Which party will actually pay for the new Debt, or will Social Security & Medicare go Bankrupt?

[Ray From Cleveland]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

We can't keep going to the wealthy every single time the country needs money. We need to go to the people that pay nothing in income tax, and have them start paying their FAIR SHARE.

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Again, let's use your own example.

Denmark’s $450 billion pension fund industry gets wake-up call

The Danish central bank won't come to the rescue of Denmark's $450 billion pension fund industry, should it need cash to meet new rules.

www.pionline.com

Denmark's central bank says it won't come to the rescue of the country's $450 billion pension fund industry if it needs cash to meet clearing requirements due in 2023.

So you rightly pointed out that Denmark's taxes on the lower and middle class are significantly higher.

Yet, even with those higher tax rates.... they still have a pension crisis. Their system is still going broke, even with much higher taxes than the US.

Again... if your system worked... why has not one single country on the face of this planet, ever done it? Not one system around the world, is not have problems funding their socialist ponzi scheme.

We can jack up taxes, and punish the lower and middle class.... but it won't fix anything, and just like Denmark.... THE EXAMPLE *YOU* CHOOSE.... it still will end up going broke.

We need to reform, or eliminate the system. More and more taxes non-stop until the end of time, does not fix socialism. It never has, and never will. You will always run out of other people's money.

1. Denmark's taxes were used only to show that the US tax rate is LOWER than the rest of the world, so no one should squeal if taxes go up slightly.
2. The US system has worked well for almost 100-years. The only reason it is having difficulty now is demographics. The "baby boom" generation needs more revenue to be made whole. No big deal, there are well documented "fixes" that can make SS work well beyond 2095.
3. Your claim that the actuarial fixes won't work based on Denmark or other anecdotal "proofs" is your opinion. I believe in math, thank you. The Denmark "example" was just to show tax rates, not that their pension system is sound.
4. Agreed that we need to "reform" or "fix" the social security and Medicare systems to be financially sound. SS and Medicare are not "socialism" they are paid for, earned, and promised benefits. (welfare & medicaid are socialism)

 

[bripat9643]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

We can't keep going to the wealthy every single time the country needs money. We need to go to the people that pay nothing in income tax, and have them start paying their FAIR SHARE.

I agree that the bottom half should contribute, which us why I recommend the "Fed Sales Tax".

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

 

[bripat9643]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

 

[Andylusion]

The amount of money you pay into Social Security, you are not likely to get back. The benefits today, are exceeded by the cost of Social Security. Most people pay in, more than they get back.

You gotta love CNN. They are leftists who try like all leftists to convince us that SS is not really a problem.

Two things here though. I stated if you live the average US lifespan. Secondly, here is what your CNN article also said:

Still, there are many folks who will collect more than they'll have paid. The typical American couple do not each earn the average wage during their careers since women often have lower incomes or take years off to raise children.

The next question would be, if we will collect less than we put in, how is SS predicted to be broke in the future? People that die before 65 or 67 will not see one penny back, but that group of people are not enough to save the program. Also your link states that besides the typical American couple, that low income people will also get much more back than they put in.

Well think about what you are asking. If people do not get back, how much they put in, then how could it go broke?

The same way every ponzi scheme goes broke. It doesn't matter how much you get back, verses how much you pay in... if there is not enough being paid in.

Remember, how much you paid in, does not matter... because it's spent already. The only calculation that matters is how many are paying in right now, verses how many are collecting out, right now. The dollar from yesterday, as spent yesterday, and is long gone. Not relevant to the equations at all.

Again, if there was a separate account with your name on it, then it would not be possible for the system to go broke, whether you collected more or less than how much you paid in.

But there isn't. Every dollar taxed out of your pay check last year, or last decade, was spent and gone, before the end of that very month.

So yes, the people at the lowest end of the income ladder, will in fact get out of social security, more than they paid in. That's true.... as long as the system remains solvent of course. The moment government runs out of money, like Greece, then that will disappear pretty quick.

Last I checked, when the system goes negative, and the government can't borrow to cover it, I think they said payouts would drop by 1/3rd. So you can average your payout, by X 0.66, and see how much you'll end up with if the sh!t hits the fan.

Nevertheless, those at the lower end, even if they are collecting more than the put in, they are collecting very little. Like I said before, my SS payout is calculated to be $1,200 a month. $18,000 a year, isn't exactly a brilliant retirement.

