Raise Retirement age and cut benefits or not?

[hazlnut]

Do we touch Medicare and Social Security or not?

With Medicare, it's all about the government giving money to drug companies and rich doctors. We should gradually raise the retirement age, yes. But as far as cutting what Medicare is willing to pay, that would hurt seniors because the greedy doctors and drug companies would stop accepting Medicare. So the only viable thing there is health reform to cut the costs of healthcare paid by all so that what Medicare pays can also go down. Obamacare was supposed to work on that, but because of the toxic Washington environment they rushed out a Democrat only plan rather than working together with Republicans on the healthcare cost issue.

On Social Security, raise the retirement age, and tax benefits to more well off seniors. It's not fair, but there's no alternative. The money seniors put in to social security is gone and the current generation can't sustain the older generation at the current benefit level.

So fixing medicare is much tougher and must be done hand in hand with healthcare reform.

Bottom line: Huckabee, Christie, Bush, everybody had some good ideas. Get together with Democrats and come up with something.

We need to elect somebody who can do that because neither party will win absolute power in 2016.

Just have an opt out kick in when people reach a certain income level.

 

[CowboyTed]

Single payer with government negotiating the costs with the suppliers.

$600 toilet seat... Yeah good idea

Except we have proven time and time again that public healthcare insurance is cheaper and more efficient than private.

Now I know you are going to do disbelief, then complete denial and then the Ostrich. But them are the facts, since you either don't know those facts or choose ideology over evidence your input here is very limited and actually is really just noise.

So adults are thinking and the kids should be quite.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Do we touch Medicare and Social Security or not?

With Medicare, it's all about the government giving money to drug companies and rich doctors. We should gradually raise the retirement age, yes. But as far as cutting what Medicare is willing to pay, that would hurt seniors because the greedy doctors and drug companies would stop accepting Medicare. So the only viable thing there is health reform to cut the costs of healthcare paid by all so that what Medicare pays can also go down. Obamacare was supposed to work on that, but because of the toxic Washington environment they rushed out a Democrat only plan rather than working together with Republicans on the healthcare cost issue.

On Social Security, raise the retirement age, and tax benefits to more well off seniors. It's not fair, but there's no alternative. The money seniors put in to social security is gone and the current generation can't sustain the older generation at the current benefit level.

So fixing medicare is much tougher and must be done hand in hand with healthcare reform.

Bottom line: Huckabee, Christie, Bush, everybody had some good ideas. Get together with Democrats and come up with something.

We need to elect somebody who can do that because neither party will win absolute power in 2016.

Make it a opt in or opt out to start with.

That is the worst idea.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Social Security was fixed by Ronald Reagan in 1983,

for FIFTY years.

How about the RWnuts use the model of their GOD Reagan to fashion another bi-partisan fix.

 

[Obiwan]

Retirement age has already been raised. It's subtle, but it's been there since 1983:

Retirement Age Calculator

It needs to be further raised in order for projected deficits to not happen. Those projections already take onto account the 1983 law.

Well, you have to pay for the Democrats' "free shit" somehow, right???

This is just another attempt to rob working people to cover the deadbeats..

Want to talk "slavery" now???

 

[Davros]

Retirement age has already been raised. It's subtle, but it's been there since 1983:

Retirement Age Calculator

It needs to be further raised in order for projected deficits to not happen. Those projections already take onto account the 1983 law.

Well, you have to pay for the Democrats' "free shit" somehow, right???

This is just another attempt to rob working people to cover the deadbeats..

Want to talk "slavery" now???

No. It's an attempt to address the budget deficits you guys are always whining about.

The way this is done in a republic is for opposing parties to come together and agree to something.

Obama promised he would take in any body's idea and work with everybody, but he lied. If he hadn't been lying, he would have been a great president.

 

[Obiwan]

Retirement age has already been raised. It's subtle, but it's been there since 1983:

Retirement Age Calculator

It needs to be further raised in order for projected deficits to not happen. Those projections already take onto account the 1983 law.

Well, you have to pay for the Democrats' "free shit" somehow, right???

This is just another attempt to rob working people to cover the deadbeats..

Want to talk "slavery" now???

