GOP: Millions For The Wealthy But We Can't Afford To Award $250 Social Security COLA

[DiveCon]

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

True, True... We do pay into it, but...

Fed says if I Die right now, my Wife and Chitlins get about $1200 ea a Month until the kids are 18...

That's a MINIMUM of $561,000 just based on when my Eldest Child turns 18 and no Increase in COLA...

This System can NOT Sustain itself, Period.



peace...

Your kids will take 35+ years to reach the age of 18?

516,000/1200 = 430 months

430/12 = 35.8 1/3 years.

he likely has 3 kids

 

[mal]

True, True... We do pay into it, but...

Fed says if I Die right now, my Wife and Chitlins get about $1200 ea a Month until the kids are 18...

That's a MINIMUM of $561,000 just based on when my Eldest Child turns 18 and no Increase in COLA...

This System can NOT Sustain itself, Period.



peace...

Your kids will take 35+ years to reach the age of 18?

516,000/1200 = 430 months

430/12 = 35.8 1/3 years.

he likely has 3 kids

My Wife and Kids will get $1200 ea for 13 years... Then $2400 for another 2.5 years...

3 People = $3600 a month... True Story!

They send me a sheet on it and everything!... Tells me how much I've earned a year since the 80's!...

Anyway...



peace...

 

[mal]

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

True, True... We do pay into it, but...

Fed says if I Die right now, my Wife and Chitlins get about $1200 ea a Month until the kids are 18...

That's a MINIMUM of $561,000 just based on when my Eldest Child turns 18 and no Increase in COLA...

This System can NOT Sustain itself, Period.



peace...

Your kids will take 35+ years to reach the age of 18?

516,000/1200 = 430 months

430/12 = 35.8 1/3 years.

Damn, you're Dumb.



peace...

 

[WillowTree]

my GAWD, what the fxxk can a person DO WITH 250dollars.

what a friggen JOKE.

Buy new set of tires.

Heat their homes for a few months.

But their grandkids Christmas presents.

Pay off their mounting unpaid utility bills.

No doubt $250 is a miniscule sum to you, Steph, but to people living on the margins of fiscal solvency, it can actually be a great windfall.

It will put a week or two's worth of groceries on the table too.

 

[DiamondDave]

Is making rich people richer worth the additional debt?

The government is making them richer?? Hardly

You and your ilk think that the money is not theirs or earned by them in the first place.... you just wish to take more out of your 'guilt' or jealousy

 

[DaGoose]

See, you are mistaking something.

SS COLA is something the government would be GIVING to people.

Taxes are something that the government TAKES from people.

The gov't isn't GIVING the rich more money. The gov't (Obama) is simply not TAKING more

SS is a fund the government collects from everyone. If that pool of $$$ is short, it's short. Theres nothing we can do about it other than raise taxes, which no one wants to do.

But thats the ideological difference. The right sees people's money as belonging to the individual person. Whereas the left sees money as being government property that the government can forcefully take from the individual whenever it needs a bigger pot of $$$ to use.

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

Well, you're half right. We pay in 6.2% and employers match it (of course, a legitimate argument could be made that if the employer didn't have to pay it they would give us raises but that's going out on a limb).

Social Security is more of an insurance than anything else. It's a contract between you and the government that you will have some type of sustaining income in your old age until the day you die. And like any insurance if you don't collect the money stays in the pot until someone else does.

But no matter what, like Homeowners or Car insurance it's there when you need it. Is it broken? No, but it needs tweaking to remain viable. I'm not opposed to paying benefits on a sliding scale to who needs them, bumping up the retirement age and lift the ceiling from $106,500.

But I will say that it's rediculous that some on this board are just peachy with extending tax cuts for the wealthy that will increase the deficit and we will need to pay back (oh yes we will) and yet will refuse to help out Senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and really need it.

And anyone who says they're beyond ever needing it must sure live a charmed life.

 

[mal]

My Ma-in-Law just told me, after calling about the $100 in Kings cards I have to get her, that my Wife won't get $1200...

I could've swore the last summary I got from SS said the my Spouse and Children would each get $1200 a month if I Died.

Now I've got to dig that shit out again.

Where did I put it.



peace...

 

[WillowTree]

See, you are mistaking something.

SS COLA is something the government would be GIVING to people.

Taxes are something that the government TAKES from people.

