User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:24:39 PM EDT
[#1]
Raise taxes? Reduce benefits?? How about we stop providing billions to people who are here but have never contributed one penny to the system?
We could cut funding to Ukraine, and our seniors could live like kings and queens in their latter years of life. How about that? I say we Increase benefits, lower taxes, and stop providing the world and illegals with free money, how about that?!?! We could all live like kings if we stopped giving it all away!! And honestly, I don't care if the person is a lowlife bum piece of shit, this is America, we take care of our own bums first, before anyone who is not an American. That simple. Many of our homeless contributed to our society at one point or another in their life anyways, so they get preferential treatment over some European country that is funneling the money to cronies! |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:25:07 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Tallahasseezz: Contribution is capped at around 10K a year right now. They'll increase that so the rich can pair their "fair share". Means testing also. If you have millions in retirement you won't be getting your SS back. The max salary in 2024 is 168,600 per year. You contribute 7.5% Your employer contributes 7.5% So 15% of 168,600 is $25,200 per year is the max. I'm self employed, so I get to pay the whole 15% I'll be collecting when I retire next year at 65 Honestly, why not increase the salary limit to $500k? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:29:02 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cavedog: Raise the cutoff. Yea, keep screwing our old members of society while we fund illegals and Ukraine and every other fucking thing not related to America. Nope. I say provide a large stipend to every American and pull it from the billions set aside for some hostile country that hates us! Sorry but we should not make it even more difficult for our older society just because our politicians are siphoning money out of every deal they make. Cut wasteful spending for bullshit programs, and take care of our own! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:36:30 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By nisa715: Give me everything I’ve already paid in and put it in an investment account. After that stop taxing me for this BS. This. Give me back what I paid in for the last 39 years. Then do whatever they want to do. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:37:47 PM EDT
[#5]
Tell government to get their hands out of our cookie jar.
They literally borrow from it all the time |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:43:20 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By phlat: Combo, and push back retirement age again. All this plus the effects of inflation devaluing currency and seemingly reducing the problem. |
|
|
|
UT, USA
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:53:27 PM EDT
[#7]
Take more non retirement folks off SS disability.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:56:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: FlashMan-7k]
[#8]
Originally Posted By Lou_Daks: In your opinion, what will the govt. do to cover the shortfall? The age to get SSI benefits will become as it was in the start - they will put it up beyond the average lifespan. They will likely also cut the COLA increases and inflate the currency supply to the moon and force SSI beneficiaries to accept worthless currency in payment, under terms that they must be paid in dollars, and they are not to be paid in equal buying power that they paid in, but in equal numbers of dollar bills. Eventually even that will stop working and the bandaid will fall off the sucking chest wound and the economy and political structure will impolode. That's how government run ponzi schemes work. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/22/2024 11:57:49 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DrywellDweller: When is welfare going to run out of money Never. They'll just keep inflating the money supplies until everyone finally catches on that the dollar is worthless. If they have to get to the point where they are issuing 100 quadrillion dollar bills, they will. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:14:18 AM EDT
[#10]
And I retire in 2035
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:19:18 AM EDT
[#11]
Make Zelensky and Iran give all the billions back |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:21:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: AmericanPeople]
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By entropy: Honestly, why not increase the salary limit to $500k? Because those who earn more would not get proportionally more. We are way past the point where screwing over higher wage earners is fair. The higher wage/income earners already pay more than their fair share....they are being screwed. That is also why means testing is a terrible idea only to be suggested by Democrats and fellow socialist commies. |
|
|
|
MOZ
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:22:15 AM EDT
[#13]
Just print another trillion…
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:43:53 AM EDT
[#14]
Where is the option for Nothing?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 12:50:07 AM EDT
[#15]
money printers go BRRRRrrrrr
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 7:08:19 AM EDT
[#16]
Let older people that contributed get SS payments.
They'll bitch if they were too stupid to provide for themselves outside of government intervention. Yes, my money was stolen from me. I want Social Security killed. End it now. I'm okay with not getting payments, if it frees my children, grandchildren, ... etc. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 7:13:15 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ulster: Social security will fix itself. The younger generations won't file because they don't want to steal from their kids like the boomers did. Once everyone stops collecting, the government will stop taking it out of our paychecks. Bravo sir!  Attached File |
|
|
|
VA, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:02:23 AM EDT
[#18]
Stop forcing people to get on and pay for SS?