No. It's an attempt to address the budget deficits you guys are always whining about.

The way this is done in a republic is for opposing parties to come together and agree to something.

Obama promised he would take in any body's idea and work with everybody, but he lied. If he hadn't been lying, he would have been a great president.

But he lied...

You just need to admit the bastard failed, right???

 

[eagle1462010]

CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

- See more at: CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

 

[Obiwan]

CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

- See more at: CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

Or possibly put Social Security back to what it was intended to be???

Stop stealing the money for other pork projects, or handing it out as welfare (SSI) to people that never contributed one red cent...

 

[Davros]

Retirement age has already been raised. It's subtle, but it's been there since 1983:

Retirement Age Calculator

It needs to be further raised in order for projected deficits to not happen. Those projections already take onto account the 1983 law.

Well, you have to pay for the Democrats' "free shit" somehow, right???

This is just another attempt to rob working people to cover the deadbeats..

Want to talk "slavery" now???

No. It's an attempt to address the budget deficits you guys are always whining about.

The way this is done in a republic is for opposing parties to come together and agree to something.

Obama promised he would take in any body's idea and work with everybody, but he lied. If he hadn't been lying, he would have been a great president.

But he lied...

You just need to admit the bastard failed, right???

He failed to be the President he said he was going to be.

 

[eagle1462010]

CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

- See more at: CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

Or possibly put Social Security back to what it was intended to be???

Stop stealing the money for other pork projects, or handing it out as welfare (SSI) to people that never contributed one red cent...

I am simply putting out data...............according to the CBO that is what it would take to save it in it's current form.............

Other options are increased caps.........on taxation.........increased age.......do away with COLA and other options...............

The deal is it is insolvent without action...........The Trust fund is a stack of IOU's..........and those IOU's are now projected to go broke in 2029..............Under the Act in 1983 that age is already increasing to 67 I believe.........It has been gradually increasing over time via that Act..................

I don't know what the real fix should be................I do know that the unfunded liabilities will destroy this country economically............Personally, on a thread like this I go look for sources to make an educated conclusion or GUESS on the best path forward.................

 

[Davros]

CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

- See more at: CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

Or possibly put Social Security back to what it was intended to be???

Stop stealing the money for other pork projects, or handing it out as welfare (SSI) to people that never contributed one red cent...

What did the first generation of Social Security recipients contribute? Social Security is welfare. The lie was pretending it wasn't.

 

[eagle1462010]

CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

- See more at: CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com

Or possibly put Social Security back to what it was intended to be???

Stop stealing the money for other pork projects, or handing it out as welfare (SSI) to people that never contributed one red cent...

What did the first generation of Social Security recipients contribute? Social Security is welfare. The lie was pretending it wasn't.

Social Security History

January 31, 1940 Ida M. Fuller became the first person to receive an old-age monthly benefit check under the new Social Security law. She paid in $24.75 between 1937 and 1939 on an income of $2,484. Her first check, dated January 31, was for $22.54.

From the onset, it was paying out to those who didn't pay into it..................So yes it began as a Welfare program.

 

[JakeStarkey]

CBO’s 2014 Long-Term Projections for Social Security: Additional Information

In calendar year 2010, for the first time since the enactment of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, annual outlays for the program exceeded annual tax revenues (that is, outlays exceeded totalrevenues excluding interest credited to the trust funds). In 2013, outlays exceeded noninterest income by about 9 percent, and CBO projects that the gap will average about 17 percent of tax revenues over the next decade. As more members of the baby-boom generation retire, outlays will increase relative to the size of the economy, whereas tax revenues will remain at an almost constant share of the economy. As a result, the gap will grow larger in the 2020s and will exceed 30 percent of revenues by the late 2020s.

CBO projects that under current law, the DI trust fund will be exhausted in fiscal year 2017, and the OASI trust fund will be exhausted in 2032. If a trust fund's balance fell to zero and current revenues were insufficient to cover the benefits specified in law, the Social Security Administration would no longer have legal authority to pay full benefits when they were due. In 1994, legislation redirected revenues from the OASI trust fund to prevent the imminent exhaustion of the DI trust fund. In part because of that experience, it is a common analytical convention to consider the DI and OASI trust funds as combined. Thus, CBO projects, if some future legislation shifted resources from the OASI trust fund to the DI trust fund, the combined OASDI trust funds would be exhausted in 2030.

