Posted on 01/28/2023 7:41:42 AM PST by 6thavenue
Edited on 01/28/2023 9:04:42 AM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
Bloomberg
This thread is hilarious, the two new astroturfers are at least good for a laugh, but you glowies have got to get better at covering your retread status. LOFL.
He is either from the Paul Ryan/John Mccain school of how to lose elections or a poser trying to damage conservatives.
I think most people have him figured out.
“...Of all that, the only one I’ve supported is massive cuts in retirement entitlements...”
Well, maybe you’ll be lucky and die before you reach retirement age...
For sure. But even basic Medicare and plan b aren’t too bad.
If you put all your hope into government socialism for your retirement, then... There are words I won’t repeat that describe doing that.
“Of all that, the only one I’ve supported is massive cuts in retirement entitlements.”
You’re advocating for massive poverty for older folks.
The only people who have secure retirements are government workers and rich people.
Middle class (non-government) people have to fund their own retirements via 401k & IRA’s and the vast majority are way underfunded.
Yeah, he is about as conservative as Pelosi, Biden, or Obama.....
So government welfare to the rescue is the answer to not investing or saving?
This is a conservative ideal? I don’t understand that attitude, but ok.
Yes, those far-right people that want to cut entitlement spending. I’m just like them... Uh huh.
I AM retired and I am receiving my SS retirement benefits that I PAID for during the 58 years that I worked and paid into it...
It’s a ponzi scheme. You were paying for retired people before you, and working people are paying your entitlements now.
But there’s no helping an old person that wants it all.
Good point. The question is, what do you do with the SS tax money that’s not immediately needed for payment to beneficiaries. If you don’t have a way to earn interest on it , the value of the “pot of money” declines bc of inflation , just as in a no interest bank account. Currently they “loan” the money to the federal General Fund, establishing Social Security bonds that are to be repaid with interest like any other government bonds. So, if they’re not going to loan Social Security surpluses to the government , should they put the money into private sector bonds? There’s an extra level of risk, of course, because private business don’t have full faith and credit promise to the lender - ie they don’t have the taxing power as a guarantee they’ll be able to repay bondholders
You put $10 into your savings account and 20 years later you draw $10 out and you think that is the same $10 bill you put in???
You are really some kind of fool...
I know money is fungible. Nice strawman though. Comparing a ponzi scheme to a savings account, incredible.
I will have to give that some consideration. There’s no easy answer.
I did like Bush’s proposal of individual private accounts. The Nannies and mother hens did not approve because some folks might invest unwisely. Yet that’s what the Gov did, using our money to invest in pet projects and freebies for votes. In the real world that would be a crime.
I certainly can invest better than the Fed Gov, who btw couldn’t keep a cathouse afloat.
Regarding Ms Fuller: Yeah So!
The point regarding her is, you can withdraw far far more then you ever put in. There is no growth in SS other than what the government can ring out of the working taxpayer.
They may “theoretically deserve” to get it back but there’s nothing in the law that guarantees it. It’s up to the next working generation to continue to do as before or change the law and stiff those people.
Look I detect hostility from you toward me for pointing this out! I am just stating reality. Getting mad at me won’t change the situation! I wish it wasn’t so, but it is!
I wish FDR and his gaggle of Ivy League genius lawyers had set up something financially sound. They didn’t! They were warned back then by the financial community this would happen! But they were Ivy League geniuses so they didn’t have to pay attention, besides it would collapse on someone else’s watch not theirs!
I understand why Trump is saying don’t touch this topic right now. I support that. However someday it will have to be “touched”! The longer we wait the more painful the solution.
No...I’m not mad at you about anything...It’s just the time references between what she paid in and how long she collected is far, far different than what retirees today worked and paid...Not even close comparison...
The program would be much, much better if as people say, was an individual account ran for all the years working, but it isn’t...It is what we have today, what I have paid into since 1965...if it is changed, as some have suggested by starting at today’s worker around the age of 40, it would be very much better for their future, but people such as myself, our benefit should NOT be cut...PERIOD....
This was once thought one time to be a good idea...
https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v62n1/v62n1p47.pdf
They get living expenses plus a per diem
They get paki nearly two hundred thousand a year in addition
Yawn
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.