A solution for the Social Security nightmare that could be implemented in two weeks

reply to post by dolphinfan


Sounds good at first cut but the reality is that in some areas, it's much more expensive to live than others.

Means testing would have to be adjusted to the area in which you live.

The other objection that I have to this type of solution, is that I've been working towards my retirement for some time. Social security is going to be one of my income streams. I've managed our resources carefully so that I will be able to retire. One of my decisions was to continue working for a lower wage but at a company that has a retirement program. Why should I be penalized for making this choice?

I'm not greedy. However I've watched a number of people make foolish choices in employment and spending throughout their lives. Why should they get subsidized by the government(social security) and I should be penalized for being conservative financially?

I don't think this is a solution that will ever be implemented.

I do think that SS benefits will be reduced as time goes on so the contribution by the government will continue to be a pay as you go system.

reply to post by dolphinfan


there is no will in society either!!
what was one of the gripes we heard about obamacare?
Oh, we'll have to wait forever to see a doctor!! they'll be overwhelmed by all these new patients!!

that right there tells me that somewhere along the line society has decided that healthcare should be rationed!! that there should always be a portion of the population that should be left out, since we want quick and adequate care that we wouldn't get if everyone was participating!!! It would just be so barbaric for this small group to consist of the "poor", so they come up with these neat little formulas, call it means testing and well spread that group out a little...so they are less indentifiable, more easily blamed for their fate!!
the fact of the matter is that society didn't like the selection that natural cause would pick, so they took these people's money, their healthcare, and gave it to another!!!

Originally posted by Avenginggecko
reply to post by dolphinfan

 

This entire problem is caused by the elderly, the greediest component of the American society. They “paid into the system” Its “my money”. All of that is rubbish. It is a page out of the playbook when folks died at a much earlier age and folks did little if any investing. The notion that regardless of how well off you are, you are entitled to a benefit is a dog that ceased barking a couple of decades ago.

Um, what?

A) The elderly aren't the greedy ones
B) Social Security is solvent for the next 25 years or so
C) We can make it solvent forever by reforming the tax code and taxing the top earners at a fair rate
D) Social Security doesn't add to the deficit

If you want to find greed in America, look at the banksters and corporate fascists who have made you believe the only way to solve America's "debt crisis" is by breaking the backs of the poorest and weakest members of society.

Wealth has done nothing but move upward to the top 1% since corporate-fascism began spreading widely through the American political system. Cutting taxes and deregulating investments (which is what rich people do - invest and move money around in various vessels) only serves to enrichen the rich.

Then, after the rich pull the greatest ponzi scheme in human history, the taxpayers bail them out, corporatists use their resources to break unions and populist organizations and install faux Tea Party fascists into power who further gut state services, and then when revenues are so low basic services can no longer be provided, they say, "these leeches are taking all your money!" and because so many people would rather blame grandma(?) than the obvious culprit, they are able to perpetuate the decline of the American Middle Class further and further.

Grandma isn't greedy and she is not the problem. The corporate-fascists who have infected the American media and political system who completely refuse to pay their fair share of the wealth they raped from the rest of us and our future generations are the problem. Means testing is not a way to fix Social Security, no matter how you spin it. Means testing is just another right wing smoke screen to dismantle the thin safety net the weakest members of society have.

They literally stole the wealth of America. And here you are shilling for them and saying the elderly are the greedy ones. Right.

Thank you...you have said in a very intelligent and easy to understand way....what the real truth is. (this is what I wanted to say!...lol)

reply to post by dawnstar


You want to toss the bankers in jail? I'm with you. Keep in mind that under the current model, some gent like Dick Fuld, who ran Lehman Brothers in to the dirt, destroyed a great firm, killed thousands of jobs and cost the tax payers billions will receive social security upon his release from prison. He will receive it despite the estimated $400M he took in compensation from Lehman Brothers during his tenure there.

You can set the limit at what ever you want as a start, say $100K/year or a net worth of over $2M, but based on the replys in this thread, there is not even a slight desire to deny folks from benefits based on their net worth and income level. With that mentality, this problem will never be solved.

The bail outs were criminal as were many of the folks who were bailed out. We can't get that money back. Even were you to take the worst offending bankers, confiscate their assets and jail them, you would not even approach a half measure of a solution to this problem. You can tax the rich all you want and still won't get there as the rich will merely move money, hide money, move to a different country. Every time a tax the rich scheme is implemented it generates far less than originally intended. Taxing the rich is a feel good solution, not an economic one.

My basic point is that all of these programs need to be reconsidered and restructured significantly. Ultimately to do that you are going to have to tell folks who have paid into the system that they are not getting anything.

The irony is that many of the replys here are touting a "progressive" wealth redistribution model, but are also suggesting that a government benefit should not be denyed the rich.

reply to post by dolphinfan


ummm....ya, sure.....100 thousand a year or assetts over a million......
sure, more than likely it would be....
gee, your husband's social security check puts you our of our classification of "needy" so well, well, you just keep on working to fill the gaps that his check doesn't extend to!!!
sorry, been living that life for awhile now, here's an idea, how about they stop turning everyone of these programs that are designed to help the poor into their own personal cash cows???
everything, food, rent, medical care, housing, college, everything that has a program by the gov't helping people get access to it have an inflation rate two or more times the average!!! pills that cost us a hundred dollars a pop are reasonably priced in other countries...why is this??? if you want my opinion, it's because the drug companies know that they can charge however much they want and there will be people buying it, because only a very few are actually paying the full cost for it!! there's either gov't programs, or insurance, or charities paying it!!
same with the rest....
heck, the reason why college costs go up every year is because the gov't w ill increase the loan amounts every year...and well, the colleges just follow up and increase their costs....
somewhere, something has to give!!!
or I will stop giving!!! I already purposely avoid stores and go to second hand stores to buy as much of my needs as I can to avoid paying taxes, along with other measures....I can go further, talk my boss into laying me off, or well, whatever......I certainly ain't gonna be 80 years old and still giving!!!
find another sucker people!!!
PAY FOR YOU OWN KIDS!! WE DID!!!