 

[Lesh]

All of the above folks

It's a whole new world folks

This is going to be very expensive and
A. trying to pay for it on the backs of the middle class and poor isn't gonna cover it

B. That would be a disaster in its own right

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

The amount of money you pay into Social Security, you are not likely to get back. The benefits today, are exceeded by the cost of Social Security. Most people pay in, more than they get back.

You gotta love CNN. They are leftists who try like all leftists to convince us that SS is not really a problem.

Two things here though. I stated if you live the average US lifespan. Secondly, here is what your CNN article also said:

Still, there are many folks who will collect more than they'll have paid. The typical American couple do not each earn the average wage during their careers since women often have lower incomes or take years off to raise children.

The next question would be, if we will collect less than we put in, how is SS predicted to be broke in the future? People that die before 65 or 67 will not see one penny back, but that group of people are not enough to save the program. Also your link states that besides the typical American couple, that low income people will also get much more back than they put in.

Well think about what you are asking. If people do not get back, how much they put in, then how could it go broke?

The same way every ponzi scheme goes broke. It doesn't matter how much you get back, verses how much you pay in... if there is not enough being paid in.

Remember, how much you paid in, does not matter... because it's spent already. The only calculation that matters is how many are paying in right now, verses how many are collecting out, right now. The dollar from yesterday, as spent yesterday, and is long gone. Not relevant to the equations at all.

Again, if there was a separate account with your name on it, then it would not be possible for the system to go broke, whether you collected more or less than how much you paid in.

But there isn't. Every dollar taxed out of your pay check last year, or last decade, was spent and gone, before the end of that very month.

So yes, the people at the lowest end of the income ladder, will in fact get out of social security, more than they paid in. That's true.... as long as the system remains solvent of course. The moment government runs out of money, like Greece, then that will disappear pretty quick.

Last I checked, when the system goes negative, and the government can't borrow to cover it, I think they said payouts would drop by 1/3rd. So you can average your payout, by X 0.66, and see how much you'll end up with if the sh!t hits the fan.

Nevertheless, those at the lower end, even if they are collecting more than the put in, they are collecting very little. Like I said before, my SS payout is calculated to be $1,200 a month. $18,000 a year, isn't exactly a brilliant retirement.

I am curious as to where you got that 1/3 figure.

 

[bendog]

The point I tried to make is simply that imo most people taking benefits before full retirement age do so because they don't have a choice. They couldn't work and couldn't get disability, or disability didn't pay as much as they needed.

So while raising full retirement age might be necessary, I don't think we can really raise early retirement age

It all depends on how much you love working. I always hated working in my later years, and wanted to retire at 62. You only lose 25% of your max collection, and who knows if you'll even live that long to collect full benefits. You can still earn up to 17.5 K, so depending on your situation, it's better to take early retirement if you can get by on it.

I'm not sure many of us "love" working. Most of us want to stay active. But imo its not at all uncommon, since the great recession and it will get worse now, that workers over the age of 60 are cast aside. Employers find they are not "essential" or employers find cheaper workers.

But you make a good point. If the goal is to preserve soc sec, maybe we should raise the full retirement age, and require some showing of loss of full time employment to get early benefits.

Increase the retirement age, and a lot of people will be filing for disability. You really don't solve much that way. When we get older, most of us develop physical conditions that we could use to get out of working at that age.

Like I said, if we as a majority want to keep these programs, we simply have to pay for them. That's the real solution.

We simply can't. Again, Greece tried that. Didn't work. Venezuela tired that. Didn't work.

There is no possible way to just "pay for them". There simply isn't enough money for these programs.

Then people down the road area going to have to make a decision. Either fund the program, allow the program to collapse, or keep borrowing the money and the entire economy of the country collapses.

Well we had the opportunity in 2000 to fund the revenue gap we boomers will cause, but we chose tax cuts instead. assuming we can get through this, our kids in the millennium generation will get their chance to do what we didn't have the stones for.

This can't last forever which is why it needs to totally change. SS sends out pamphlets now and then. They tell you how much you contributed to the system since you started working each year. Take that pamphlet to a reputable investment company, and ask them how much you'd be worth today if all the money you and your employer contributed all these years, were invested in a conservative growth account. You'd probably pass out.

