Social Security horse pucky

[Wolfstrike]

today i was watching some TV and they said on the news,
"Social Security is going to run out in 2033."
"Medicare is going to run out in 2026"

i thought it was an astonishing coincidence!

Social Security is going to "run out" the same exact year the current rules expire.
isn't that amazing!

you see, Reagan, Tip O'Neil, and a bunch of other worthless politicians set up the current rules which were guarenteed until 2033.
if you're born after, around 1968, like i am, you won't get the same amount of "benefits" the current generation does.
in Socialist union terms, i guess they would call that a tier.

we've been programmed to accept this reduction in "benefits" for years, with the big myth that "people are living longer"
what they don't want to talk about is , how insane this Social Security scam was in the first place.

what our attitude SHOULD BE is,
if Social Security is "running out" like you say all the time, then i guess you don't need to collect for it.
if Social Security "benefits" need a higher collection age or they need to be reduced, well then i guess our mandatory
participation needs to be reduced.

 

[Grandma]

It depends on who's running the show then. Hopefully all the cruel greedy oligarchs will have been replaced by politicians that care about America.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It depends on who's running the show then. Hopefully all the cruel greedy oligarchs will have been replaced by politicians that care about America.

Obama threatened to withhold Social Security checks, is he a politician that "cares about America."

 

[zeke]

today i was watching some TV and they said on the news,
"Social Security is going to run out in 2033."
"Medicare is going to run out in 2026"

i thought it was an astonishing coincidence!

Social Security is going to "run out" the same exact year the current rules expire.
isn't that amazing!

you see, Reagan, Tip O'Neil, and a bunch of other worthless politicians set up the current rules which were guarenteed until 2033.
if you're born after, around 1968, like i am, you won't get the same amount of "benefits" the current generation does.
in Socialist union terms, i guess they would call that a tier.

we've been programmed to accept this reduction in "benefits" for years, with the big myth that "people are living longer"
what they don't want to talk about is , how insane this Social Security scam was in the first place.

what our attitude SHOULD BE is,
if Social Security is "running out" like you say all the time, then i guess you don't need to collect for it.
if Social Security "benefits" need a higher collection age or they need to be reduced, well then i guess our mandatory
participation needs to be reduced.

Sounds like you are pissed that my benefit amount (born in '54) will be greater than your benefit amount.

Increase the wage amount on which Social Security is collected and means test for benefits.

It will be fine. It ain't rocket science. Our politicians just treat it that way.

 

[healthmyths]

today i was watching some TV and they said on the news,
"Social Security is going to run out in 2033."
"Medicare is going to run out in 2026"

i thought it was an astonishing coincidence!

Social Security is going to "run out" the same exact year the current rules expire.
isn't that amazing!

you see, Reagan, Tip O'Neil, and a bunch of other worthless politicians set up the current rules which were guarenteed until 2033.
if you're born after, around 1968, like i am, you won't get the same amount of "benefits" the current generation does.
in Socialist union terms, i guess they would call that a tier.

we've been programmed to accept this reduction in "benefits" for years, with the big myth that "people are living longer"
what they don't want to talk about is , how insane this Social Security scam was in the first place.

what our attitude SHOULD BE is,
if Social Security is "running out" like you say all the time, then i guess you don't need to collect for it.
if Social Security "benefits" need a higher collection age or they need to be reduced, well then i guess our mandatory
participation needs to be reduced.

Sounds like you are pissed that my benefit amount (born in '54) will be greater than your benefit amount.

Increase the wage amount on which Social Security is collected and means test for benefits.

It will be fine. It ain't rocket science. Our politicians just treat it that way.

You've obviously never heard of the concept called "compound interest" have you?
You are also obviously unaware that your employer matches your contribution?
So right there you have two strikes with your idiotic proposal which cliched and common for low information people.

Are you aware that smarter people obviously then you have wanted to allow YOU to make your OWN decisions as to where both YOURS and Your
SS be put for YOUR own use when you retire?

For you age 59 when you entered the work force at say 18 (I don't assume you went to college...)
and you worked full time 41 years ...
if you were able to have your SS and your employer's contribution be put into your local bank insured by FDIC and for the next 41 years at a rate
of 3% over those 41 years YOU would have accumulated i.e. due to "compound interest" in a NOT RISKY stock market, simple savings account..
$855,000 over those 41 years!

ALL simply being deducted from your paycheck and automatically put into a FDIC insured account for 41 years!
That $855,000 would be yours to annuitize (big word I know!!) guaranteeing a $2,000 a month for 21 years.. and you still would have $355,000 left over!

The solution is simple. It ain't rocket science. It ain't RISKY! Maybe for you because you don't understand "compound interest"!

 

[editec]

Gee, a retirement system administered by a pack of fucking theives since 1980 might be in trouble.

Who'd have thought, eh?