Posted on 11/01/2015 8:18:39 AM PST by Louis Foxwell
Boomers at age 28 worked hard and paid SS without whining about it. Now the millenials have charged up billions in student loans and want the govt to forgive it. Now that’s welfare. :-)
Since the gov’t hasn’t forgiven student loans, the welfare has not occurred.
As for social security welfare
“We don’t call Social Security “welfare” because it’s a pejorative term, and politicians don’t want to offend. So their rhetoric classifies Social Security as something else when it isn’t. Here is how I define a welfare program: First, it taxes one group to support another group, meaning it’s pay-as-you-go and not a contributory scheme where people’s own savings pay their later benefits. And second, Congress can constantly alter benefits, reflecting changing needs, economic conditions and politics. Social Security qualifies on both counts.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/06/AR2011030602926.html
By every objective measure, social security is welfare.
“Greenfield posed your question in the final paragraph.”
Maybe that’s as good as anyone can do.
Fortunately your warped definition of SS is so like Obama. Maybe if you can just explain it one more time everybody will understand. :-)
Actually, your view of SS is like Obama
““Second, I do not want to cut benefits or raise the retirement age. I believe there are a number of ways we can make Social Security solvent that do not involve placing these added burdens on our seniors. One possible option, for example, is to raise the cap on the amount of income subject to the Social Security tax. If we kept the payroll tax rate exactly the same but applied it to all earnings and not just the first $97,500, we could virtually eliminate the entire Social Security shortfall.—
https://ourfuture.org/fact_sheet/barack-obama-s-statements-social-security
“I just wish they’d get a job and out of mom’s basement”
Yes, then they could pay into SS. :-)
I would like to see younger workers transferred over to private savings as they will likely receive a lot more in benefits at age 65 than from SS.
I’ve seen some calculations, which show that if people could have placed the 12.4% Social Security payroll taxes they and their employers have paid all these years into other investments, that their retirement income from those investments would be a good bit higher than they will ever get from Social Security.
Everything that the left has done, from breaking up the family to driving out manufacturing industries to promoting Third World immigration has made its own spending completely unsustainable. On a social level alone, we don't have the people we need to pay the bills. And at the rate we are going, we will only run up more bills that our demographics and our culture can no longer cash.
Bernie's a smart man... he should know this stuff...
And if one dies the day after retiring, then he and his airs get nothing, in part because nothing is there, as it was given away to prior generations.
Agree - CLEARLY WELFARE. The money a person gets who retires tomorrow will come from the debt imposed on our little kids, many not even born yet. The money that a working person puts in is immediately sent out to pay other government obligations...it is not saved or invested in any way.
“If we kept the payroll tax rate exactly the same but applied it to all earnings and not just the first $97,500”
Actually it’s now about $115k, but the cap will always be there, as lifting it will actually have the biggest effect not on rich Republican fat-cats, but on upper middle-class families in the Northeast and California - i.e., much of the DEMOCRAT BASE, which is why Obama may have talked about lifting the cap early in his campaign, but he QUICKLY shut up about it, once told who gets hit first.
I believe that Chile has a plan that works really well. At retirement age people retire with about $3,000-$4,000 per month. One of the GOP candidates in 2012 was pushing that plan. I can’t remember who it was. Maybe Newt.
More accurately, those taxes funded the spending growth authorized by the Democrat Congress during the Reagan years.
Every tax payer enjoyed the benefits of Reagan's tax cuts and "Reagan's tax cuts for the wealthy" is nothing more than liberal Democrat mantra.
We now have a democracy. And, that’s a big problem.
The money that young people put in today does not go into some account for them to access.
It goes directly to pay for the above 65 year old crowd in this country that will leech off those born after 1970 for the next 30-40 years
Do you have any idea how intellectually lazy such a statement reveals you to be?
Welfare is, by definition, something for nothing -- other than existing. AFDC and Section 8, that's welfare. Social Security is a social compact -- you pay in now, you get paid later.
And, while you are correct that Social Security is today nothing more than a transfer payment -- from the young to the old -- that is not due to any action on the part of the old. It is, instead, a corruption of the system traceable solely to the actions of Lyndon Baines Johnson and his Democrat party, followed by most subsequent Congresses and Administrations.
Nonetheless, when they were young, the old paid in. They're not getting something for nothing. They fulfilled their side of the deal.
Now, it's up to you.
But, please, think first -- before you write...and reveal your ignorance.
actually, no.
There’s an incentive to delay SS retirement, to receive up to approx. 8% a year more, past Full Retirement Age.
In the scenario given, the guy who works 10 more years will get more.
I like it, CondorFlight.
i mis-read the scenario. same age, same income same retirement date. One worked 10 years more than the other ( started working 10 years earlier than the other)
yes, they’d get the same benefit.
You've bought the propaganda.
Unfortunately, that’s not true.
Just like the border problem. Cut off the freebies for the parasites and locust invaders and balance would self-restore.
The problem is that the situation has been purposely created to drive demand, instill dependency, and fund/establish/enable an goverment machine to control every aspect of society. Power for the sake of power.
At this point of the game, any pol who appears to want to *genuinely* fix things through honest principles is 1) hopelessly naive and will get eaten alive, 2) easily corrupted or blackmailed into compliance, and/or 3) a deceiver playing the role of "good cop".
This can be discerned because the problem, as you said, *is not really that hard to fix*. So, why don't they fix it? They lie when they claim to have solutions to middle class woes.
The pols dance to the tune of those who are paying them to perform. If it were the American taxpayers and citizens - IOW the legitimate voters who have a natural stake in maintaining a healthy system - pols would fear the ire and wrath of the responsible citizenry. They don't. Instead, they flaunt their support for every destructive element that has infested American society - leeches, invaders, perverts, criminals, PC enforcers and all other lovers of lies and lawlessness.
Those are the folks they desire to please so as not to lose their power. Conclusion - their positions of power are not determined by the lawful voter, but by outside forces and legal voters who have become so utterly corrupted that their definition of responibility is to hire pols to steal from their fellow citizens.
SS is particularly insidious because it was established as an involuntary social contract, ultimately pitting generation against generation. Now enter Obamacare, pitting the young against the old, the healthy against the sick, the morally sound against the mentally degenerate.
A house divided against itself cannot stand. How "convenient" for the agents of change.
My theory is that the Day of the Lord is only delayed because there are way too many millstones still on back order. And that Hell is going to need a bigger mouth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.