Social Security Will Be Insolvent in 10 Years

[DudleySmith]

Did you post evidence that the top 20% earn 95% of all income? DURR

Did you post evidence they pay '87% of all taxes'? lol.

 

[DudleySmith]

He wants you to be liable if you own a share of stock.

I want company owners to be be held responsible for the companies they own. Todd is just stupid and doesn't want responsibility for his poor management and choices.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I want company owners to be be held responsible for the companies they own. Todd is just stupid and doesn't want responsibility for his poor management and choices.

I'm not managing the companies I hold shares in. Are you?

 

[struth]

Easy fix, follow the Swedish model. they were in the same boat years ago but made the necessary reform.

The left refuses to do it though

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Did you post evidence they pay '87% of all taxes'? lol.

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/Distribution-of-Income-by-Source-2022.pdf

Looks like they had, in 2022, 57.7% of all labor income.
60.5% of family cash income.

https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/131/Distribution-of-Tax-Burden-Current-Law-2022.pdf

76.3% of total federal taxes. 93.4% of individual income taxes.

Your turn.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Your Medicare and social security. Start there.

OK. What next?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

That you are getting welfare checks?

I am retired and have SS, not that is any of your business.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Are you sad that you're full of shit and prove it all day every day?

Sources of Government Revenue in the United States

Different taxes have different economic effects, so policymakers should always consider how tax revenue is raised and not just how much is raised.

taxfoundation.org

That is overall, not federal. Unless of course the feds have property taxes now.

 

[Blaster]

I am retired and have SS, not that is any of your business.

Then don't tell me if it embarrasses you.

 

[Winco]

Social Security is running out of money

hotair.com

It is striking to me how many human beings will accept lie after lie from Democrats. The dark vision of elder financial doom has been prophesized for decades. It is simply a matter of math, and math cannot be refuted. Oh, it can be manipulated (e.g., electoral politics; climate "science"; etc...). But calculations and their results cannot be refuted. I raised this issue here on this board months ago and was refuted by virtually all the leftist yo-yos and ding-dongs that this is simply just not true. "You have no evidence of that!", "You are being lied to by the Republicans!", and "It is really you on the right who are trying to destroy Social Security!", are just some of the tripe I heard in response. Well, I am back again to point this out to you. Massive cuts to your entitlements will begin in 2033. "Oh, Long Rod, you are just so naive! Our generous government overseers will not let this happen to us! They will tend to us and our needs by making the wealthy pay their fair share!", will come the retort. I say, hogwash!

One author bravely asked the question I have been asking for months in response to Dem stupidity, to wit: "Is it Necessary to Prove What is Self-Evident?" (in relation to Covid fraud). Is it necessary to prove what's 'self-evident'?

Gaslighting is merely a nice way of saying "lying". Prominent in leftist propaganda today is the trick of simply denying things ("That was debunked!!"; "You are gaslighting"; "Show me the evidence!!", etc...). In doing so they are lying to the American people. When, for example, a leftist kunt asks you for "evidence" that Biden was engaged in a pay-to-play, influence peddling scheme when he was occupying the position of VP under the deplorable and dark (possibly Satanic) rein of the Ayatollah Barry Hussein Hamas Obama, then you give it to him (citing tons upon tons of circumstantial evidence, and substantial direct evidence), they wildly respond to you by falsely claiming there is no evidence. What the fuck, right? People who act like this are not people we need in our body politic. They are wet, smelly turds and they are making everybody else look and smell like shit. They must be flushed down the toilet and into the sewage system, where they belong.

Let us look at the Social Security issue as if we have fucking brains that function at higher than a pre-school level AND belong to virtuous and honorable people (which pretty much excludes Democrats, to be clear). Omit the emotional responses, the blue collar morality, lies, the politics, propaganda, etc... Social Security is not going to be able to cover its current obligations in 10 years (or some similar short time period, depending on who you listen to). This will necessitate cuts. This is the undisputed consequence if we continue forward with this program unchanged.

We can certainly get into a debate (have a conversation, as the black Dems are fond of saying) of how we can prevent the program from becoming insolvent (which, for you Democrats, means its obligations exceeds its funding; i.e., ya'll ain't payin' yer bills!), and whether we even should preserve it. Maybe we ought to dismantle the system altogether. For all you folks who "paid into SS for years" expecting to get a pittance of it returned to you upon retirement (i.e., however much the federal government says you can have), you should remember that this is not the first time the government has fucked you. Why you expect the federal government not to fuck you is what I find surprising.

SS "investment" (LOL!!) is similar to tax refunds. The only way some people can save is to allow the government to over-deduct for income tax withholdings, then use your money interest-free for a year before they return it to you. You are duped into thinking this is a windfall. I do not know about where everybody else is from, but where I am from this is considered a great big old fucking put on you by the feds. Similarly, with SS you give the fed a percentage of your gross earnings, allow the government to hold it, interest free and derived from your labor, and spend it, purportedly in exchange for them letting you have a little bit of it back when you reach a certain age. Why? Because they think you are too fucking stupid to save and invest your own money. Contrary to what some say, the money they take from you to fund SS is not going into a little lock box to be safely held for your golden years. It is going to pay people who are currently drawing SS benefits.

