Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Jeb Bush: Social Security Means-Testing 'Ought to Be Considered'
CNS News ^ | June 1, 2015 | Susan Jones

Posted on 06/01/2015 2:49:39 PM PDT by BradtotheBone

(CNSNews.com) - Jeb Bush says he would considering pushing back the Social Security retirement age by as many as five years and scaling back benefits for Americans who paid into the system but who also have accumulated wealth.

"We need to look over the horizon and begin to phase in, over an extended period of time, going from (age) 65 to 68 or 70. And that by itself will help sustain the retirement system for anybody under the age of 40," Bush, a potential contender for the Republican presidential nomination, told CBS's "Face the Nation" on Sunday.

Bush also wants to phase out benefits for higher earners, who have paid into the system for their entire working lives.

"What about means testing?" Bob Schieffer asked Bush.

"I think it ought to be considered, for sure," Bush replied.

As conceived by the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Social Security was intended to be a retirement insurance program for all working Americans regardless of income, funded by mandatory payroll taxes.

Means-testing would turn Social Security into a wealth transfer program, diverting payroll contributions from those who earn more to those who earn less.

And if Jeb Bush has his way on immigration, some of those lower-income workers would be people who came to the United States illegally.

(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: 118k; 2016election; bobschieffer; election2016; florida; jeb4mexico; jebbush; meanstesting; ponzischeme; socialsecurity
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

Stop it, just stop it.


21 posted on 06/01/2015 3:02:42 PM PDT by novemberslady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
scaling back benefits for Americans who paid into the system but who also have accumulated wealth

In many cases this would penalize success, discipline and hard work. If you choose to save for your future instead of spending every dime, the social security benefits you earned would be cut. Reward consumers while punishing savers. What kind of economic logic is that?

Jeb the Fed. He loves big government.

22 posted on 06/01/2015 3:03:12 PM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

The feds in D.C. have economically gang banged middle America boomers, now they want to completely f*** over the rest. Just make it 78 years old before people can collect the money these corrupt assh*les in D.C. confiscated. Most will be dead before they get a dime back. A win win for fat pension government class.


23 posted on 06/01/2015 3:03:24 PM PDT by dragnet2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

66 is full retirement age, not 65. Has he paid for his own grocery’s lately?


24 posted on 06/01/2015 3:03:54 PM PDT by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jospehm20
I wish this whole family would go away. I think they have done enough damage to the country already.

Which includes (but is not limited to) setting the stage for both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama......

25 posted on 06/01/2015 3:04:05 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hadaclueonce

Thank you for posting that. Enough of the damn Bushes.


26 posted on 06/01/2015 3:04:19 PM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

“not means tested....but the age should begin to escalate - with reasonable exemptions for those 55 or over, etc....”
right now for anyone born after 1943 age for full benefits is 66
and increases in monthly increments until it is 67 if born ater 1960

so Jeb needs to learn the rules before he says stupid stuff


27 posted on 06/01/2015 3:04:29 PM PDT by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone
Easy Social Security solution:

55 and older: Offer a one-time, lump-sum payment of $100,000 to the beneficiary in exchange for forgoing future payments
30 - 54: Roll what the beneficiary put into the system into their own private IRA or 401(k)
18 - 29: Abolish the payroll tax, offer a $2,500 tax credit to open an IRA or 401(k)

Shut the system down.

28 posted on 06/01/2015 3:04:37 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

So all my life I’ve been putting the max into 401k/IRA funds. My neighbor, who earns the very same salary as me has instead spent his money on new ski boats, fishing boats, RV’s and camping stuff every year (absolutely true situation). When we both hit retirement, I will have a nest egg and he will have put nothing away, so I won’t get social security but the government will pay him. Am I getting this right? Maybe I should cash out my 401k now and go by that boat I’ve always wanted.


29 posted on 06/01/2015 3:04:46 PM PDT by Teotwawki (For a person to get a thing without paying for it, another must pay for it without getting it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DonaldC

This guy is a moron!

************
Yes, but he’s a wealthy moron. That makes him even more dangerous and unfit.


30 posted on 06/01/2015 3:05:17 PM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RWGinger

So there has been a very gradual uptick in the eligibility age? I didn’t realize that (t’s gonna have to be done at some point).


31 posted on 06/01/2015 3:07:42 PM PDT by C. Edmund Wright (www.FireKarlRove.com NOW)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

The age will probably go up again before get there and given life expectancy, that makes a little sense. In the end, they will probably raise withholding by 1% which will make it solvent till 2060, iirc. Any other ideas I’ve heard will never get off the ground in this political climate.


32 posted on 06/01/2015 3:10:00 PM PDT by DonaldC (A nation cannot stand in the absence of religious principle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

Agree about raising the age for SS eligibiity. Actually, years ago, they should have adopted a system to review life expectancies every ten to twenty years, and adjust the elibility age for persons then around 40.

Could have made it automatic like a COLA and removed it from being a political issue to kick around periodically.


33 posted on 06/01/2015 3:10:56 PM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bill1952
Second you can impose all of that as long as I can get back everything paid in with compound interest for the last 50 years.

Yes, and anything short of what you describe would be income redistribution.

34 posted on 06/01/2015 3:11:32 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

http://www.nasi.org/learn/socialsecurity/retirement-age

“Social Security’s full-benefit retirement age is increasing gradually because of legislation passed by Congress in 1983. Traditionally, the full benefit age was 65, and early retirement benefits were first available at age 62, with a permanent reduction to 80 percent of the full benefit amount. Currently, the full benefit age is 66 for people born in 1943-1954, and it will gradually rise to 67 for those born in 1960 or later. Early retirement benefits will continue to be available at age 62, but they will be reduced more. When the full-benefit age reaches 67, benefits taken at age 62 will be reduced to 70 percent of the full benefit and benefits first taken at age 65 will be reduced to 86.7 percent of the full benefit.”

I approve of raising the age to 67, which is already on the books. I also approve of continuing that increase, for those who are more than 10 years from eligibility. Raise it to 70, at least, adding one month of age for every three months thatt pass or some such schedule.


35 posted on 06/01/2015 3:12:01 PM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

It will inevitably be means tested as it inches closer to bankruptcy. Thanks to BO, that inching has turned to galloping.


36 posted on 06/01/2015 3:12:32 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist

no offense intended ... but that would not work out so well for me ... if I live more than 5 years beyond retirement.

So no ... I don’t want a lump sum unless it’s a heckuva lot more. Add to that ... between my % contribution as well as my employer % contribution ... I have way more than $100k into the SS coffers.

I would like to, at the very least, pull out the money I have put in by myself and put in by my employers.


37 posted on 06/01/2015 3:15:09 PM PDT by conservaKate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Starboard
In many cases this would penalize success, discipline and hard work. If you choose to save for your future instead of spending every dime, the social security benefits you earned would be cut. Reward consumers while punishing savers. What kind of economic logic is that?

Welcome to the new United Socialist States of America where deviancy is normal, normalcy is deviant and responsibility is for suckers.

38 posted on 06/01/2015 3:15:10 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BradtotheBone

But these new SS restrictions will apply only to us racist nativists.


39 posted on 06/01/2015 3:16:50 PM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Teotwawki
So all my life I’ve been putting the max into 401k/IRA funds. My neighbor, who earns the very same salary as me has instead spent his money on new ski boats, fishing boats, RV’s and camping stuff every year (absolutely true situation). When we both hit retirement, I will have a nest egg and he will have put nothing away, so I won’t get social security but the government will pay him. Am I getting this right?

You got it.

And I too saved all my life while my dopey neighbor spent his money like a drunken sailor. He'd get SS and I won't.

Maybe my neighbor is not so dopey. But Jeb Bush is.

40 posted on 06/01/2015 3:18:35 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson