AARP Blocks Social Security Reform

RushLimbaugh.com ^ | Rush Limbaugh

[qam1]

Here's the Robert Samuelson column he's talking about

Entitled Selfishness

[eleni121]

BUMP

[qam1]

Xer Ping

Ping list for the discussion of the politics and social (and sometimes nostalgic) aspects that directly effects Generation Reagan / Generation-X (Those born from 1965-1981) including all the spending previous generations (i.e. The Baby Boomers) are doing that Gen-X and Y will end up paying for.

Freep mail me to be added or dropped. See my home page for details and previous articles.

[dawn53]

Folks, it is the present day retirees who will not put up with any changes whatsoever, and they vote. That is the stumbling block to getting anything changed.

LOL, Rush must have read my post yesterday on the subject (just kidding.)

I wrote in post number three of this thread
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1765141/posts

Sorry to disagree with this guy, but IMHO, it's the present day "seniors" (aka AARP members and the like) that are preventing a "fix" to the problem. The politicians are afraid of denying or cutting back benefits because they'll lose the elderly vote. Most boomers I talk to don't expect to collect SS, and many are planning on working past their 65th birthday, not necessarily because of necessity.

[KarlInOhio]

Some changes could have been made almost painlessly. The first is to tie the annual increase in SS benefits to the consumer price index (inflation) instead of to average wage growth. That would cut about 0.5%-1% per year on average. Even at only 0.5% over 30 years that would cut nearly half of the expected shortfall in SS taxes.

[webstersII]

What about the agreement Bush signed with Mexico where the illegals will be able to collect SS after they go back to Mexico?

This program will completely bankrupt the system, as alot of those lower-wage workers will be drawing out much more than they put in.

If the AARP wants to get upset about something, they should get upset about illegal immigrants getting SS payments.

[Alberta's Child]

Both parties are complicit in the problem, but the truth is that behind the scenes they are both supporting measures that are aimed specifically at addressing it.

The minimum wage hike passed yesterday is a good example. This is being sold to the American public as a "liberal vs. conservative" issue involving increased wages vs. higher costs of doing business, but these are secondary issues for the most part. The primary aim of this legislation is to inflate the hourly labor rates for America's lowest-income earners -- with the specific intent of generating higher Federal tax revenue through the payroll taxes these people pay (and their employers match) for both Social Security and Medicare.

[chiefqc]

Maybe we all should take a look at the empty vault where the SS money should be, it has no money there since being, stolen, by our elected officals to be used for everything else but for what it was intended.

It was never invested wisely as it was such an easy target for our elected officals to steal.

There must be a reason that these educated elected officals have a much better retirement source than the voters who elected them. Perhaps their thinking is why would I put MY money into something that will get stolen from by others and replaced with useless IOU'S?

If there was a way to allow the people to withdraw whatever was in their account, the scandal would be beyound belief when they found out there was no money there.

Why do youn think there is such resistance to op-out of SS completly and putting that money where YOU have control and the ability to invest wherever you want? That would dry up their slush fund used at their pleasure for other than what it was intended.

[misterrob]

Problem is that by boosting wages 40% does not translate to a 40% increase in payroll taxes overall given the fact that business will reduce headcount to counter the effects of government mandated costs.

[Alberta's Child]

No, but when you combine this with our open-borders policy you have the added incentive for illegal aliens working off the books who can become "guest workers" on legitimate payrolls.

[kabar]

Some changes could have been made almost painlessly. The first is to tie the annual increase in SS benefits to the consumer price index (inflation) instead of to average wage growth. That would cut about 0.5%-1% per year on average. Even at only 0.5% over 30 years that would cut nearly half of the expected shortfall in SS taxes.

I am sure that will be one of the alternatives offered by the Dems who are trying to keep the system going, even though it is unsustainable as currently structured. The fact is that in 1950 there were 16 workers to every retiree, today it is 3.3, and in 2030 it will be 2 workers for every retiree. You can't keep the system going without increasing taxes and/or decreasing benefits. Tinkering with the COLA computations will just delay the inevitable. SS is a pay as you go system. It starts going broke in 2017.

I suspect that AARP will launch a huge PR effort if there is an attempt to change the COLA computations to give retirees less benefits. Their anti-PAs effort was something to behold.

[knarf]

bump for later read

[kabar]

The primary aim of this legislation is to inflate the hourly labor rates for America's lowest-income earners -- with the specific intent of generating higher Federal tax revenue through the payroll taxes these people pay (and their employers match) for both Social Security and Medicare.

