Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 46,731
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
After not doing anything to address the solvency issue of Social Security and Medicare for decades, problem apparently still a problem..
... my checks still clear.After not doing anything to address the solvency issue of Social Security and Medicare for decades,
...and the "not a problem" is still not a problem.problem apparently still a problem..
Yeah, it isn't insolvent yet. The upcoming insolvency is the problem. Personally, I'm not that happy about investing in a system that won't provide back to me. After all, that was the deal. The GOP and W wanted to create private accounts that'd have cost a fortune and then require earning a few percent to break even. That fell on its head once people learned that trillions would need to be borrowed to start that program.... my checks still clear.After not doing anything to address the solvency issue of Social Security and Medicare for decades,
...and the "not a problem" is still not a problem.problem apparently still a problem..
The "problem" is, having given money to the government to save for my retirement, I'm getting some of it back, and Republicans in government think they should have it. Anywhere there is government money other than military, Republicans think it should belong to them and their donors. THAT is "the problem".
Yeah, it isn't insolvent yet. The upcoming insolvency is the problem.... my checks still clear.After not doing anything to address the solvency issue of Social Security and Medicare for decades,
...and the "not a problem" is still not a problem.problem apparently still a problem..
The "problem" is, having given money to the government to save for my retirement, I'm getting some of it back, and Republicans in government think they should have it. Anywhere there is government money other than military, Republicans think it should belong to them and their donors. THAT is "the problem".
Personally, I'm not that happy about investing in a system that won't provide back to me. After all, that was the deal.
... my checks still clear.
...and the "not a problem" is still not a problem.problem apparently still a problem..
The "problem" is, having given money to the government to save for my retirement, I'm getting some of it back.
Republicans in government think they should have it, for no good reason except that they're greedy.
Anywhere there is government money other than for defense contractors, Republicans think it should belong to them and their donors.
THAT is "the problem".
If I could make money appear out of thin air, as the US government can, how would that be incorrect? Where do you think the billions for Ukraine came from, Fort Knox?lol which one of you said that Social Security can't become insolvent because you still get checks?
Yeah!! Dear BANK, I can't be out of money, I still have some checks left!!
It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
No, it doesn't have to work that way at all.It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
The faux egalitarianism of Murkin conservatism dictates that the rich, who paid so much more into the system, must also withdraw proportionally more out of the system. Means tests are dreaded SOCIALISM!! The only way to avoid it is to let most of the money that rich people make, be immune from FICA.No, it doesn't have to work that way at all.It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
That's how social security works--what you get is a function of what you put in.No, it doesn't have to work that way at all.It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
The horror. The horror.That's how social security works--what you get is a function of what you put in.No, it doesn't have to work that way at all.It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
If you don't do that you're turning it into a welfare program.
I would go even farther. Exempt the first $10,000 of income from SocSec Tax (both employee and employer portions). This would encourage hiring. Make up the SocSec revenue shortfall with the proceeds of a gasoline or carbon tax.There is an easy fix for Social Security and Medicare. Make the FICA withholding a flat tax instead of the regressive one it is today.
That's right. Congress has control over SocSec details. Believing that we "should" or "must" make SocSec conform to some private savings or pension model is blindered thinking.No, it doesn't have to work that way at all.It's not as much of a fix as you think because the people that would be paying more in would also be getting more out come retirement.
That's how social security works--what you get is a function of what you put in.
The horror. The horror.If you don't do that you're turning it into a welfare program.