Bush had a good idea that everybody rejected. He wanted to allow workers to be able to contribute a small percentage of their SS contribution to a private account. The reason the Democrats hated it is because once people seen their own money actually accrue interest, they would demand they allow a higher percentage. If that demand kept up, eventually SS would be a thing of the past in future generations, and problem solved.

W's plan had two problems. First and foremost taking money OUT of the Soc Sec "trust fund" was contrary to shoring up it's already path to deficits of taxes to benefits.

But what truly made W's "idea" really a fantasy was Alan Greenspan had already laid down the gop opposition to putting any ss funds in the markets because that would affect asset prices. Possibly, a portion of contributions could have been put in index funds that would have treated all assets equally, but W wanted to get the political benefit of telling people who contributed the least in term of taxes that they too could become Warren Buffet by shrewd investing, which was bullshit because markets are NOT TRANSPARENT …. meaning insiders have more info that mom and pop traders.

I still voted for the Shrub but I regret even today. And Trump is worse, but I sure as shit didn't vote for him.

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The amount of money you pay into Social Security, you are not likely to get back. The benefits today, are exceeded by the cost of Social Security. Most people pay in, more than they get back.

You gotta love CNN. They are leftists who try like all leftists to convince us that SS is not really a problem.

Two things here though. I stated if you live the average US lifespan. Secondly, here is what your CNN article also said:

Still, there are many folks who will collect more than they'll have paid. The typical American couple do not each earn the average wage during their careers since women often have lower incomes or take years off to raise children.

The next question would be, if we will collect less than we put in, how is SS predicted to be broke in the future? People that die before 65 or 67 will not see one penny back, but that group of people are not enough to save the program. Also your link states that besides the typical American couple, that low income people will also get much more back than they put in.

Well think about what you are asking. If people do not get back, how much they put in, then how could it go broke?

The same way every ponzi scheme goes broke. It doesn't matter how much you get back, verses how much you pay in... if there is not enough being paid in.

Remember, how much you paid in, does not matter... because it's spent already. The only calculation that matters is how many are paying in right now, verses how many are collecting out, right now. The dollar from yesterday, as spent yesterday, and is long gone. Not relevant to the equations at all.

Again, if there was a separate account with your name on it, then it would not be possible for the system to go broke, whether you collected more or less than how much you paid in.

But there isn't. Every dollar taxed out of your pay check last year, or last decade, was spent and gone, before the end of that very month.

So yes, the people at the lowest end of the income ladder, will in fact get out of social security, more than they paid in. That's true.... as long as the system remains solvent of course. The moment government runs out of money, like Greece, then that will disappear pretty quick.

Last I checked, when the system goes negative, and the government can't borrow to cover it, I think they said payouts would drop by 1/3rd. So you can average your payout, by X 0.66, and see how much you'll end up with if the sh!t hits the fan.

Nevertheless, those at the lower end, even if they are collecting more than the put in, they are collecting very little. Like I said before, my SS payout is calculated to be $1,200 a month. $18,000 a year, isn't exactly a brilliant retirement.

It was never designed to be a total retirement plan, only a supplement. My retirement would pay a little over 20K which isn't enough to live off of. However, I planned ahead of time. Besides the IRA my employer started for us over 20 years ago, I have rental income in addition to SS. So I'll do fine with the combination of those two, or I have the option of withdrawing from my IRA in case of emergency.

 

[Andylusion]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

But see, Greece tried to pay for everything. Greece jacked up taxes non-stop. Greece did exactly what you are advocating here.

And they crashed.

Your plan DOES NOT WORK. That's not opinion, or "just what I think we should do".... your system does not work.... FACT. That's a FACT. That is historically proven FACT.

What part of this, do you not understand? Greece is direct undeniable proof, that you can't tax your way into make social security work. You keep referring to Greece, when Greece is exactly the example that proves your system does not work.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The point I tried to make is simply that imo most people taking benefits before full retirement age do so because they don't have a choice. They couldn't work and couldn't get disability, or disability didn't pay as much as they needed.

So while raising full retirement age might be necessary, I don't think we can really raise early retirement age

It all depends on how much you love working. I always hated working in my later years, and wanted to retire at 62. You only lose 25% of your max collection, and who knows if you'll even live that long to collect full benefits. You can still earn up to 17.5 K, so depending on your situation, it's better to take early retirement if you can get by on it.

