Should the Social Security and Medicare Age be Raised

[dblack]

However, we can only remove government from retirement totally IF you make people 100 percent liable for failure if and when it occurs. You cant have one side without the other and you know good as well DBlack that is not going to happen.

I don't think it's so black and white. In any case, the poor planning of some is better to deal with IF and when it happens then to presume the worst case and build policy around it.

So, if we are not going to get government out of ensuring you are able to live out your last days with some monetary guarantees, you must have some program that ensures those monetary gains are able to be realized in the best manner possible.

I disagree. Why "must"?

You can be an ideologue and demand the purity of no government involvement here but that flatly ensures nothing gets done whatsoever.

Horseshit. We're not hapless morons. Sans government involvement people WILL solve their own problems. True story.

As the saying goes, never let perfect be the enemy of the good (or at least something better in this case).

I'm not. I'm satisfied with reducing the welfare state. It's not an all or nothing proposition. I just reject the idea of a "safety net" we're all forced into. That's not a safety net - it's just state control.

As long as the government is going to be responsible for ensuring you have the basics at the end of your life, and make no mistake about it that is going to be the case, then a program to ensure proper saving is necessary.

This is the black and white thinking. I don't accept the idea that if we're going to accept some socialism, we need to be "all in" - that we must have cradle-to-grave guarantees from government (guarantees that aren't worth shit anyway).

 

[bendog]

Both soc sec and medicare were explicitly created by specific taxes levied and supported by supermajorities to provide specific benefits to all taxpayers. That's no more socialist than the national park system or the clean air and water acts.

But there are structural problems with their revenue streams. I wasn't around in 1932 or whenever soc sec came into being, but I think anyone can read about LBJ's negotiations with his own party, and medicare only came into being when Wilbur Mills agreed to the tax avenue. Any notion of a "right" to healthcare was not acceptable even to a maj of dems. Funding these programs though general revenue is just an excuse to means test them, and you can bet 'your bottom dollar" that in the end, the progressives will come out on the short end if they try to "cut out the rich."

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You really think that Americans are so stupid and incompetent that they can’t grasp the very basics of asset allocation? It’s something that could be taught in a morning seminar.

Yes it is for those who are responsible and interested.

Years ago when my employer gave us an IRA, the agent from the investment company came in for a meeting. He was very interesting and took questions from employees at the end. We had this one guy, Don, who was always a complete idiot raise his hand. He asked the agent when he could take the money my employer contributed? The agent repeated himself and said "when you retire" with a confused look on his face. Don responded "you mean you can't take it out before then? The agent explained that he could but not without a hefty penalty and having to claim the withdrawal at tax time which would be a stupid move. Don repeated what he said and ended with "that's all I want to know!"

Only a few months went by when Don told us of the expensive ring he bought for his wife, mink coat and various other items. How did this guy who never had a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of suddenly able to afford these expensive gifts for his wife?

People like Don (and a few other employees like him at our company I'm sure) didn't give a shit about his future. All he cared about is kissing up to his wife. Their attitude is worry about tomorrow when tomorrow happens.

Don and the millions like him are why government needs to be involved so he would have something when he retires (which I'm sure he's at retirement age now).

 

[Lesh]

Privatizing is a disaster. Not only would it screw younger folks as it did in Chile it will DESTROY the current system.

You think SSI is short money now? Wait till the payroll tax no longer supports it

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Don't be an idiot. Most Americans only know enough about investing to really **** up...as Bernie Madoff showed us

Correct, which is why the law should be choosing a professional investment company the government gives you the choice of.

 

[beagle9]

Care to explain that?

You just did when you said there were zero GOP votes available to deal with this

Bullshit. Sinema has ZERO power if just ONE Republican votes with the Dems on any of these issues

Complete horse shit. You don't know what you are talking about.

Those T Bills are cashed in (like all government securities) all the time and ALL are paid out of the General fund.

In fact those T Bills will be used up (completely redeemed) in a little over 15 years and that's the POINT.

Well stop with the outlandish spending on you all's leftist dependency for votes bull crap, and the senior's will be taken care of as they damned well should be after contributing to this Nations prosperity for all their years. This country's government has gotten so corrupt over the year's, that it's so wonder we haven't completely imploded already. I think we're close, but let's see what it does next.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Privatizing is a disaster. Not only would it screw younger folks as it did in Chile it will DESTROY the current system.

You think SSI is short money now? Wait till the payroll tax no longer supports it

It would not happen overnight. It would be a gradual conversion plan. But either way government would have to fund it. I would rather have taxes contribute to a better system than fund the disaster we have today until the end of time. At some point it would be unaffordable.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

That’s the whole problem with leftists. They think Americans are too stupid to take care of themselves, and thus the government must rescue them in every aspect of their lives, which translates into control and little choice.

It’s a key difference between Dems and Republicans.

But the problem is there are enough Americans that are too stupid to take care of themselves. Look at our welfare rolls. Those are not smart enough people to take care of themselves in most cases.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Dumping trillions into the market would turn the market into the Wild West and ya know who would get screwed?

