Republicans Are, And Have Been, Attacking Social Security

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's his choice, right? You don't get a choice under the SS Ponzi scheme, Simp.

Why do you oppose choice?

What he doesn't understand is you don't have to leave money to a family member. I read stories where people with no family left their money to a charity. In one case a guy left millions to a no kill animal shelter.

 

[22lcidw]

True. Some Republicans want to sunset Medicare and Social Security, along with EVERY funded program, and then refund them as needed.

If you're looking for a good "wedge issue" between seniors and Republicans, SS & Medicare are it.

If the stupid fucks don't just "fix" entitlements and move on, 2024 might be a bloodbath compared to the "red wave" disappointment of 2022.

If we keep averaging around 2 per cent growth like we have for decades, social security and medicate will reduce. These people we elect are middlemen. Meanwhile in china....Thank you for the rice. We were living off dirt and now over three hundred million and growing in numbers are in the middle class. And China has a billion more people. When they come her. we will be begging. They will be colonizers.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

No because Wall Street has no claim on it. The money gets transferred to the state as unclaimed funds. The state holds the money until somebody does claim it.

That's true.

What they do with it after X period of time I don't know. But it doesn't go to Wall Street so I have no idea where you got that from.

Hmmmmmm.
Given Wall Streets track record of fees and commissions they will get their cut.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

You are a fucking moron.

Wall St doesn't get shit.

You're FOS, MORON.
See above Q-NUT.

 

[Likkmee]

Already got mine. ALL of it.Lump sum. O'course The Great Satan taxed me on it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That's true.

Hmmmmmm.
Given Wall Streets track record of fees and commissions they will get their cut.

If it's still in the fund, yes they will, but on the other hand the money keeps growing and growing. The charge is called a maintenance fee. It's usually a small fraction of your account. I think mine is something like $45.00 a year.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

That's his choice, right? You don't get a choice under the SS Ponzi scheme, Simp.

Why do you oppose choice?

Because, Q -NUT, Social Security provides a guaranteed income for people to survive.
Wall Street doesn't.

 

[hadit]

Tax the rich again and invest in America and Americans again. People who aren't rich should not be taxed anymore that's for sure and I've had it with law and order ruining small town life....

There's not enough income among the rich to fund half of the things the usual suspects bleat about. And would you rather small towns become Road Warrior territory?

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

If it's still in the fund, yes they will, but on the other hand the money keeps growing and growing. The charge is called a maintenance fee. It's usually a small fraction of your account. I think mine is something like $45.00 a year.

Social Security doesn't charge a maintenance fee?
My 401K charges $30 for maintenance, LAST I checked,
For February.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Social Security doesn't charge a maintenance fee?
My 401K charges $30 for maintenance, LAST I checked,
For February.

Well there you go. It's hardly worth considering. But outside of the maintenance fee, the money does not get transferred to Wall Street. It gets transferred to the state you live in under unclaimed funds.

 

[80zephyr]

What about the guy who invests for 50 years and dies before he collects on his stocks?

It goes to his estate.

 

[80zephyr]

Really Q-NUT?
What if that person didn't designate any heirs?
Wall Street will get that $$$.
Social Security doesn't have that issue, the wife/husband/daughter/son will collect.

Why would you believe Wall Street gets the money??

 

[Billy000]

Total bullshit. One of the main quotes is from Joe Biden.

You know i get that you don’t trust or like democrats which is fine. That doesn’t matter much. What matters though is the trust you have in republicans. It’s wildly misguided. You better believe republicans are willing to pass legislation that will fuck you over. You really need to wise up to that dude. They don’t give a flying fuck about you and their legislation proves that.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Well there you go. It's hardly worth considering. But outside of the maintenance fee, the money does not get transferred to Wall Street. It gets transferred to the state you live in under unclaimed funds.

True, I acknowledged that fact.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

It goes to his estate.

NOT without court cases.
More $$$ deductions.

 

[Red Front]

Biden refused to name them, but here's the names of some of the loudest ones...



Do the USMB rightwing Republican-voters agree w/this attack on social security?