It ain’t complicated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:07:51 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ulster: Social security will fix itself. The younger generations won't file because they don't want to steal from their kids like the boomers did. Once everyone stops collecting, the government will stop taking it out of our paychecks.  Attached File |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:08:44 AM EDT
[#20]
Social Security is a benefit of the Capitalist system.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:09:45 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By cavedog: Raise the cutoff. Raise the cufflinks. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:10:35 AM EDT
[#22]
Stop giving Social Security money to children.
Stop illegally paying off 160B in student debt. Not worry about it because by 2010 most of the East Coast of America will be underwater due to climate We're not going to make it to 2035. The country will have collapsed by then and we'll be living Mad-Max style. |
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:12:05 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By apexcrusade: Social Security is a benefit of the Capitalist system. I view it as more of an ulcer upon the capitalist system. Its main victims being those on the lower end of the economic scale. There are outliers of course, but it is obvious to see who gets hurt the most, even though it is re-distributionist in the way it is structured. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:14:05 AM EDT
[#24]
Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:20:07 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Scalped: You ain't even scratching the surface of 2030, pal, much less 2035. I hope you've brushed on crops that can endure in a nuclear wasteland. Shit's gonna get wild, and you normies best start hoarding sample bottles of shampoo if you want to get laid past those years. Hear me?  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:24:09 AM EDT
[#26]
I'm alarmed at how many people think we would ever pay for SS. We will just make up dollars in a computer and pay for it with fake dollars.
|
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:28:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Wineraner]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. (The LTC-portion of Medicaid is not at that link, but is readily determinable elsehwhere.) A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:31:28 AM EDT
[#28]
They have tons of options
1) Raise the payroll tax 2) Raise retirement age 3) Means test Social Security isn't going anywhere. It's just going to become a bigger and bigger burden on the working population as the population pyramid thins out at the bottom over time. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:32:38 AM EDT
[#29]
Or they just add a zero to the spreadsheet "white house makes stimulus payment to SS"
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:32:38 AM EDT
[Last Edit: apexcrusade]
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine to no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine to no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. It's just disingenuous to jump to cutting old age and survivor's benefits, contributions to which have been confiscated from earnings over a lifetime with nary a word to the extreme levels of fraud, waste and use of taxpayer funds by the elite in their pursuit of permanent political power. We want a better system. Let's start in the obvious places rather than engage in arguments about SS. I always post the same schtick because the SS threads are always identical, one to the other. |
|
|
|
AR, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:35:39 AM EDT
[Last Edit: wmagrush]
[#31]
Average lifespan in my family is mid 90s. That’s 396 months from the day I am eligible for SS by today’s criteria. My no interest return on what I’ve paid in would be even in 73 months. So the govt could cut me a no tax liability check for what I paid in, no strings attached, or I can stick around and collect potentially five and a half times that amount.
If people had the option of a one-time check some would take it. But what percentage would squander the money then be ‘destitute’, just to hop on the welfare dole? Could smart people take that check, invest it and get close to equal what the long term SS endpoint payout be? Total end value definitely would be higher if that money had been privately invested from day one vs. ‘contributing’ to SS. Social Security was a contract with the US public, a lot like the land deals that railroad robber barons had with land owners. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:36:44 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Wineraner]
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AmericanPeople: Because those who earn more would not get proportionally more. We are way past the point where screwing over higher wage earners is fair. The higher wage/income earners already pay more than their fair share....they are being screwed. That is also why means testing is a terrible idea only to be suggested by Democrats and fellow socialist commies. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AmericanPeople: Originally Posted By entropy: Honestly, why not increase the salary limit to $500k? Because those who earn more would not get proportionally more. We are way past the point where screwing over higher wage earners is fair. The higher wage/income earners already pay more than their fair share....they are being screwed. That is also why means testing is a terrible idea only to be suggested by Democrats and fellow socialist commies. Social Security is a safety net for the elderly. Or welfare for old farts, depending on your point of view. There's nothing fair about it. If you don't need the safety net---because you're not falling, of course it's not going to be equitable. We should have had the conversation about welfare for the indigent elderly, and the associated questions about how government giveaways can crowd out private charity. We didn't, because we all preferred to believe New Deal bullshit, and now the contradictions are starting to get to where Winston Smith and friends can't paper over the holes. |
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:36:56 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By woodsie: They have tons of options 1) Raise the payroll tax 2) Raise retirement age 3) Means test Social Security isn't going anywhere. It's just going to become a bigger and bigger burden on the working population as the population pyramid thins out at the bottom over time. While your post is factually correct, the 3 options you list make the bad aspects of the SS even worse. Which is not the way to solve a problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:37:36 AM EDT
[#34]
I still think they will end up taxing private retirements into near non-existence and restructure social security so it is massive wealth redistribution.