The gov't isn't GIVING the rich more money. The gov't (Obama) is simply not TAKING more

SS is a fund the government collects from everyone. If that pool of $$$ is short, it's short. Theres nothing we can do about it other than raise taxes, which no one wants to do.

But thats the ideological difference. The right sees people's money as belonging to the individual person. Whereas the left sees money as being government property that the government can forcefully take from the individual whenever it needs a bigger pot of $$$ to use.

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

Well, you're half right. We pay in 6.2% and employers match it (of course, a legitimate argument could be made that if the employer didn't have to pay it they would give us raises but that's going out on a limb).

Social Security is more of an insurance than anything else. It's a contract between you and the government that you will have some type of sustaining income in your old age until the day you die. And like any insurance if you don't collect the money stays in the pot until someone else does.

But no matter what, like Homeowners or Car insurance it's there when you need it. Is it broken? No, but it needs tweaking to remain viable. I'm not opposed to paying benefits on a sliding scale to who needs them, bumping up the retirement age and lift the ceiling from $106,500.

But I will say that it's rediculous that some on this board are just peachy with extending tax cuts for the wealthy that will increase the deficit and we will need to pay back (oh yes we will) and yet will refuse to help out Senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and really need it.

And anyone who says they're beyond ever needing it must sure live a charmed life.

Why do you say that? Leave the taxes right where they are and the deficit shouldn't move either. Unless of course you demonRats spend a few more trillion than you have.

 

[DaGoose]

Is making rich people richer worth the additional debt?

The government is making them richer?? Hardly

You and your ilk think that the money is not theirs or earned by them in the first place.... you just wish to take more out of your 'guilt' or jealousy

Sure it's THEIR (and OUR) money. But it's also THEIR (and OUR) debt that each of us owe.

 

[DaGoose]

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

Well, you're half right. We pay in 6.2% and employers match it (of course, a legitimate argument could be made that if the employer didn't have to pay it they would give us raises but that's going out on a limb).

Social Security is more of an insurance than anything else. It's a contract between you and the government that you will have some type of sustaining income in your old age until the day you die. And like any insurance if you don't collect the money stays in the pot until someone else does.

But no matter what, like Homeowners or Car insurance it's there when you need it. Is it broken? No, but it needs tweaking to remain viable. I'm not opposed to paying benefits on a sliding scale to who needs them, bumping up the retirement age and lift the ceiling from $106,500.

But I will say that it's rediculous that some on this board are just peachy with extending tax cuts for the wealthy that will increase the deficit and we will need to pay back (oh yes we will) and yet will refuse to help out Senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and really need it.

And anyone who says they're beyond ever needing it must sure live a charmed life.

Why do you say that? Leave the taxes right where they are and the deficit shouldn't move either. Unless of course you demonRats spend a few more trillion than you have.

What????? You don't realize that we have been adding to the debt every year since Trickle Down economics started us down this road?

 

[DiveCon]

Well, you're half right. We pay in 6.2% and employers match it (of course, a legitimate argument could be made that if the employer didn't have to pay it they would give us raises but that's going out on a limb).

Social Security is more of an insurance than anything else. It's a contract between you and the government that you will have some type of sustaining income in your old age until the day you die. And like any insurance if you don't collect the money stays in the pot until someone else does.

But no matter what, like Homeowners or Car insurance it's there when you need it. Is it broken? No, but it needs tweaking to remain viable. I'm not opposed to paying benefits on a sliding scale to who needs them, bumping up the retirement age and lift the ceiling from $106,500.

But I will say that it's rediculous that some on this board are just peachy with extending tax cuts for the wealthy that will increase the deficit and we will need to pay back (oh yes we will) and yet will refuse to help out Senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and really need it.

And anyone who says they're beyond ever needing it must sure live a charmed life.

Why do you say that? Leave the taxes right where they are and the deficit shouldn't move either. Unless of course you demonRats spend a few more trillion than you have.

What????? You don't realize that we have been adding to the debt every year since Trickle Down economics started us down this road?

thats because the government(IE CONGRESS) has been spending WAY too much

 

[DiveCon]

See, you are mistaking something.

SS COLA is something the government would be GIVING to people.

Taxes are something that the government TAKES from people.

The gov't isn't GIVING the rich more money. The gov't (Obama) is simply not TAKING more

SS is a fund the government collects from everyone. If that pool of $$$ is short, it's short. Theres nothing we can do about it other than raise taxes, which no one wants to do.