What's your position on this matter?

​

The Repubs more than the Dems, are constantly trying to privatize social security and other social programs, at best, at worse, eliminate them altogether. However, Biden ironically was once one of those few Dems that were cozying up to the Repubs, trying to "sunset", and privatize entitlements. He was onboard with the Repubs, so it's ironic that he would now pretend to be a champion of Social Security and Medicare when he was once in bed with the Repubs that wanted to eliminate these government entitlement programs.

 

[Rocko]

Biden refused to name them, but here's the names of some of the loudest ones...



Do the USMB rightwing Republican-voters agree w/this attack on social security?

What's your position on this matter?

Obama also acknowledged that entitlements was driver of high debt

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I have no idea what this means in relationship to what I posted since it was a response to my post.

WW

I am saying that too many people have fallen for the Marxists identity politics where some people who worked hard and saved lots of their money, is the enemy of those who didnt work as hard but worked just enough to be satisfied with their lives, until these political hacks get them all riled up.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Really Q-NUT?
What if that person didn't designate any heirs?
Wall Street will get that $$$.
Social Security doesn't have that issue, the wife/husband/daughter/son will collect.

So if someone works all their lives and puts money into SS for over 42 years then dies, the daughter/son will not get to collect any of that money. So your point is moot.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Are you an actuary?
You really get into the details of calculating benefits.

"Am I an actuary?" No. I'm an information system guy for Human Resources. My boss is quite a visionary, I'm a behind the scenes technical guy. If it's computer system related she tells me what she want's as an outcome, we discuss details. Then she gets out of the way while I roll up my sleeves. Very good working situation to be honest and why I enjoy my job. But it means I need to peek behind the curtain and think beyond the bump-sticker and think through details of how something works.

I work with benefits systems, recruiting systems, the HR side of payroll, ya-da ya-da ya-da.

When I retired I used the data table that SS provides, 62 looked good.
The only "hit" I would have taken for retiring at 62 is paying for healthcare insurance from age 62 to age 65 and Medicare. Luckily my wife added me to her coverage.
Don't forget that your SS benefit is reduced by the Medicare premium, and then you need to buy supplemental for the "donut hole", plus prescription drug coverage if you want that.\

My parents were older when I was born and their own retirement was just a few years away. They would have tried to help, but I left home at 18 with nothing on but the clothes on my back and joined the Navy. My rating was in Aviation Electronics, which led to computers, then databases and now information systems. Forty-Five years later I'm looking at our own retirement. We have - well - some solid retirement assets (home equity, 401K's, some stocks, CD's, etc.). The retirement budget has 6 sources of revenue (military pension, current employer pension, and SS for each of us). Our revenue steams will cover retirement living without having to touch retirement assets, including not touching the 401Ks.

Right now (in addition to employer health insurance) we have TRICARE Select which transitions to TRICARE for Life once we reach 65. We'll have TRICARE and MediCare in retirement and Medicare premiums won't be a problem. Will probably pick up either an Advantage or MediGap policy to cover the holes in coordinated medical coverage. As military retirees we are enrolled in the BENFEDS program where we access Dental and Vision coverage, those premiums already come out of my military retirement.

Personally speaking, if I assume a 25% reduction (worst case) in SS payments in 2035 - in other words SS check are reduced to 75%. That 25% drop in SS results in a 9.3% reduction in Gross Income (pre-tax) because SS is only 2 of the 6 streams. Because of the reduction in income, some napkin calculations show the effective negative impact on disposable income is 7.36% because of the standard deduction for taxes.***

WW

*** Take Gross Income, subtract the standard deduction for married filing jointly with the Senior provision, calculate Federal & State income tax on that amount, then subtract the taxes from Gross to get disposable income to build the budget. Then repeat the process based on a SS income reduction of 25%. The difference is the true impact of the SS reduction on our personal retirement budget based on the 6 revenue streams. Even then, if SS is reduced by 25%, the direct impact on disposable income isn't dollar-for-dollar because there is less income on which to pay Income Taxes. Because these calculations are based on our personal situation, others results will be different.