The effect will be negligible. The Ponzi scheme can't be saved.

[kabar]

If there was a way to allow the people to withdraw whatever was in their account, the scandal would be beyound belief when they found out there was no money there.

Individuals have no accounts. They don't own their contributions. The federal government does. The Supreme Court ruled in Flemming v. Nestor that there is no legal right to Social Security benefits. Source: Flemming V. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603, 610–11 (1960)

[dalereed]

Eliminate SS and Medicare, they are unconstitutional as are all federal social programs.

Put the AARP out of business, they are a pure socialist group.

BTW, im 69 and wouldn't belong to AARP if it was feee.

[babygene]

I think it would be fair that SS benefits be linked with how many kids one has...

My mother got just over $300 a month in SS before she died. She had 8 working kids paying in. The eight of us could have contributed $37.50 a month to give her that level of luxury.

When the boomer's (for what ever reason) decided to have just 2 kids(that's one a peace for both parents), it should have been clear that it was going to put a burden on the kids in their old age.

Then when we (collectively) decided to kill 40 million of the potential workers over the last 30 or so years, what the hell did we expect.

[Ol' Dan Tucker]

Now, excuse me, Mr. Samuelson, George W. Bush for six years has tried to do something about this, and he has been rebuked at every turn.

Now, excuse me, Mr. Limbaugh, perhaps you'd care to address one of the changes Duhbya tried to make in 2004 --the Social Security Totalization Agreement with Mexico.

Now, you may think that giving US Social Security benefits to 20+ million Mexican law-breakers is a good thing, but I, as well as many Americans vehemently disagree.

A Mexican illegal alien can apply for, and receive benefits after having worked (illegally) in the US for 6 quarters (18 months). US citizens (you and I) have to work 40 quarters (10 years) before we're eligible to apply.

But that's not the worst of it. Under the terms of Bush's agreement, the Mexican illegal alien can apply for, and receive benefits for his Mexican (national) wife and Mexican (national) children, even if the wife and children have never stepped foot in the USA.

So, not only does George W. Bush want US citizens to give US Social Security benefits to the Mexican law-breakers, he also wants US citizens to pay benefits to the Mexican law-breakers' family back home in Mexico.

So, in spite of your statements to the contrary, it looks like you're still a GOP water boy.

It was ever thus.

[chiefqc]

Gee what a surprise. We are forced to pay SS taxes to an account we don't own so that the Goverment can pay us benifits over which we have no say from an account that has no money. Then we are told that this accout which has no money in it will run out of this money in the next ?? years unless we fix it.

I guess the bottom line is, We elected officals stole all the money from our slush fund and we need more so we need to come up with another smoke an mirror way to get it.

Just remember though, we will not be so stupid as to allow ourselves to be part of this fake scheme.

Have a good day and remember to vote for me as I will always be looking out for my,I mean, your best interests.

[Jim Verdolini]

"The primary aim of this legislation is to inflate the hourly labor rates for America's lowest-income earners -- with the specific intent of generating higher Federal tax revenue through the payroll taxes these people pay (and their employers match) for both Social Security and Medicare"

No, the primary aim of this legislation is to give union workers a pay increase as their pay is often indexed to the minimum wage.

[kabar]

We elected officals stole all the money from our slush fund and we need more so we need to come up with another smoke an mirror way to get it.

The SS Trust Fund is a scam. It only represents the USG's intention to pay SS benefits. SS is a pay as you go system. The revenue collected is used to pay those benefits. Any "surplus" is put into the general fund to pay for defense, education, servicing the national debt, etc. The SSTF contains IOUs in the form of non-market T-bills [not redeemable to anyone except the USG] and are not assets, but unfunded liabilities. Hence, the SS Trust Fund and other such trust funds are carried as part of the almost $9 trillion National debt as "intragovernmental holdings."

We need to eliminate the fiction of the SS Trust Fund and make SS part a line item on the annual federal budget. 80% of Americans pay more in payroll taxes [SS and Medicare] than they do in income taxes. The only way we are going to resolve SS permanently is to privatize part or all of it. The UK and Chile, among other countries, have already done it. The Dems want to keep American dependent upon the government so they can exercise their power.

Imagine a so called retirement system where someone at 17 could pay into the system for 50 years, die a day before his 67th birthday, and not collect anything [assuming he was single without dependents] except for a small burial benefit. There would be nothing from the system to leave in his estate for a friend or relative.