Skip to comments.
This simple fix could help save Social Security
American Thinker ^
| 01/13/2023
| Brenton Smith
Posted on 01/13/2023 9:58:29 AM PST by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-107 last
To: Tell It Right
How about the SS fund be allowed to invest in other things besides US Treasuries? It could be invested in many mutual funds spread across many asset classes.
No. Take the King’s shilling, do the King’s bidding.
101
posted on
01/13/2023 5:36:30 PM PST
by
rxh4n1
To: Iceclimber58
102
posted on
01/14/2023 5:56:55 AM PST
by
SMARTY
(“Liberalism is totalitarianism with a human face.” Thomas Sowell)
To: Robert A Cook PE; AdmSmith; AnonymousConservative; Arthur Wildfire! March; Berosus; Bockscar; ...
103
posted on
01/14/2023 7:36:33 AM PST
by
SunkenCiv
(Imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie.)
...the program locks up all its loose cash on June 30. So, starting July 1, the program needs to redeem bonds, and the Treasury Department picks the wrong bonds for redemption based on a policy that literally dates back to the era of black-and-white TV.
Gosh, it's almost as if the rest of the gubmint is setting the policy to benefit the rest of the gubmint, knowing that no one will oppose a later, "necessary" increase in the FICA rate.
104
posted on
01/14/2023 7:38:23 AM PST
by
SunkenCiv
(Imagine an imaginary menagerie manager imagining managing an imaginary menagerie.)
To: wgmalabama
For the government pensions it’s easy to calculate. It’s 1% for each year of service against an average of youtube high 3 salaries. Percentages don't mean much, total amount of the payout to each system is the only thing that matters to me. Maybe one is way bigger than the other maybe not.
105
posted on
01/14/2023 2:03:30 PM PST
by
itsahoot
(Many Republicans are secretly Democrats, no Democrats are secretly Republicans. Dan Bongino.)
To: Portnoy001
I just don’t feel sorry for people that have enough money getting by receiving expensive benefits they don’t need in retirement.
If you aren’t serious about limiting the payola, then you aren’t serious about reducing government spending.
So people that don't need SS benefits at retirement have plenty of money. If they can self-support themselves through retirement, why are they paying into SS in the first place? Why not let rich people opt out of the program entirely, and then you don't have to worry about means-testing beneficiaries?
To: Portnoy001
I just don’t feel sorry for people that have enough money getting by receiving expensive benefits they don’t need in retirement.
If you aren’t serious about limiting the payola, then you aren’t serious about reducing government spending.
So people that don't need SS benefits at retirement have plenty of money. If they can self-support themselves through retirement, why are they paying into SS in the first place? Why not let rich people opt out of the program entirely, and then you don't have to worry about means-testing beneficiaries?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-107 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson