After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives

Doc7505

Diamond Member
Feb 16, 2016
18,717
33,886
2,430

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
Was a bi partisan bill, fool.
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
These worthless leftist traitors already raped medicare to fund their "green" agenda, so no surprise here.
 

Attachments

  • 1000000614.jpg
    1000000614.jpg
    27.3 KB · Views: 3
The Gateway Pundit strikes again.
Yes and no.

There are no cuts in that bill but I'm not a huge fan of expanding the program like that. These people get pensions instead of SS, they haven't had it deducted from their paychecks every month for decades either, and the pensions at least used to be more generous and available earlier than SS.

I believe they have enough advantages. This should not be signed into law.
 
The bill cuts nothing from anyone's social security benefits.

Like the proverbial stopped clock, the Democrats are right about this one. This bill will help people like me, who paid into social security as a full-time worker for more than two decades before becoming a teacher.

Under current law, I lose a large chunk of the social security benefits I would be entitled to if I had simply stopped working altogether rather than leaving a job in which I paid into social security for a job in which I paid into Texas Retirement System.

The worst loss would be my wife's, who was a stay-at-home mom for twenty years before becoming a teacher. She would not be eligible for Social Security survivor benefits due to the "Windfall Elimination Act." Again, she would be entitled to them if she had never worked at a job at all, but because she became a teacher, she is currently not going to get anything.

That part is very unfair, since many, many teachers are married to spouses who paid into Social Security and will likely outlive them.
 
Last edited:

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you payet el
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
let em pass it
 
Social security benefits are regulated by core inflation. Which have been falsely reported.
However Congress is trying to vote themselves a 40% increase while SS recipients only have gotten 5%.

We do not need to expand those covered under Social Security....just pay those who paid in 120 calendar quarters or more fairly.

And those who only have 40 calendar quarters? The minimum. Also stop having a cap on SS Taxes. And that will fund the taxes on SS payments....so they can stop. Basically an increase.
 

Stuff That Flew Under the Radar: The Social Security Fairness Act​

—​

Why It Matters​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Jennifer Oliver O'Connell

H.R. 82, the "Social Security Fairness Act" was one of the last gasp endeavors of 118th Congress to get bills passed and off to President Joe Biden for signature before leaving for Christmas vacation. Because, priorities. With the passage of this bill, Congress succeeded in repealing established laws from 1977 (the Government Pension Offset or GPO) and 1983 (the Windfall Elimination Provision or WEP), which prevented certain public pension earners from double-dipping into the Social Security coffers.
H.R. 82, passed the Senate 76 to 20, with four senators not voting. Those four included Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) because, confirmation hearings. Sen. JD Vance (R-OH), because hey, inauguration preparations. The other two were Joe Manchin (D-WV) because he has ended his Senate career and does not really care at this point, and surprisingly, Sen. Adam Schiff (D-CA) who has no good excuse, especially since he needs to, maybe, start earning his keep.
The bill had previously cleared the House in November, 327 to 75, with one congressperson voting present. The WEP reduced Social Security benefits for individuals who receive other retirement benefits through state or local government pension programs: like teachers, firefighters, first responders, police officers, and postal workers. The GPO eliminated the government pension offset for surviving spouses and their children who inherited their deceased spouses said government pensions. In the past, they would have had the full Social Security pension amount. I know because my father was a postal worker when he died, and my mother and my siblings received his pension benefits in full. When the GPO was signed into law in 1977, those benefits were reduced by two-thirds.

~Snip~
While touted as "bipartisan," I would bill it more of a mixed bag of representatives championing its passage, the majority Democrats. Notable on the Republican side: Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), both whose record is not stellar in voting to reduce government coffers. Most of the labor unions are cheering this on, and if the unions are considering this a win, then it's probably does not portend well for the American people.
Despite this repeal and relief for three million pensioners struggling in the age of Biden-Harris, none of this theater addresses Social Security's insolvency issues--issues that have spanned decades and that each Congress kicks into the next session. As our senior editor Joe Cunningham wrote:
My take: this bill, and the CR, are an ignominious end for the 118th Congress. Both will be barnacles on the backs of the incoming 119th, and may be what tanks both Republican majority leaders. More indications that DOGE has its work cut out for it.


Commentary:
The deal is that 62 is the retirement age right now. What the scam artist ambulance chasers in congress have done is cut that a little bit at a time by ‘raising the retirement age’ but what really has happened is a thirty percent reduction in benefits for people that retire at 62. Crazy huh?
Actually, the 'Windfall Elimination Provision' or WEP) reduced Social Security payouts to people who paid into Social Security who did not accumulate 30 years.
“Where will that $195 billion over the next decade come from?”
How about taking that entire amount from just one year of taxpayer contributions to illegal aliens. Just one year will pay for that bill.
Read more @:
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benwwork or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.ond
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
imagine the ss tax that would be there if the bidens would have paid their fair share from their grifting
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
If they worked in a private enterprise and paid social security and then got a government job not paying SS they are still owed SS from the private job, especially if they worked decade in the private sector first.
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
SS is not being cut, duh. Yous guys just can't stop lying.
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
You don’t understand. My wife was both a teacher who was exempt from Ss and an educational aide who paid into it. Her SS which is tiny since she only paid into it for a few years gets reduced every time she gets a raise in her teacher’s pension. As I understand this bill, it removes the penalty.
 

After Lying That Trump Wants to Cut Social Security, Dems Rush Bill That Will Cut Benefits – Need Biden to Sign Before Trump Arrives​

21 Dec 2024 ~~ By Samuel Short, Western Journal.

Democrats have been caught doing the very thing they’ve been accusing President-elect Donald Trump of doing: Cutting Social Security.

On Wednesday, the U.K. Daily Mail reported Senate Democrats are trying to push through a Social Security reform bill they want to see signed by President Joe Biden before Trump takes office.
The Social Security Fairness Act aims to repeal provisions that reduce payouts to public sector employees like police officers, firefighters, teachers, and post workers. The Mail cites The Committee for a Responsible Budget in their article, and that group states this would make Social Security insolvent six months earlier than current projections by giving increased benefits to 3 million people who paid into their state or local pensions that did not pay Social Security.
The CRFB also states, “As a result, we estimate a typical dual-income couple retiring in 2033 would see their benefits cut by an additional $25,000 over their lifetime.”
The think tank says if Social Security runs out of money under this bill, as much as $400,000 in benefits would be lost for the average couple. CRFB states the cost for the bill over the next decade — citing the Congressional Budget Office — would be $190 billion.
~Snip~
“It speeds the bankruptcy of Social Security. Social Security is due to go bankrupt in 2034. This will speed it up by a year or so. It’s $200 billion added to a program that is already short of money,” he said, following up by commenting, “If you’re going to add to its mandate by expanding it, you should pay for it.”
Schumer tried to pose the effort on X in the most altruistic fashion last week, saying, “It would ensure Americans are not erroneously denied their well-earned social security benefits simply because they chose at some point to work in their careers in public service.”
~Snip~
In July, Democrat Rep. Hakeem Jeffries invoked to boogeyman that is Project 2025 to say Trump would be the end of Social Security.
He claimed, “Trump’s Project 2025 will end Social Security and Medicare as we know it.”
Despite looking to address excessive government spending, Trump stated earlier this month, “We’re not touching Social Security.”
Under Democrats’ bill, cuts will be made, and insolvency will be sped up.
It is unclear whether Democrats actually think this is helpful, or if they just want to create a massive disaster later — perhaps for the president-elect to “deal” with.
That all being said, there may be a far less conspiratorial explanation for this latest move from the Democrats.
Hanlon’s Razor states we, “shouldn’t attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

See Also:
**********​


Commentary:
These people have not paid in to social security and they are supposed to get benefits? They have benefits from their pension. Then every one should be given the max SSI payment regardless of how long they work or when they choose to retire, if you pay in to SSI.
The pensions of all public sector workers is outrage that we also pay for. Most are getting their full salaries as though they are still working…. Teachers unions and all public sector unions have made sure their members are taken care of after retirement. So no, they should not receive full SS Benefits….
If you haven't paid in to the systems you should not be collecting SS. Also SS should not be used to provide benefits for people that have never paid in. It was never designed for that. The government pays a larger portion than the employee. And the benefit payout is guaranteed by the taxpayers.
Figures. Will the current Senate pass it?
 

Forum List

Back
Top