The program is easily reformed, as you well know.

You always say that but never give options...................How do we stop the unfunded Liabilities.............................................

Since they combined the Trust Funds, which are a stack of IOU's, they are now insolvent by 2030.........Insolvent now if we don't take into account the Trust Funds are no longer there................

Social Security Policy Options

Policy Options
In this study, CBO analyzes 30 options that are among those that have been considered by various analysts and policymakers as possible components of proposals to provide long-term financial stability for Social Security. The options follow the convention of not reducing initial benefits for people who are currently older than 55, and all would directly affect outlays for benefits or federal revenues dedicated to Social Security.

The options fall into five categories:

• Increases in the Social Security payroll tax,
• Reductions in people's initial benefits,
• Increases in benefits for law earners,
• Increases in the full retirement age, and
• Reductions in the cost-of-living adjustments that are applied to continuing benefits.

Each option is analyzed in isolation, although most proposals to make substantial changes to Social Security combine several provisions. Many options would interact with one another, so combining them might cause changes to the overall finances of the system that are larger or smaller than would be produced by a simple sum of the effects of several discrete options.

This list of options is far from exhaustive. It does not include changes that would draw on general government revenues, create individual accounts, or change the trust funds' investments. Other than an increase in the Social Security payroll tax, changes to federal tax policy are not considered. The options do not include any that apply only to people who receive DI benefits, although some of the options would affect OASI and DI beneficiaries alike.

continue reading if you choose to do so........

Read your last paragraph carefully, please.

 

[JakeStarkey]

CBO’s 2014 Long-Term Projections for Social Security: Additional Information

In calendar year 2010, for the first time since the enactment of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, annual outlays for the program exceeded annual tax revenues (that is, outlays exceeded totalrevenues excluding interest credited to the trust funds). In 2013, outlays exceeded noninterest income by about 9 percent, and CBO projects that the gap will average about 17 percent of tax revenues over the next decade. As more members of the baby-boom generation retire, outlays will increase relative to the size of the economy, whereas tax revenues will remain at an almost constant share of the economy. As a result, the gap will grow larger in the 2020s and will exceed 30 percent of revenues by the late 2020s.

CBO projects that under current law, the DI trust fund will be exhausted in fiscal year 2017, and the OASI trust fund will be exhausted in 2032. If a trust fund's balance fell to zero and current revenues were insufficient to cover the benefits specified in law, the Social Security Administration would no longer have legal authority to pay full benefits when they were due. In 1994, legislation redirected revenues from the OASI trust fund to prevent the imminent exhaustion of the DI trust fund. In part because of that experience, it is a common analytical convention to consider the DI and OASI trust funds as combined. Thus, CBO projects, if some future legislation shifted resources from the OASI trust fund to the DI trust fund, the combined OASDI trust funds would be exhausted in 2030.

The program is easily reformed, as you well know.

You always say that but never give options...................How do we stop the unfunded Liabilities.............................................

Since they combined the Trust Funds, which are a stack of IOU's, they are now insolvent by 2030.........Insolvent now if we don't take into account the Trust Funds are no longer there................

Social Security Policy Options

Policy Options
In this study, CBO analyzes 30 options that are among those that have been considered by various analysts and policymakers as possible components of proposals to provide long-term financial stability for Social Security. The options follow the convention of not reducing initial benefits for people who are currently older than 55, and all would directly affect outlays for benefits or federal revenues dedicated to Social Security.

The options fall into five categories:

• Increases in the Social Security payroll tax,
• Reductions in people's initial benefits,
• Increases in benefits for law earners,
• Increases in the full retirement age, and
• Reductions in the cost-of-living adjustments that are applied to continuing benefits.

Each option is analyzed in isolation, although most proposals to make substantial changes to Social Security combine several provisions. Many options would interact with one another, so combining them might cause changes to the overall finances of the system that are larger or smaller than would be produced by a simple sum of the effects of several discrete options.