Yea retirees

Well what do you think quantitive easing is?

 

[bendog]

Privatizing is a disaster. Not only would it screw younger folks as it did in Chile it will DESTROY the current system.

You think SSI is short money now? Wait till the payroll tax no longer supports it

I think SSI is paid out of general revenues, and it was never actually tied to soc sec. SSDI is directly tied to a worker's pay in of quarters to soc sec, and it can be a lifeline for disabled workers and survivors. But both have similarities. SSI comes with medicaid. SSDI usually comes with medicare, but some people have dual eligibility. One of the problems with just extending the age for full retirement is we would have many more on SSDI, and that is already an increasing drain on the system because people have tendency to get sick and disabled the older they get even before age 62 or even 66 (and 4 mos for me ... and counting. LOL)

How to Determine Whether You Get SSI or SSDI Benefits

Confused about the difference between #SSI and #SSDI? 🤔 You’re not alone! While both programs provide financial help, they have different eligibility rules, benefits, and application steps. Here’s what you need to know.👇

www.ncoa.org

 

[beagle9]

Privatizing SS and getting it out of the hands of government would allow people to retire with more money at an earlier age. Plus if they didn't make it to the age they wish to retire, that money becomes an inheritance for the family or whoever.

Sure has worked so far with this HSA account... People will save if it's handled for them to some degree, but leaving it completely in their hands is a huge mistake for many. Just need something with greater return's, and more honesty in a program that works well for all, and who gave it their all for many, many years.

 

[bendog]

Well what do you think quantitive easing is?

QE does not affect individual equites or even bonds within markets. I does overall tend to cause indexes (like the corporate bonds or govt debt to have "more buyers)

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

QE does not affect individual equites or even bonds within markets. I does overall tend to cause indexes (like the corporate bonds or govt debt to have "more buyers)

It's still dumping trillions into the market and no market crash like Lush claims would happen.

 

[dblack]

But the problem is there are enough Americans that are too stupid to take care of themselves. Look at our welfare rolls. Those are not smart enough people to take care of themselves in most cases.

Do you think catering to their stupidity will make them more capable of caring for themselves, or less? Will it make our country stronger, or weaker?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Do you think catering to their stupidity will make them more capable of caring for themselves, or less? Will it make our country stronger, or weaker?

I think it's a terrible thing. Welfare the way it's designed discourages people from working. I've seen it first hand on many occasions. However we couldn't do without it unfortunately. There are plenty of people too stupid to work, make the right decisions in life like not having children they can't afford, and spend every dime they have on non-essentials. It's a necessary evil.

 

[bendog]

It's still dumping trillions into the market and no market crash like Lush claims would happen.

There is no equivalency of the effects of QE and private investment decisions. And I do NOT support having the fed just buy govt debt to allow soc sec to "be solvent."

 

[dblack]

I think it's a terrible thing. Welfare the way it's designed discourages people from working. I've seen it first hand on many occasions. However we couldn't do without it unfortunately. There are plenty of people too stupid to work, make the right decisions in life like not having children they can't afford, and spend every dime they have on non-essentials. It's a necessary evil.

Nah. Nothing "necessary" about it. In fact, I'd argue the opposite. If we're to save any semblance of the "American Dream" it's necessary to go in the other direction.

You've just given in to the droning presumptions of the statists.

 

[bendog]

Nah. Nothing "necessary" about it. In fact, I'd argue the opposite. If we're to save any semblance of the "American Dream" it's necessary to go in the other direction.

You've just given in to the droning presumptions of the statists.

I think the min soc sec benefit is around $900/mo. I think the max for 2021 (retiring at 66) was about $3100. We screwed up in not addressing soc sec in 2000, and just giving another supply side tax cut. But if "we" (I'll be long dead) see a social security tax surplus again, I don't agree with the gop establishment's 2000 that we can't use broad index funds that allow people to essentially buy annuities with part of their soc sec taxes without causing market bubbles.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Nah. Nothing "necessary" about it. In fact, I'd argue the opposite. If we're to save any semblance of the "American Dream" it's necessary to go in the other direction.

You've just given in to the droning presumptions of the statists.

You have the solution to fantasy, I have the solution to reality, and the reality is that there will always be irresponsible people. You may not like it, but that's never going to change.

For something like this to ever happen, you'd need overwhelming support for it and you're not going to get it. Besides the irresponsible, the unintelligent, you have people too insecure without government involvement. Lush is a great example of this. The only thing that scares him the most about what we're talking about is government not handling these affairs, and nearly half of the country are just like him. That's how Democrats gain and maintain power.

So in order for it to work you need as many people on board as possible and that won't happen if you get government completely out of the way. Furthermore do you really believe our country would support people starving because they weren't smart enough to save or invest wisely? I hate it to, but government would have to be there to supervise something like this.

 

[SweetTea]

MAYBE...we should stop defunding the IRS

Republicans have a history of underfunding programs and then whining when they don't work well

Yeah that is the answer. Throw more money at government agencies ripe with inefficiencies and corruption.

I swear some of you must be paid to support the Democrats. I find it hard to believe that any American can be so naïve.