I'm not sure many of us "love" working. Most of us want to stay active. But imo its not at all uncommon, since the great recession and it will get worse now, that workers over the age of 60 are cast aside. Employers find they are not "essential" or employers find cheaper workers.

But you make a good point. If the goal is to preserve soc sec, maybe we should raise the full retirement age, and require some showing of loss of full time employment to get early benefits.

Increase the retirement age, and a lot of people will be filing for disability. You really don't solve much that way. When we get older, most of us develop physical conditions that we could use to get out of working at that age.

Like I said, if we as a majority want to keep these programs, we simply have to pay for them. That's the real solution.

We simply can't. Again, Greece tried that. Didn't work. Venezuela tired that. Didn't work.

There is no possible way to just "pay for them". There simply isn't enough money for these programs.

Then people down the road area going to have to make a decision. Either fund the program, allow the program to collapse, or keep borrowing the money and the entire economy of the country collapses.

Well we had the opportunity in 2000 to fund the revenue gap we boomers will cause, but we chose tax cuts instead. assuming we can get through this, our kids in the millennium generation will get their chance to do what we didn't have the stones for.

This can't last forever which is why it needs to totally change. SS sends out pamphlets now and then. They tell you how much you contributed to the system since you started working each year. Take that pamphlet to a reputable investment company, and ask them how much you'd be worth today if all the money you and your employer contributed all these years, were invested in a conservative growth account. You'd probably pass out.

Bush had a good idea that everybody rejected. He wanted to allow workers to be able to contribute a small percentage of their SS contribution to a private account. The reason the Democrats hated it is because once people seen their own money actually accrue interest, they would demand they allow a higher percentage. If that demand kept up, eventually SS would be a thing of the past in future generations, and problem solved.

W's plan had two problems. First and foremost taking money OUT of the Soc Sec "trust fund" was contrary to shoring up it's already path to deficits of taxes to benefits.

But what truly made W's "idea" really a fantasy was Alan Greenspan had already laid down the gop opposition to putting any ss funds in the markets because that would affect asset prices. Possibly, a portion of contributions could have been put in index funds that would have treated all assets equally, but W wanted to get the political benefit of telling people who contributed the least in term of taxes that they too could become Warren Buffet by shrewd investing, which was bullshit because markets are NOT TRANSPARENT …. meaning insiders have more info that mom and pop traders.

I still voted for the Shrub but I regret even today. And Trump is worse, but I sure as shit didn't vote for him.

GW's plan would have put us on the path to the eventual elimination of SS. He was only talking about 2% or 3% which isn't all that much. I'm sure if implemented, there would have been strict limits on the type of investing you could have done with that money. It would have to be in a pretty safe and secure position.

SS is not forever. Something has to give; maybe not in our lifetime, but for our kids or grandkids. It's not sustainable, and GW was thinking ahead. If people seen their own money grow, eventually they would have kept supporting larger increases. It would have went to 5%, then 10% and so on..

But the Democrats don't like the idea of us not relying on them. If anything, they want more dependence on the federal government. If you make it to retirement age, and have a heart attack blowing out the birthday candles on your 67th birthday, your family doesn't see one penny of that SS money. Everything you worked for is gone.

With a private retirement fund, if you don't make it to retirement, all that money goes to your family.

 

[bripat9643]

The point I tried to make is simply that imo most people taking benefits before full retirement age do so because they don't have a choice. They couldn't work and couldn't get disability, or disability didn't pay as much as they needed.

So while raising full retirement age might be necessary, I don't think we can really raise early retirement age

It all depends on how much you love working. I always hated working in my later years, and wanted to retire at 62. You only lose 25% of your max collection, and who knows if you'll even live that long to collect full benefits. You can still earn up to 17.5 K, so depending on your situation, it's better to take early retirement if you can get by on it.

I'm not sure many of us "love" working. Most of us want to stay active. But imo its not at all uncommon, since the great recession and it will get worse now, that workers over the age of 60 are cast aside. Employers find they are not "essential" or employers find cheaper workers.

But you make a good point. If the goal is to preserve soc sec, maybe we should raise the full retirement age, and require some showing of loss of full time employment to get early benefits.

Increase the retirement age, and a lot of people will be filing for disability. You really don't solve much that way. When we get older, most of us develop physical conditions that we could use to get out of working at that age.

Like I said, if we as a majority want to keep these programs, we simply have to pay for them. That's the real solution.

We simply can't. Again, Greece tried that. Didn't work. Venezuela tired that. Didn't work.

There is no possible way to just "pay for them". There simply isn't enough money for these programs.

Then people down the road area going to have to make a decision. Either fund the program, allow the program to collapse, or keep borrowing the money and the entire economy of the country collapses.

Well we had the opportunity in 2000 to fund the revenue gap we boomers will cause, but we chose tax cuts instead. assuming we can get through this, our kids in the millennium generation will get their chance to do what we didn't have the stones for.

This can't last forever which is why it needs to totally change. SS sends out pamphlets now and then. They tell you how much you contributed to the system since you started working each year. Take that pamphlet to a reputable investment company, and ask them how much you'd be worth today if all the money you and your employer contributed all these years, were invested in a conservative growth account. You'd probably pass out.

Bush had a good idea that everybody rejected. He wanted to allow workers to be able to contribute a small percentage of their SS contribution to a private account. The reason the Democrats hated it is because once people seen their own money actually accrue interest, they would demand they allow a higher percentage. If that demand kept up, eventually SS would be a thing of the past in future generations, and problem solved.

W's plan had two problems. First and foremost taking money OUT of the Soc Sec "trust fund" was contrary to shoring up it's already path to deficits of taxes to benefits.

But what truly made W's "idea" really a fantasy was Alan Greenspan had already laid down the gop opposition to putting any ss funds in the markets because that would affect asset prices. Possibly, a portion of contributions could have been put in index funds that would have treated all assets equally, but W wanted to get the political benefit of telling people who contributed the least in term of taxes that they too could become Warren Buffet by shrewd investing, which was bullshit because markets are NOT TRANSPARENT …. meaning insiders have more info that mom and pop traders.

I still voted for the Shrub but I regret even today. And Trump is worse, but I sure as shit didn't vote for him.

That's a huge load of horseshit.

 

[bripat9643]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

I oppose paying for the spending that you demand. It's as simple as that.

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

But see, Greece tried to pay for everything. Greece jacked up taxes non-stop. Greece did exactly what you are advocating here.

And they crashed.

Your plan DOES NOT WORK. That's not opinion, or "just what I think we should do".... your system does not work.... FACT. That's a FACT. That is historically proven FACT.

What part of this, do you not understand? Greece is direct undeniable proof, that you can't tax your way into make social security work. You keep referring to Greece, when Greece is exactly the example that proves your system does not work.

Stop being stupid. The US is not Greece; the US economy is not like Greece's with their $210,000,000 GDP. My God how fucking stupid are you? The only "fact" that matters is that the US needs to pay for SS & Medicare, and the US can easily afford it. The 50th state (VT) has a $30b GDP, so Greece is an economic basket case by comparison.

Greece GDP - Gross Domestic Product 2023

Gross Domestic Product of Greece grew 2% in 2023 compared to last year. This rate is 36 -tenths of one percent less than the figure of 5.6% published in 2022.

countryeconomy.com

 

[kyzr]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

I oppose paying for the spending that you demand. It's as simple as that.

Exactly right, so we can agree to disagree, but IMHO I have more AARP voters wanting to save SS & Medicare than you have for letting them go bankrupt.

 

[Indeependent]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

I oppose paying for the spending that you demand. It's as simple as that.

Exactly right, so we can agree to disagree, but IMHO I have more AARP voters wanting to save SS & Medicare than you have for letting them go bankrupt.

I'm not a Liberal by any means but neo-Cons are fucking nasty bastards.

 

[Andylusion]

The COVID-19 pandemic borrowing will make SS & Medicare less solvent.
Which party will raise taxes to save SS & Medicare for future generations?

The Future of America’s Entitlements: What You Need to Know About the Medicare and Social Security Trustees Reports - AAF

The Social Security and Medicare Trustees issued their annual reports detailing the financial state of America’s two largest entitlement programs.

www.americanactionforum.org

• Medicare’s Annual Cash Shortfall in 2019 was $396 billion;
• Payroll taxes would have to increase more than 15 percent to pay for Medicare Part A in 2019; and
• Over the next 75 years, Social Security will owe $16.8 trillion more than it is projected to take in.

You are implying that it is even possible to "pay for it".

With or without Covid-19, with or without the economic down turn, whether Democrats or Republicans are in office....

You can't pay for socialism. It never works. Never. Not one time in all human history, has taking from group A, to pay for group B, worked.