This list of options is far from exhaustive. It does not include changes that would draw on general government revenues, create individual accounts, or change the trust funds' investments. Other than an increase in the Social Security payroll tax, changes to federal tax policy are not considered. The options do not include any that apply only to people who receive DI benefits, although some of the options would affect OASI and DI beneficiaries alike.

continue reading if you choose to do so........

Read your last paragraph carefully, please.

1940 was 75 years ago. Grow up and deal with the issue in its totality.

 

[eagle1462010]

CBO’s 2014 Long-Term Projections for Social Security: Additional Information

In calendar year 2010, for the first time since the enactment of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, annual outlays for the program exceeded annual tax revenues (that is, outlays exceeded totalrevenues excluding interest credited to the trust funds). In 2013, outlays exceeded noninterest income by about 9 percent, and CBO projects that the gap will average about 17 percent of tax revenues over the next decade. As more members of the baby-boom generation retire, outlays will increase relative to the size of the economy, whereas tax revenues will remain at an almost constant share of the economy. As a result, the gap will grow larger in the 2020s and will exceed 30 percent of revenues by the late 2020s.

CBO projects that under current law, the DI trust fund will be exhausted in fiscal year 2017, and the OASI trust fund will be exhausted in 2032. If a trust fund's balance fell to zero and current revenues were insufficient to cover the benefits specified in law, the Social Security Administration would no longer have legal authority to pay full benefits when they were due. In 1994, legislation redirected revenues from the OASI trust fund to prevent the imminent exhaustion of the DI trust fund. In part because of that experience, it is a common analytical convention to consider the DI and OASI trust funds as combined. Thus, CBO projects, if some future legislation shifted resources from the OASI trust fund to the DI trust fund, the combined OASDI trust funds would be exhausted in 2030.

The program is easily reformed, as you well know.

You always say that but never give options...................How do we stop the unfunded Liabilities.............................................

Since they combined the Trust Funds, which are a stack of IOU's, they are now insolvent by 2030.........Insolvent now if we don't take into account the Trust Funds are no longer there................

Social Security Policy Options

Policy Options
In this study, CBO analyzes 30 options that are among those that have been considered by various analysts and policymakers as possible components of proposals to provide long-term financial stability for Social Security. The options follow the convention of not reducing initial benefits for people who are currently older than 55, and all would directly affect outlays for benefits or federal revenues dedicated to Social Security.

The options fall into five categories:

• Increases in the Social Security payroll tax,
• Reductions in people's initial benefits,
• Increases in benefits for law earners,
• Increases in the full retirement age, and
• Reductions in the cost-of-living adjustments that are applied to continuing benefits.

Each option is analyzed in isolation, although most proposals to make substantial changes to Social Security combine several provisions. Many options would interact with one another, so combining them might cause changes to the overall finances of the system that are larger or smaller than would be produced by a simple sum of the effects of several discrete options.

This list of options is far from exhaustive. It does not include changes that would draw on general government revenues, create individual accounts, or change the trust funds' investments. Other than an increase in the Social Security payroll tax, changes to federal tax policy are not considered. The options do not include any that apply only to people who receive DI benefits, although some of the options would affect OASI and DI beneficiaries alike.

continue reading if you choose to do so........

Read your last paragraph carefully, please.

I did before I posted it.........................What is your point? What do you have to add, other than we can fix it easily.....................

I haven't seen any data from you on any thread showing us how easy it is to fix.......................

Here..........have a hint at the cost.............what it would take by taxes alone to fix it.


CBO: Social Security Needs a 4.4% Payroll Tax Increase : FedSmith.com
The document contains many facts, but two stand-out. First, CBO lowered its solvency projection from 2030 to 2029. Second, it says that Social Security needs an immediate increase in payroll taxes of 4.4% just to cover its bills over the next 75 years.

CBO’s figures differ sharply from the more optimistic projections produced by the Social Security Administration (“SSA”). SSA believes that the resources of the Trust Fund should cushion the system until 2033. Separately it believes that payroll taxes need to rise only 2.88%.

I do not know which organization is a better fortune teller. I am not even able to say why there is a difference. Someone somewhere should be able to explain a gap of this size. Thus far, I have been unable to find that anyone anywhere that has even looked at the gap, much less tried to explain it.