|
|
|
|
MS, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:38:42 AM EDT
[#35]
Originally Posted By Lou_Daks: In your opinion, what will the govt. do to cover the shortfall? Politically, the only thing they can do. Print money like there is no tomorrow and monetize the debt. Anyone suggesting cuts, will be massacred in the next election. Right or wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:45:23 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. (The LTC-portion of Medicaid is not at that link, but is readily determinable elsehwhere.) A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. (The LTC-portion of Medicaid is not at that link, but is readily determinable elsehwhere.) A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. That doesn’t clearly show the gap, though. While social security is underfunded, it wouldn’t take a mass change to fix it. Projections are the benefit reduction would be around 20%, so an increase of the tax of 25% (from 6.2% to 7.75% for employee and employer) would be close to shoring it up. The challenge is Medicare and Medicaid, which are severely underfunded and driving the deficit. And once the austerity comes there, the chaos begins. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:46:13 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ulster: Social security will fix itself. The younger generations won't file because they don't want to steal from their kids like the boomers did. Once everyone stops collecting, the government will stop taking it out of our paychecks. No way will that happen. If you want to come up with a plan to gradual phase out Social Security that is fine but unless you get another funding source, it may take 50-100 years to get off of it and payroll taxes will still be confiscated but with decreasing amounts. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:47:05 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By apexcrusade: It's just disingenuous to jump to cutting old age and survivor's benefits, contributions to which have been confiscated from earnings over a lifetime with nary a word to the extreme levels of fraud, waste and use of taxpayer funds by the elite in their pursuit of permanent political power. We want a better system. Let's start in the obvious places rather than engage in arguments about SS. I always post the same schtick because the SS threads are always identical, one to the other. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By apexcrusade: Originally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine to no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. It's just disingenuous to jump to cutting old age and survivor's benefits, contributions to which have been confiscated from earnings over a lifetime with nary a word to the extreme levels of fraud, waste and use of taxpayer funds by the elite in their pursuit of permanent political power. We want a better system. Let's start in the obvious places rather than engage in arguments about SS. I always post the same schtick because the SS threads are always identical, one to the other. Your inability to estimate math figures within an order of magnitude---a problem shared by most of the country, for what it's worth---is not relevant. I don't care that you "paid in", or that I "paid in" given I'm no more than a decade / two away from collecting it myself. The money we paid in is nowhere near sufficient to fund the outlays we're projected to draw. That's the problem, one it shares with other Ponzi schemes. Since it's not, the programs then becomes a subsidy or a charity of the Feds. A further problem is that even after the Boomers die off, with their demographic bulge excreted out of the body politic and into the toilet bowl of history, younger generations aren't having enough children to make up for even the drastically shrunken demand on those .Gov services. See Japan. Like the mostly-true joke that General Motors was primarily a health-care delivery system for autoworkers, the Federal Government is mostly a transfer payments vehicle to the elderly, the indigent, the defense industry, bondholders, and those companies who service the above. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:50:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: apexcrusade]
[#39]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Your inability to estimate math figures within an order of magnitude---a problem shared by most of the country, for what it's worth---is not relevant. I don't care that you "paid in", or that I "paid in" given I'm no more than a decade / two away from collecting it myself. The money we paid in is nowhere near sufficient to fund the outlays we're projected to draw. That's the problem, one it shares with other Ponzi schemes. Since it's not, the programs then becomes a subsidy or a charity of the Feds. A further problem is that even after the Boomers die off, with their demographic bulge excreted out of the body politic and into the toilet bowl of history, younger generations aren't having enough children to make up for even the drastically shrunken demand on those .Gov services. See Japan. Like the mostly-true joke that General Motors was primarily a health-care delivery system for autoworkers, the Federal Government is mostly a transfer payments vehicle to the elderly, the indigent, the defense industry, bondholders, and those companies who service the above. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Originally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine to no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. It's just disingenuous to jump to cutting old age and survivor's benefits, contributions to which have been confiscated from earnings over a lifetime with nary a word to the extreme levels of fraud, waste and use of taxpayer funds by the elite in their pursuit of permanent political power. We want a better system. Let's start in the obvious places rather than engage in arguments about SS. I always post the same schtick because the SS threads are always identical, one to the other. Your inability to estimate math figures within an order of magnitude---a problem shared by most of the country, for what it's worth---is not relevant. I don't care that you "paid in", or that I "paid in" given I'm no more than a decade / two away from collecting it myself. The money we paid in is nowhere near sufficient to fund the outlays we're projected to draw. That's the problem, one it shares with other Ponzi schemes. Since it's not, the programs then becomes a subsidy or a charity of the Feds. A further problem is that even after the Boomers die off, with their demographic bulge excreted out of the body politic and into the toilet bowl of history, younger generations aren't having enough children to make up for even the drastically shrunken demand on those .Gov services. See Japan. Like the mostly-true joke that General Motors was primarily a health-care delivery system for autoworkers, the Federal Government is mostly a transfer payments vehicle to the elderly, the indigent, the defense industry, bondholders, and those companies who service the above. You seem top be giving up right out of the gate, so I doubt we'll come to any agreement here. I don't believe I've used any math - perhaps you can point that out? I'm pretty good at it, having been in insurance and financial services for 35 years. Not that I need to defend myself. You seem to be missing the entire point (by orders of magnitude) Before we even get to any 'math', the will to change the system must be established. That is almost the entirety of my argument. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:51:06 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HiramRanger: I still think they will end up taxing private retirements into near non-existence and restructure social security so it is massive wealth redistribution. Where's the political will for that once the boomers drop dead? By that point most of the Xers should be too stoned or dead from smack. Millennials will be lost since they got evicted from their boomer parents basement to be able to figure it out. The youngsters will be too busy collecting scalps in the wasteland to give a fuck.  |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 10:53:07 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By exponentialpi: That doesn’t clearly show the gap, though. While social security is underfunded, it wouldn’t take a mass change to fix it. Projections are the benefit reduction would be around 20%, so an increase of the tax of 25% (from 6.2% to 7.75% for employee and employer) would be close to shoring it up. The challenge is Medicare and Medicaid, which are severely underfunded and driving the deficit. And once the austerity comes there, the chaos begins. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By exponentialpi: Originally Posted By Wineraner: Originally Posted By apexcrusade: Increase SS benefits. Reduce/eliminate government largesse to all the various cohorts that are paid to secure and maintain permanent political power, to easily pay for it. I'm going to just assume that you're screwing with us, as that's more complimentary to you, but if not: SS expenditures were 1.2 trillion in 2022. That's total. I don't have as handy, the source for funding inflow to SS, to determine the shortfall in 2022 or projected shortfalls in subsequent years. Mainly though, what largesse would you like to cut that is going to add up to 1.2 trillion? From that link you'll see that one dollar in three that .Gov spends, when you also count Medicare and LTC portion of Medicaid, is going to seniors. (The LTC-portion of Medicaid is not at that link, but is readily determinable elsehwhere.) A group that has had an entire lifetime to amass savings and capital to fund their needs. Yet still insists that 1/3 of the federal government's spending be spent on them. We could balance the federal budget right now, by ending those programs and ceasing their assorted checks. Which would also probably improve the practice of medicine no end. You all would shit a brick if that happened. Like a suicide's, our economic problems in this country are almost entirely self-inflicted. That doesn’t clearly show the gap, though. While social security is underfunded, it wouldn’t take a mass change to fix it. Projections are the benefit reduction would be around 20%, so an increase of the tax of 25% (from 6.2% to 7.75% for employee and employer) would be close to shoring it up. The challenge is Medicare and Medicaid, which are severely underfunded and driving the deficit. And once the austerity comes there, the chaos begins. Oh agreed. The link is just a handy, easy way to start recognizing the magnitude of some of the drivers. Noted though, that 20% of 1 2 trillion is still 240 billion. Or a hair less than 1/3 of the entire defense budget. It's going to be hard to scrimp and save 240 billion. Absolutely agree on Medicare/Medicaid. I'm honestly surprised. Gov hasn't pressured local state medical licensing agencies to make Medicare-patient service a condition of licensure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 11:55:07 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bat15: If you are short a few quarters, you could work a part time job. I had a professor who worked retail at Christmas time so that he would get SS. IIRC one of the conditions of my "exempt" pension is the inability to collect SS but I'm uncertain about the details. In any event, I no longer work for money; I'm done chasing that rabbit. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 11:56:50 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Oh agreed. The link is just a handy, easy way to start recognizing the magnitude of some of the drivers. Noted though, that 20% of 1 2 trillion is still 240 billion. Or a hair less than 1/3 of the entire defense budget. It's going to be hard to scrimp and save 240 billion. Absolutely agree on Medicare/Medicaid. I'm honestly surprised. Gov hasn't pressured local state medical licensing agencies to make Medicare-patient service a condition of licensure. I agree about Medicare/Medicaid. It's the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 3:36:26 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Wineraner: Oh agreed. The link is just a handy, easy way to start recognizing the magnitude of some of the drivers. Noted though, that 20% of 1 2 trillion is still 240 billion. Or a hair less than 1/3 of the entire defense budget. It's going to be hard to scrimp and save 240 billion. Absolutely agree on Medicare/Medicaid. I'm honestly surprised. Gov hasn't pressured local state medical licensing agencies to make Medicare-patient service a condition of licensure. Why do people put Medicare and Medicaid in the same bucket? They are different. |
|
|
|
CT, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 3:50:31 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By bayouhazard: Probably the same as they already do to cover the shortfall in federal employee pensions. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 3:51:40 PM EDT
[#46]
Im gonna get my Monies, one way or the other
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 4:03:09 PM EDT
[#47]
There's always money. The government has proven that to us time and time again.
Running out means you decided not to pay it. If you want to kill the golden goose, this is how you do it. Everything is pretty cool until people run out of shit to lose, then they get creative. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 4:06:12 PM EDT
[#48]
Let's just invade other countries and take the spoils to divide up among the American people.
Let's just go full Rome. We're going to be in countless never ending wars, may as well get something for the common American out of it all. |
|
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 4:12:01 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AmericanPeople: Why do people put Medicare and Medicaid in the same bucket? They are different. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AmericanPeople: Originally Posted By Wineraner: Oh agreed. The link is just a handy, easy way to start recognizing the magnitude of some of the drivers. Noted though, that 20% of 1 2 trillion is still 240 billion. Or a hair less than 1/3 of the entire defense budget. It's going to be hard to scrimp and save 240 billion. Absolutely agree on Medicare/Medicaid. I'm honestly surprised. Gov hasn't pressured local state medical licensing agencies to make Medicare-patient service a condition of licensure. Why do people put Medicare and Medicaid in the same bucket? They are different. Subsidized medical care for: the elderly or the indigent, respectively. Neither is funded adequately to meet projected shortfalls, neither comes even laughably close to compensating medical professionals for their costs to service that population. Medicaid is responsible for long-term care funding, and most of that pool is nursing home care for, again, the elderly. One dollar in three. Most of the debt required to fund that, and every other government expenditure, is held domestically. We're in hock to ourselves. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/23/2024 7:21:18 PM EDT
[#50]
SS does not run out of money in 2035. It runs out of cash reserves but people will still be contributing.
"Social Security will still exist after 2035, according to the trustees' findings, but retirees will only receive 83% of their full benefits. Preventing that shortfall requires congressional action and would likely involve trimming benefits or increasing the Social Security payroll tax." Government will not reduce benefits since they will already be lower as noted above, it would be political suicide. They will reduce benefits for younger contributors and push the age to retire back even more. They will probably raise taxes and reduce tax deductions. Plus everything else they can think of. It's funny the whole scam was based upon the idea that we were not expected to live long enough to collect any of it. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
