Bully's Target The Most Vulnerable

[thereisnospoon]

Bernie Sanders who is no Independent, is on auto FAIL

 

[Star]

Al Gore pledged during his presidential bid to “veto any plan that takes money out of Social Security and uses it for any other purpose.” Then he sort of contradicted himself when he said he would keep SS fully funded but use any surplus to pay down the debt.

Were there any struggling cripples at the time? If so, was Gore a heartless monster for not pledging to not use SS funds to pay their rent?

...funds have flowed in both directions. Shifting just one-tenth of 1% from OASI to SSDI would
extend the disability fund’s life to 2033.​

Irrelevant, are you unaware that Al Gore Jr. was never in a position to keep any campaign pledges? But that's not what's being discussed on this thread.

As OKTEXAS pointed out SS is solvent for a "couple decades", IOWs there is plenty of dough to make the same transfer of funds that has taken place 11 times in the past.

House Republicans voted to block a financial fix to Social Security's disability trust fund, which runs out of money in 2016. That would result in a 20% benefits cut

Mark Miller / Reuters
Jan. 8, 2015

<snip>

Republicans see an opening for benefit cuts in the SSDI trust fund. It is under severe financial pressure and on track to be exhausted at the end of 2016, when 11 million of the most vulnerable Americans would face benefit cuts on the order of 20%.

The rational solution is a reallocation of resources from Social Security’s Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI). Such reallocations have been done 11 times in the past, and funds have flowed in both directions. Shifting just one-tenth of 1% from OASI to SSDI would extend the disability fund’s life to 2033.

Instead, House leaders appear to be maneuvering to push through an SSDI fix during the lame duck session following the 2016 elections. Such an 11th-hour package would likely impose cuts to the retirement program, including higher retirement ages and reduced annual cost-of-living adjustments. Legislators wouldn’t have to explain a vote for benefit cuts to their constituents before the elections, and might avoid accountability if changes to Social Security get tacked on to an omnibus spending bill or other yearend legislation.

<snip>

IOWs what we're talking about is a stealthy, backdoor political maneuver by Republicans to screw the disabled, the elderly, and children out of 20% of OASI and SSDI benefits.
.

 

[OKTexas]

.
Bernie Sanders Exposes Republican Plot To Cut Social Security For 11 Million Disabled People
By: Jason Easley
Monday, January, 12th, 2015

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is warning that Republicans are plotting to cut Social Security benefits for 11 million disabled Americans through a rule change that would make it more difficult to fund the disability account.

In a statement, Sen. Sanders explained what the House rules change will mean for disabled Americans who depend on Social Security:
“Around 11 million Americans, including nearly 2 million children with a disabled parent, rely on Social Security to help keep them out of poverty,” said Sanders, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee.

A new House rule creates a legal obstacle course that would make it harder to shift funds from the Social Security retirement account, which has a big surplus, to the smaller disability account. Such transfers have been done routinely in the past under both Republican and Democratic presidencies, including four times under President Ronald Reagan.

Without a transfer to shore up the disability fund, Social Security Administration experts say the disability program will run short of money next year, and there will be only enough to cover 80 percent of scheduled benefits.

<snip>

The Republican rule change that would lead to more benefits cuts will only push millions of Americans with no source of income further into poverty. House Republicans are repeating a pattern of attacking those who most need assistance. Since they have taken over the majority, Republicans have tried to cut benefits for the unemployed, children, wounded veterans, the elderly, and the disabled.

<snip>

The Republican desire to remake America into an oligarchy knows no limits. Sen. Sanders is leading the charge against the oligarchs, and the economic future of millions depends on his warnings being heeded.
.

So you see no problem in robbing Peter to pay Paul? You can't ripoff one program to sustain another one without eventually destroying both and neither are particularly solvent, they say SS could start experiencing major problems in the next couple of decades, stealing from it now won't help.

Acknowledging that Social Security insolvency is decade and decades away makes you smarter than just about every other rightwing/Republican on this M/B - good on you. Given that SS is solvent for the "next couple decades", how do you propose fixing it?

If you/Republicans choose to abolish SS, Dwight D, Eisenhower thinks you're "stupid", so you may want to consider Ronald Reagan's fix, raise taxes on the middle class and-----and if the mantra of former Republican Presidents of being stupid and/or raising taxes on the middle class doesn't appeal to you, how do you propose we fix SS in "next couple decades"?


"This bill demonstrates for all time our nation's ironclad commitment to Social Security. It assures the elderly that America will always keep the promises made in troubled times a half a century ago. It assures those who are still working that they, too, have a pact with the future. From this day forward, they have one pledge that they will get their fair share of benefits when they retire." ~ R. Reagan, April 20, 1983


"...anyone attempting to abolish Social Security is stupid." Dwight D. Eisenhower, November 8, 1954
.

My fix, phase it out over the next 60-70 years. Mankind made it millions of years without it and could do it again.