But thats the ideological difference. The right sees people's money as belonging to the individual person. Whereas the left sees money as being government property that the government can forcefully take from the individual whenever it needs a bigger pot of $$$ to use.

Well, actually ss is not something the gov merely GIVES to people. Most people have worked a 30 or 40 years and have paid their MONEY into SS. Now the gov. is paying it back in increments. The people who die before they reach ss age just donated 30 or 40 years of hard labor to the rest of us orr to some illegal who stole his identity.

Well, you're half right. We pay in 6.2% and employers match it (of course, a legitimate argument could be made that if the employer didn't have to pay it they would give us raises but that's going out on a limb).

Social Security is more of an insurance than anything else. It's a contract between you and the government that you will have some type of sustaining income in your old age until the day you die. And like any insurance if you don't collect the money stays in the pot until someone else does.

But no matter what, like Homeowners or Car insurance it's there when you need it. Is it broken? No, but it needs tweaking to remain viable. I'm not opposed to paying benefits on a sliding scale to who needs them, bumping up the retirement age and lift the ceiling from $106,500.

But I will say that it's rediculous that some on this board are just peachy with extending tax cuts for the wealthy that will increase the deficit and we will need to pay back (oh yes we will) and yet will refuse to help out Senior citizens who are on fixed incomes and really need it.

And anyone who says they're beyond ever needing it must sure live a charmed life.

the employers contribution is included in your pay package
just as the full cost of your healthcare plan

 

[DiamondDave]

Is making rich people richer worth the additional debt?

The government is making them richer?? Hardly

You and your ilk think that the money is not theirs or earned by them in the first place.... you just wish to take more out of your 'guilt' or jealousy

Sure it's THEIR (and OUR) money. But it's also THEIR (and OUR) debt that each of us owe.

No... it is not "our" money

50% owe no debt in that system of taxation...

selective equal treatment by government

 

[edthecynic]

See, you are mistaking something.

SS COLA is something the government would be GIVING to people.

Taxes are something that the government TAKES from people.

The gov't isn't GIVING the rich more money. The gov't (Obama) is simply not TAKING more

SS is a fund the government collects from everyone. If that pool of $$$ is short, it's short. Theres nothing we can do about it other than raise taxes, which no one wants to do.

But thats the ideological difference. The right sees people's money as belonging to the individual person. Whereas the left sees money as being government property that the government can forcefully take from the individual whenever it needs a bigger pot of $$$ to use.

SS funds do not belong to the government , they belong to the people that paid them in.

If there was a trust fund somewhere that had your $$ in it that you had paid into you would be correct.
There isn't so you and I both were conned.
There is not one cent in any trust fund.
We are broke. Sorry.
Please do not make the kids pay for yours, mine, the previous generations and ALL of the interest while they get NOTHING.
Is that fair? They pay for 2 generations of benefits and interest and get nothing.
Slash it now for the kids. **** us dumbasses that allowed this mess to happen.
It is yours and my fault. Get out of denial and quit being selfish and do something about it.
$$$ does not grown on ******* trees.

The money in the SS Trust fund was borrowed to pay for such things as the Bush tax cuts, which effectively redistributed the money collected from incomes under $100,000 to incomes over $100,000 by using income tax rates to refund money collected at SS payroll tax rates. Of course, CON$ have no problem with that kind of REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH!!!!!

 

[Gadawg73]

SS funds do not belong to the government , they belong to the people that paid them in.

If there was a trust fund somewhere that had your $$ in it that you had paid into you would be correct.
There isn't so you and I both were conned.
There is not one cent in any trust fund.
We are broke. Sorry.
Please do not make the kids pay for yours, mine, the previous generations and ALL of the interest while they get NOTHING.
Is that fair? They pay for 2 generations of benefits and interest and get nothing.
Slash it now for the kids. **** us dumbasses that allowed this mess to happen.
It is yours and my fault. Get out of denial and quit being selfish and do something about it.
$$$ does not grown on ******* trees.

The money in the SS Trust fund was borrowed to pay for such things as the Bush tax cuts, which effectively redistributed the money collected from incomes under $100,000 to incomes over $100,000 by using income tax rates to refund money collected at SS payroll tax rates. Of course, CON$ have no problem with that kind of REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH!!!!!

They started borrowing $$ in 1960 with IOUs to fund social programs.
You and I are at fault for allowing it.
Do you want to pass it on to children that owe $50,000.00 each and rising?