If Social Security and Medicare were possible to have working, then we would never have the concept of a Ponzi scheme, because both of those are ponzi schemes.

In the end, my guess is that health care in the US will end up run by the government, and thus will end up declining in quality to meet the ability of the government to pay.

Social Security will equally need to be cut to the ability of the government to pay. The way they will do this, is by cutting the retirement age, meaning raise the retirement age to 75 or something.

Now there are a few alternatives that the nation could go down, that will be absolutely devastating.

One is a drastic increase in taxes, which will cause capital flight and economic decline. That would be much like what we saw in Greece.

The other option is that government just keeps spending, until they destroy themselves. Again, much like Greece.

Given the recent rise of incompetence, like AOC who is exceedingly popular, even after saying things as utterly mindless as she's going to "spend" the money from a tax cut on schools and health care.....

I see the Greece result as more and more a real possibility.

There is no way to "pay" for Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid. These programs, were never, and are not, sustainable. We have only been able to out-grow our spending thus far, but that can't continue forever.

You want 75 year-old truck drivers on the road? You want 75 year-old roofers working on your house? You want a 75 year-old nurse assisting your doctor?

You really have not thought this through, have you?

What I want, doesn't matter. What you want, doesn't matter either.

Facts don't care what either of us think. Math doesn't care what we want.

Do you want to be this guy in Greece, with no money, living in poverty, because the government simply does not have any money?

Because that's our future if we keep pushing Social Security. There is zero difference between how Social Security works, and how the Greek Pension system worked.

If you keep doing the same thing, you'll get the same result.

You talk about math and don't provide any. Here are several real SS "fixes". Show me where they are wrong.
https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/21/how-warren-buffett-thinks-we-should-fix-social-sec.aspx
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2014/11/14/5-potential-social-security-fixes
https://www.aarp.org/work/social-security/info-05-2012/future-of-social-security-proposals.html

So let's use your links for example.

Finally, gradually raising the full retirement age to 68 would take care of 16% of the funding gap.

Right, I said openly that we would have to raise the retirement age.

Raising the Social Security payroll tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20-year period would generate 52% of the shortfall.

Again, Germany has an 18% pension tax, and they are saying they need to increase it. So if 18% now in Germany isn't enough, why do you think 7.2% would be enough?

Eliminating the taxable earnings cap over a 10-year period would fix 74% of the long-term financing gap all by itself.

No, I don't think so. All you have to do is look at the 1970s. In the 1970s, we have a 70% rate on the top marginal income tax rates.

Did we have endless amounts of money for everything we wanted? Or did we have deficits? We had deficits. So if 70% tax rates didn't fix anything the 1970s, would would this fix social security?

Again.... if any of those proposals could work.... why hasn't any country anywhere in the world today, done all those things and had it work?

All those things can help.... Sure you delay the crash with all those things. Certainly. But it does not fix anything. We know that because as I said, Germany has a much higher pension tax, and they still need to raise the tax rate. Germany has a lower pension payout, and they still need more taxes.

You can't show me a single country, that doesn't have a pension crisis, unless they don't have a pension system.

For example, Singapore does not have a pension crisis. And the reason why is very simple. Singapore has a private system. People pay into a private account, that is invested in their own assets, that they own in their private account.

It's impossible to have a crisis, because people get out of their retirement account, what they paid into their retirement account.

That's also pretty good, because the government can't take it away by arbitrarily increasing the retirement age, thus denying you the money you paid into retirement.

Now I will say that Means-testing could in theory work.

But you'll never get that passed. Guaranteed. Because the moment you pass means testing, you blow apart the entire mythology that Social Security is a retirement system you pay-in and pay-out of.

The moment you tell people "Yes you paid into Social Security your entire life, but you have too much wealth, so you don't get anything from it".... you will have massive revolt across the country. No politician of either party will survive trying to implement means testing.

Ok, so I think we agree that SS is fixable and is NOT a ponzi scheme.
1. We agree on raising the full retirement age 1-year from 67 to 68 is not a big deal and gets 16% of the problem.
2. Raising the SS tax rate from 6.2% to 7.2% gets 52% of the shortfall, so that's 68% of the needed fix, no biggie.
3. Eliminate the earnings cap over 10-years gains 74%, so we're at 142% of the fix. QED SS Fixed.

The actuaries proved BY MATH that SS is fixable without much controversy or pain, so why don't the DC coxuckers fix it already!!

