“It will be my objective to phase out Social Security." - Sen. Mike Lee says the quiet part out loud.

[TimFitz]

SS has been working perfectly since its inception. It needs to be fixed or we only get 70% of promised benefits after 2034.

Trump is not the man to fixit. He has never fixed anything.

 

[80zephyr]

Social security needs an ever expanding population to pay for it. That is impossible. Hard choices need to be made for the future.

 

[Rigby5]

That's like saying that maxing out more credit cards saves you money.

The facts are that SS (and other taxes) has impoverished seniors by taxing them excessively during their productive years.

Wrong.
SS ensures that people are not "taxed excessively" during their productive years.
Since SS is invested in the National Debt, if not for SS, then taxes would have to be increased beyond what SS takes.
That is because if not for SS, then we would have to entice the rest of the world to buy our National Debt, and they would demand a higher interest rate.
SS is the best invention ever.
It not only saves us money by paying the interest on the national debt instead of us being taxed for that, but then it also pays us back later after we retire.
It is a total win/win situation.
There is no down side to Social Security.

 

[Anathema]

"to pull it up by the roots and get rid of it".

Well, that's plain enough for me! What do you think?

I think it’s the best idea I’ve heard in decades.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Understood, but why didn't you prepare?

I would rather see a better program that provides a better return. Bush had the right idea with the private accounts and he got demonized over it.

Because he isn't big on personal responsibility. He'd rather just hold his hand out.

The problem is that all the new money coming in SS gets paid out as benefits.
There was a surplus during boomers working, now boomers are collecting benefits.

Like all Ponzi schemes.

I have met Mike and know him slightly. He means get rid of it, period, and nothing to replace it.

Suuuuuuuuuuure you do.

Uncap the tax and it will pay for Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and VA.

So...you have actual DATA to back that up, right? Because you'd NEVER make a claim like that without having hard facts to support it...right?

 

[Rigby5]

Social security needs an ever expanding population to pay for it. That is impossible. Hard choices need to be made for the future.

No, normally inflation takes care of the needed growth.
The slight SS deficit will not last long and is only due to the huge boomer bulge.

This graph explains the change in US population over time.

It shows that the boomer bulge was an anomaly, and people are having much smaller families now.
That is not a problem in the future, once the boomer bulge has died off.
Me included.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Ponzi schemes do not last over 100 years

/—-/ They do if funded by a government with a printing press.

 

[boedicca]

Wrong.
SS ensures that people are not "taxed excessively" during their productive years.
Since SS is invested in the National Debt, if not for SS, then taxes would have to be increased beyond what SS takes.
That is because if not for SS, then we would have to entice the rest of the world to buy our National Debt, and they would demand a higher interest rate.
SS is the best invention ever.
It not only saves us money by paying the interest on the national debt instead of us being taxed for that, but then it also pays us back later after we retire.
It is a total win/win situation.
There is no down side to Social Security.

The government investing SS into the Federal Debt is at the root of the excessive Federal Spending Bloat.

You can spin it all you want but taxing people to the point where they can't save for their own retirements is malevolent.

 

[Rigby5]

I think it’s the best idea I’ve heard in decades.

Wrong.
Without SS, we will have no way to fund the interest on the national debt anymore, so will have to impose taxes equal or greater to SS withholding that we will not get back, if we end SS.
That is because if we do not fund the national debt interest with SS, then we will have to sell more government bonds at a higher interest rate to the rest of the world.
That makes us all more poor.

 

[Rigby5]

/—-/ They do if funded by a government with a printing press.

SS is not a ponzi scheme, and has very rarely had to call back money that the SS surplus invested in the national debt.
SS is NOT "funded by a government with a printing press".
The SS surplus being taken back by SS from the government, does NOT mean the government is funding SS.
SS still has a huge surplus that the government owes back, and government will not be funding SS until all that surplus over the decades is fully paid back.

 

[Rigby5]

The government investing SS into the Federal Debt is at the root of the excessive Federal Spending Bloat.

You can spin it all you want but taxing people to the point where they can't save for their own retirements is malevolent.