“The combined OASDI trust funds are projected to be exhausted in calendar year 2029.”

2029 means that someone on average who is 73 expects to outlive scheduled benefits. It means that someone who is 53 expects to retire the year that the Trust Fund is exhausted.

“Over the next 75 years, if current laws remained in place, the program’s actuarial shortfall would be 4.4 percent of taxable payroll, or 1.4 percent of GDP”

 

[eagle1462010]

CBO’s 2014 Long-Term Projections for Social Security: Additional Information

In calendar year 2010, for the first time since the enactment of the Social Security Amendments of 1983, annual outlays for the program exceeded annual tax revenues (that is, outlays exceeded totalrevenues excluding interest credited to the trust funds). In 2013, outlays exceeded noninterest income by about 9 percent, and CBO projects that the gap will average about 17 percent of tax revenues over the next decade. As more members of the baby-boom generation retire, outlays will increase relative to the size of the economy, whereas tax revenues will remain at an almost constant share of the economy. As a result, the gap will grow larger in the 2020s and will exceed 30 percent of revenues by the late 2020s.

CBO projects that under current law, the DI trust fund will be exhausted in fiscal year 2017, and the OASI trust fund will be exhausted in 2032. If a trust fund's balance fell to zero and current revenues were insufficient to cover the benefits specified in law, the Social Security Administration would no longer have legal authority to pay full benefits when they were due. In 1994, legislation redirected revenues from the OASI trust fund to prevent the imminent exhaustion of the DI trust fund. In part because of that experience, it is a common analytical convention to consider the DI and OASI trust funds as combined. Thus, CBO projects, if some future legislation shifted resources from the OASI trust fund to the DI trust fund, the combined OASDI trust funds would be exhausted in 2030.

The program is easily reformed, as you well know.

You always say that but never give options...................How do we stop the unfunded Liabilities.............................................

Since they combined the Trust Funds, which are a stack of IOU's, they are now insolvent by 2030.........Insolvent now if we don't take into account the Trust Funds are no longer there................

Social Security Policy Options

Policy Options
In this study, CBO analyzes 30 options that are among those that have been considered by various analysts and policymakers as possible components of proposals to provide long-term financial stability for Social Security. The options follow the convention of not reducing initial benefits for people who are currently older than 55, and all would directly affect outlays for benefits or federal revenues dedicated to Social Security.

The options fall into five categories:

• Increases in the Social Security payroll tax,
• Reductions in people's initial benefits,
• Increases in benefits for law earners,
• Increases in the full retirement age, and
• Reductions in the cost-of-living adjustments that are applied to continuing benefits.

Each option is analyzed in isolation, although most proposals to make substantial changes to Social Security combine several provisions. Many options would interact with one another, so combining them might cause changes to the overall finances of the system that are larger or smaller than would be produced by a simple sum of the effects of several discrete options.

This list of options is far from exhaustive. It does not include changes that would draw on general government revenues, create individual accounts, or change the trust funds' investments. Other than an increase in the Social Security payroll tax, changes to federal tax policy are not considered. The options do not include any that apply only to people who receive DI benefits, although some of the options would affect OASI and DI beneficiaries alike.

continue reading if you choose to do so........

Read your last paragraph carefully, please.

1940 was 75 years ago. Grow up and deal with the issue in its totality.

The Faker says it's easy................but doesn't give a single option to fix it..............then complains when people put up options and ideas of what will need to happen to save it..........................

Then he tells me to grow up.................

 

[leftwinger]

If the trust fund drys up, benefits will be cut to 65% of current in order to match up with incoming revenues. We pay money in every month...it has to go somewhere.

OK, 65% of $938, rent is $685/mo.....yeah that should be OK.

This board is funny. Lots of laughs in here. "somebody is doing the raping"

 

[JakeStarkey]

Stop the nonsense. Raise the retirement age to 70 and cap the tax at $1 million.

 

[eagle1462010]

Stop the nonsense. Raise the retirement age to 70 and cap the tax at $1 million.

That still wouldn't close the fiscal gap............

Continue please..................given you probably read my postings to come up with it anyway........

Why did it take you so long to do so....................

You need another 50% or so to end the gap..........continue.............