Only a moron would claim that increased taxes are not "pain."

Let the pigs squeal, SS needs to be fixed.

But dude... you are the pig man. This is what you people don't grasp.

You are the pig. You are the one who is going to squeal.

Again, name one country anywhere, that has the rich paying for the poor? No such country exists.

It's the poor and middle class that pay tax. You the pig. That's you buddy! When you say "Someone has to pay for this, let the pigs squeal!".... that's you! You are the one who is going to pay the tax.

Why do you think Denmark has a 200% tax on cars? Who do you think paid that tax? The lower and middle class. You. Those like you in Denmark paid that tax.
Why do you think Germany has a 19% sales tax? Who do you think is paying that? You! Those like you! The lower and middle class!

There is not one single country in this world, where the rich pay for the poor. Not one.

You want Social Security and Medicare? fine... but just realize, that's your taxes that are going to go up. You are the one who is going to squeal. You are the one who is going to pay $8/gallon of gas.... that's how much the price of a gasoline in the UK was. (likely lower now given the crash of oil prices).

Why were Brits paying $8 in gas? Taxes. To pay for health care and pensions.

You the pig. You are.

Take a look at these two graphs and tell me who is squealing. Its not the rich paying for the poor, its paying fair taxes. :
View attachment 329711

View attachment 329712

You can squeal all you want, but the tax man cometh. Bills need to be paid and the top US incomes need to pony up.

You've already posted this worthless propaganda chart. Without attribution it can't be believed.

I don't see any link, asshole.

See post #172 asked and answered

A leftwing think tank? Not credible. Furthermore, the graph is in terms of taxes against GDP. Income is less than per capita GDP, so their tax rates are considerably higher than the percentages listed in the chart. Denmark is more like 60%

ok, lets use Denmark as the metric:
Denmark Personal Income Tax Rate | 1995-2018 Data | 2019-2020 Forecast | Historical (about 55% AS PER DENMARK)
List of countries by tax rates - Wikipedia (accurate)
Countries With the Highest Single and Family Income Tax Rates (also accurate)
View attachment 329843

So you believe a 55% tax rate is reasonable?

You chose Denmark as the metric to verify that the graph is accurate. The graph is accurate.
That means that the US personal tax rate compared to EU countries is very low at 47%.
I suggested a 7% bump for the top rate up to about 54% along with adding a "Fed Sales Tax" to cover the Deficit and help keep SS & Medicare solvent.

Anyone who believes 47% is low needs to have his head examined.

Look at the tax rates in post #214, the US tax rates are low compared to other 1st world countries.

Who cares about the tax rates in a bunch of socialist kleptocracies? Why should we screw ourselves just because they did?

OK, so you prefer your ridiculous "spending cuts" that no party would support over actually paying for what you spend, or keep the $30T Nation Debt going skyward until the US turns into Greece and can't borrow anymore with $1T interest payments forever? Stupid options.

But see, Greece tried to pay for everything. Greece jacked up taxes non-stop. Greece did exactly what you are advocating here.

And they crashed.

Your plan DOES NOT WORK. That's not opinion, or "just what I think we should do".... your system does not work.... FACT. That's a FACT. That is historically proven FACT.

What part of this, do you not understand? Greece is direct undeniable proof, that you can't tax your way into make social security work. You keep referring to Greece, when Greece is exactly the example that proves your system does not work.

Stop being stupid. The US is not Greece; the US economy is not like Greece's with their $210,000,000 GDP. My God how fucking stupid are you? The only "fact" that matters is that the US needs to pay for SS & Medicare, and the US can easily afford it. The 50th state (VT) has a $30b GDP, so Greece is an economic basket case by comparison.

Greece GDP - Gross Domestic Product 2023

Gross Domestic Product of Greece grew 2% in 2023 compared to last year. This rate is 36 -tenths of one percent less than the figure of 5.6% published in 2022.

countryeconomy.com

There is nothing more stupid, than suggesting that the fundamentals that govern the whole world, do not apply to us.

You do realize just how arrogant that is, right? "all those rules don't apply to us, cause we're Merican!"

That is idiocy.

Greece is an economic basket case, specifically because they tried to pay for their pension system, using the exact policies you are proposing here.

If you think that you can follow the exact same plans that have failed everywhere else, and they'll just magically work here, because..... we're Merican!.... then you are a fool.