It is true that having the SS suplus does allow more government spending, and that is bad, but also our fault.
We are the ones who elect those who do that spending the way the voters want them to.
And historically almost no one has ever "saved for their own retirement".
I did, but I would bet 90% of the population would not.
And you are forgetting that if not for the SS surplus to borrow from for the national debt, then we would have to finance the national debt through bond sold at a much higher interest rate, to attract investors.
That would cost us all a lot more in taxes.

 

[Anathema]

Wrong.
Without SS, we will have no way to fund the interest on the national debt anymore, so will have to impose taxes equal or greater to SS withholding that we will not get back, if we end SS.
That is because if we do not fund the national debt interest with SS, then we will have to sell more government bonds at a higher interest rate to the rest of the world.
That makes us all more poor.

Yes we do… cut every penny of spending not directly related to one of the seventeen specific powers listed in Article I section 8 of the US Constitution… thereby gutting the US Government like a fish and providing plenty of money to actually reduce the debt.

 

[kyzr]

No, what you are asking it for some people only to cough up more without getting anything in return.

In 2033 if no fix is made we only get 70% of promised benefits.
The "fix" options include, raising the cap, means testing benefits, covering the shortfall with "budget cut savings".
Pick one.

 

[boedicca]

It is true that having the SS suplus does allow more government spending, and that is bad, but also our fault.
We are the ones who elect those who do that spending the way the voters want them to.
And historically almost no one has ever "saved for their own retirement".
I did, but I would bet 90% of the population would not.
And you are forgetting that if not for the SS surplus to borrow from for the national debt, then we would have to finance the national debt through bond sold at a much higher interest rate, to attract investors.
That would cost us all a lot more in taxes.

I'm not forgetting anything. You are betting that 90% of Americans can't act in their own self-interest. You are wrong.

You are also wrong by assuming that the spending fueled by the debt was proper and necessary. In reality, a vast amount of was grifted on inane programs and forever wars. That's why people can't afford to retire.

 

[kyzr]

You can't do "means testing" for SS since it is your own money paid in that you are getting payed back with.

Besides cutting spending, a better alternative is to allow in more immigrants who will be paying into SS.

Does Warren Buffet need SS payments? Means testing makes some sense.
Raising the cap also makes sense, high earners can afford a small increment in SS tax.
Repaying SS from the general budget also makes sense since they used the SS surplus
Instead of allowing immigrants into SS, how about requiring all US citizens to pay into SS, some now do not contribute saying they have their own plans.

 

[kyzr]

The Social Security trust fund is often misunderstood. Many believe it to be a genuine financial asset ensuring future benefits. This paper challenges that misconception, showing that the trust fund is more of a political construct than a true repository of savings or investments. The trust fund essentially consists of IOUs or promissory notes that represent claims on future tax revenues

True. So this IOU system can be repaid only if Elon and Vivek can recognize long term budget cuts that can be used to repay SS for the money that was borrowed to pay back the IOUs. I'm for cutting the Department of Education, moving Welfare to the States, moving Medicaid to the States, eliminating subsidies, eliminating Foreign Aid, etc.

 

[Zincwarrior]

True. So this IOU system can be repaid only if Elon and Vivek can recognize long term budget cuts that can be used to repay SS for the money that was borrowed to pay back the IOUs. I'm for cutting the Department of Education, moving Welfare to the States, moving Medicaid to the States, eliminating subsidies, eliminating Foreign Aid, etc.

Are we going to eliminate NASA?

 

[Cellblock2429]

Does Warren Buffet need SS payments? Means testing makes some sense.
Raising the cap also makes sense, high earners can afford a small increment in SS tax.
Repaying SS from the general budget also makes sense since they used the SS surplus
Instead of allowing immigrants into SS, how about requiring all US citizens to pay into SS, some now do not contribute saying they have their own plans.

/—-/ Fuc**ng communist agenda. Take people’s money and squander it. If you’re successful in life, you are the enemy.

 

[kyzr]

IOW, it’s a Ponzi scheme backed by government mandated participation. Something should be done.

SS works fine, but only if its "fixed" occasionally. SS has been working fine since 1935.

 

[kyzr]

Trump is not the man to fix it. He has never fixed anything.

Trump promised to end taxing SS benefits. But that is NOT fixing it for the long term. Democrats haven't fixed it either.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/13/politics/benefits-trump-social-security-plan/index.html

How a second Trump term could affect Social Security benefits​