When I hear somebody say "Dad-gummit!! I dun paid into the Social Security fer decades and I expect ta git sumthang out of it. They owes me!!", I cannot help but to sadly shake my head. And these are usually good people, many conservatives. But you got to get it through your heads, brothers: You have been fucked. You have been played, and there is nothing you can do about it. Your money was taken from you by force of law and payed to other people who are on the public dole. You will get some of it back (maybe), but you will take a huge cut relative to what is being paid out today to others (with YOUR money).

Nice copy and paste.

Or did you really waste all that time typing all that shit?
Why not just post the link you copied it from?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Then don't tell me if it embarrasses you.

Why would it embarrass me?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Didn't I say when they cut taxes on rich people and corporations that ultimately the tax burden will be shifted on to us? So Reagan, Bush and Trump all cut taxes. Trump doubled the number of corporations who effectively pay zero taxes. And now we're broke? What a shocker.

What does any of that have to do with Social Security?

There is only one solution.

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts | Common Dreams

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault. A few hours before the bridge collapsed in Minnesota, a news release landed (among hundreds) in my email inbox. It was from the right-wing "Heartland Institute" and a Minnesota conservative group calling itself...

www.commondreams.org

Great way to start another depression.

 

[80zephyr]

I suspect it will just be a 30% cut to all our benefits. So if you were going to be getting $2000 a month it will be $1400.

Now you may not consider that "raising your taxes" but you can consider this. Since Reagan Republicans have been bankrupting our government by cutting rich people and corporate taxes, also defunding the IRS so they are powerless to go after guys like Trump when they commit tax fraud.

So they will be shifting the tax burden on to you from the days when those corporations and rich people paid their fair share. And remember, you defended all those tax breaks to the rich. It's your fault. And it's going to cost you.

I'll survive with $600 a month less for the rest of my life. Boy, that's a huge tax on us isn't it? I mean taking that much away from us middle class people? We should have never given the rich and corporations tax breaks knowing this was going to happen.

And, make you work until you are 70 instead of 67. You don't mind working 3 more years to pay for Trump's tax breaks do you? Of course not.

Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983

Fact Check: Higher Corporate Tax Revenue After GOP Tax Reform Debunks Another Democrat Myth – Ways and Means

waysandmeans.house.gov

 

[Blaster]

Why would it embarrass me?

Because you are so defensive about it.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Reagan cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts | Common Dreams

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault. A few hours before the bridge collapsed in Minnesota, a news release landed (among hundreds) in my email inbox. It was from the right-wing "Heartland Institute" and a Minnesota conservative group calling itself...

www.commondreams.org

Stay off the kook sites you moron.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That is overall, not federal. Unless of course the feds have property taxes now.

That moron thought the federal government got 16.6% of their revenue from consumption taxes.

He's actually dumber than he first appeared. LOL!

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Fixing Social Security is very easy, since it is not going broke. Just pay back all the corporate welfare, interstate highway building funds, off-budget defense spending and the thousand other things SS revenue was used for, along with taxing off-shored imports as if the stuff was still being made here by American workers paying payroll taxes. Just a few ways to set it right again. It should actually be tripled to reflect real inflation, not reduced.

And, since over 90% of all productivity gains of the last 60 + years have gone to the financial sector, capital gains and dividends on stocks can be taxed at 50% to make up for lost wages and the lost payroll taxes from that, and profits from off-shoring and paying for all the bailouts the stock markets and banks have been getting since the 1960's.

Problem solved.

Here’s a silly idea. How about politicians stop spending our tax dollars on stupid shit to get themselves re elected. Potato *Joes inflation reduction act that is nothing more than trillions of green spending would be a great start.

 

[Blaster]

Here’s a silly idea. How about politicians stop spending our tax dollars on stupid shit to get themselves re elected. Potato *Joes inflation reduction act that is nothing more than trillions of green spending would be a great start.

Politicians are only good at wasting taxpayer money.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Reagan cut income taxes on the very rich from 70% down to 27%. Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983 (they're still in that neighborhood, the lowest in the industrialized world).

The result was devastating. Our government was suddenly so badly awash in red ink that Reagan doubled the tax paid only by people earning less than $40,000/year (FICA), and then began borrowing from the huge surplus this new tax was accumulating in the Social Security Trust Fund. Even with that, Reagan had to borrow more money in his 8 years than the sum total of all presidents from George Washington to Jimmy Carter combined.

Roll Back the Reagan Tax Cuts | Common Dreams

Our bridges are falling apart (among other things), and its Ronald Reagan's fault. A few hours before the bridge collapsed in Minnesota, a news release landed (among hundreds) in my email inbox. It was from the right-wing "Heartland Institute" and a Minnesota conservative group calling itself...

www.commondreams.org

Federal Tax Revenue by Source, 1934 - 2018

Federal tax revenue by source, 1934-2018. Compare federal tax revenue by source over time from 1934 to 2018. See more federal tax revenue analysis.

taxfoundation.org

Corporate tax rates were also cut so severely that they went from representing over 33% of total federal tax receipts in 1951 to less than 9% in 1983

They were already down to 12.5% of revenues before Reagan did anything.

 

[DudleySmith]

I'm not managing the companies I hold shares in. Are you?

Yet you feel entitled to suck profits out of them, and voting for management. lol deadbeat.