 

[edthecynic]

Unemployment was low and steady when Bush was President, until Democrats controlled Congress.

I've lost track of how many times you've posted this crap!
Unemployment ROSE from 3.90% at the end of Clinton's term to 5% when the Dems took over. That is not steady by any definition of steady.

Now tell us what law the Dems got past the record number of GOP filibusters and Bush's veto pen that caused the UE rate to rise after the Dems took over Congress.

 

[edthecynic]

If there was a trust fund somewhere that had your $$ in it that you had paid into you would be correct.
There isn't so you and I both were conned.
There is not one cent in any trust fund.
We are broke. Sorry.
Please do not make the kids pay for yours, mine, the previous generations and ALL of the interest while they get NOTHING.
Is that fair? They pay for 2 generations of benefits and interest and get nothing.
Slash it now for the kids. **** us dumbasses that allowed this mess to happen.
It is yours and my fault. Get out of denial and quit being selfish and do something about it.
$$$ does not grown on ******* trees.

The money in the SS Trust fund was borrowed to pay for such things as the Bush tax cuts, which effectively redistributed the money collected from incomes under $100,000 to incomes over $100,000 by using income tax rates to refund money collected at SS payroll tax rates. Of course, CON$ have no problem with that kind of REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH!!!!!

They started borrowing $$ in 1960 with IOUs to fund social programs.
You and I are at fault for allowing it.
Do you want to pass it on to children that owe $50,000.00 each and rising?

They started borrowing in the 1960s to pay for the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was not a social program!

No I want to pass it onto the rich who didn't pay enough of the income tax load that necessitated the borrowing from the SS Trust fund in the first place. They benefited from the borrowing, now it is time to pay it back with interest.

 

[edthecynic]

The government is making them richer?? Hardly

You and your ilk think that the money is not theirs or earned by them in the first place.... you just wish to take more out of your 'guilt' or jealousy

Sure it's THEIR (and OUR) money. But it's also THEIR (and OUR) debt that each of us owe.

No... it is not "our" money

50% owe no debt in that system of taxation...

selective equal treatment by government

Now when CON$ say "government" they really mean "Republicans." It was the GOP tax cuts to buy votes that has 50% of wage earners not paying income taxes. Bush's tax cuts alone raised it from 25% to the 50% and CON$ want to make the Bush tax cuts permanent so they can permanently WHINE about 50% not paying income taxes.

 

[Gadawg73]

The money in the SS Trust fund was borrowed to pay for such things as the Bush tax cuts, which effectively redistributed the money collected from incomes under $100,000 to incomes over $100,000 by using income tax rates to refund money collected at SS payroll tax rates. Of course, CON$ have no problem with that kind of REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH!!!!!

They started borrowing $$ in 1960 with IOUs to fund social programs.
You and I are at fault for allowing it.
Do you want to pass it on to children that owe $50,000.00 each and rising?

They started borrowing in the 1960s to pay for the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War was not a social program!

No I want to pass it onto the rich who didn't pay enough of the income tax load that necessitated the borrowing from the SS Trust fund in the first place. They benefited from the borrowing, now it is time to pay it back with interest.

When you buy a loaf of bread and pay tax on it does the rich guy behind you pay more tax?
Income taxes hurt the economy. The wealthy would pay a lot more tax with a consumption tax.
I favor that.

 

[The Rabbi]

Unemployment was low and steady when Bush was President, until Democrats controlled Congress.

I've lost track of how many times you've posted this crap!
Unemployment ROSE from 3.90% at the end of Clinton's term to 5% when the Dems took over. That is not steady by any definition of steady.

Now tell us what law the Dems got past the record number of GOP filibusters and Bush's veto pen that caused the UE rate to rise after the Dems took over Congress.

3.9 to 5 from 2000 to 2006 is not steady?? Maybe on Planet Leftist that's the case, but not in the real world.
In fact UE rose from 5% when the Dems took Congress to between 9.5 and 10% today. That's an impressive record of failure.

Back to the OP: This is being painted by some union thugs as keeping grandma from eating dog food. But there is no means test for this $250. Since there are millionaires getting SS it would seem the Dems want to send $250 checks to millionaires. The elderly as a group have far lower instances of poverty than many others, especially people in their 20s with kids at home. Dems want to take money from young struggling families and send them to rich old coots. And of course the children--and grandchildren--of those young families will be stuck with the bill.
What else can one expect from the Democrats: The Party of **** You?