that. ~

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/t...social-security-is-right-on-track-11659105163

 

[SLB_SA]

Chicago politics has always been a contact sport. But even congressional tough guy Dan Rostenkowski, the Windy City pol who ruled the powerful House Ways and Means Committee for years, didn't know what hit him two decades ago, when irate senior citizens descended upon his car after a town hall meeting to discuss a law that made some of the biggest changes to Medicare since it was established in 1965. NPR

This kind of action might be needed to let the pols know SS and medicare are not dead.

 

[RonDean]

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!