Posted on 01/18/2013 12:57:10 PM PST by Kaslin
Why don’t we ever hear about similar need to cut welfare, food stamps, and other freebies, government handouts and subsidies?
Especially those for moochers, able bodied malingerers and illegals.
At least social security recipients paid something into the system.
Most of the recipients of government habdouts and feebies paid nothing - they just take and take and take.
2.) Social Security will soon be little more than “phantom income” due to the means testing and higher premiums for upper income people, on Part B and Part D of Medicare.
You will get taxed on your Social Security benefits even if you don't see any benefit in your checking account, due to the very high Medicare premiums we will face in the future.
This will get “solved” with tax hikes.
-Wall Street transaction tax
-Remove the cap on payroll tax (perhaps up to every last dime)
-VAT or some type of sales tax
There is simply no political will to address the situation any other way.
****For the first time since Social Security’s cash crisis in 1983, the program can’t afford to pay full benefits for its youngest crop of new retirees through life expectancy, government data show.****
But, but the SS system was supposed to NEVER go dry! Here is the promise from 1964!
http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssa/usa1964-2.html
Self-Supporting
“The program is designed so that contributions plus interest on the investments of the social security trust funds will be sufficient to meet all of the costs of benefits and administration, now and into the indefinite future—without any subsidy from the general funds of the Government.
Both the Congress and the Executive Branch, regardless of political party in power, have scrupulously provided in advance for full financing of all liberalizations in the program.”
Raising the retirement age to 70 is not a practical solution.
The consequences should be obvious...
(1) An explosive increase in SS Disability claims.
(2) An explosive increase in Work Injury claims.
(3) An explosive increase in Age Discrimination lawsuits.
(4) An explosive increase in government agencies and laws that will allegedly “protect” and “retrain” older workers.
In addition, pensions for all the federal employees could be converted to Social Security upon retirement.
The peckerheads in government won't even address the issue because a) they are afraid or b) they are benefiting from the threat of default.
My joke is "Give me a 40 in Yellowstone Park and I will release you from the obligation you forced me to accept."
Thanks Buckeye for making this point.....SS is not going to default. They will do a VAT, national sales tax, get into our 401ks, or whatever, but there’s ZERO chance of SS going away.
How about limiting payout to what was paied in plus interest?
Could also subtract any welfare or unemploymnet paid out from waht was paid in.
Fleming v Nestor settled the question of whether or not there ever was any “social contract”.
A waste of breath. Obama voters — “I got my new Obamaphone! He gonna pay my rent, my taxes, he gonna pay my gas from his stash!” — have a six-week thought horizon. Not until they actually suffer a money loss will they care.
From a Social Security pamphlet in 1936....
“You and your employer will each pay 3 cents on each dollar you earn, up to $3,000 a year ($48,000 inflation adjusted).”
“That amount is the most you will ever have to pay.”
“From the time you are old and stop working, you will get a government check every month of your life.”
“This check will come to you as your right.”
“At least social security recipients paid something into the system.”
They did not. There is no “system” into which one can pay. Also, in our country there is no connection between who pays taxes and who receives benefits. That’s what the rich paying their “fair share” is all about. From each according to his ability to each according to his need.
If we wanted what you’ve earned to count toward what is let for your retirement, we’d let you keep it.
I don’t even understand what this article is about. No, there was no trust fund. SS is not self-supporting. It’s already in the red. What are we talking about, it being more in the red? Look, they can use allow the funny accounting they want. Why should we pretend it’s meaningful?
We do hear about that, by the way. SS gets more press first because it’s bigger: it alone eats up about as much of the budget as defense. Second because unfortunate souls like you pretend they’ve “paid into the system” and won’t allow the problem ever to be fixed.
The premims paid for Medicare Parts B and D only pay for 25% of the annual costs of the programs. By law, the other 75% comes from the General Fund. In FY-2011 this amounted to $222 billion. These costs will continue to increase as 10,000 people a day retire for the next 20 years. Medicare Part A has been running in the red since 2008.
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.