Posted on 01/02/2011 10:24:47 AM PST by rabscuttle385
Seniors should be older before the receive Social Security and wealthy Americans should receive less benefits across the board, says Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
He made the argument in an interview on Sunday's Meet the Press, but it's a position Graham has advocated for on the stump in South Carolina, including a 2009 stop at The Citadel with Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.
"What I'm going to do is challenge this country to make some hard decisions," Graham said at the time, telling the crowd of cadets, Tea Partiers, and Graham supporters that they shouldn't give Congress a pass on the tough stuff.
(Excerpt) Read more at charlestoncitypaper.com ...
The real problem is that the voters keep on voting for politicians that do nothing about SS and I don't think that will change. So, the SS income tax will need to rise or cut benefits.
The politicians don't have the will to cut other spending enough. However, that is hard to do since SS and Medicare make up 60% of the budget. Because of that huge percentage, the only way to save it is to raise taxes and reduce benefits, which is what has been said repeatedly now for two decades, but no one did anything.
>I won’t even bother to correct the rest of your blatherings. You are too class-envious to debate with. You don’t like folks being too “rich” for your tastes when they can no longer work.
This is clear proof of you being delusional. I mean you are just plain off the deep end. I do not ascribe to class envy, and if you actually read what I posted, it would be clear. The fact is Social Security is bust, and a means of weakening its political support is necessary. Reducing it to purely a welfare system by removing the political cover it gets by being ‘universal’ is necessary.
Advocating a way to keep the system from going broke is not the same as class envy.
The fact that you say something as dumb as :
>Vote the bastards out is the answer to these SS and other economic problems, not penalizing producers, savers and investors.
Shows you have no grasp whatsoever of the situation. We’re broke. Things have to be cut. Firing politicians doesn’t change the fact that hard decisions on cuts have to be made. Sure, make it a across the board cut of entitlements. I’m OK with that. It’s less likely to fly, but sure, give it a shot. I don’t care what the direct means are as long as the entitlements are reigned in. You, however, don’t seem to grasp what is actually important, or how dire the situation actually is.
I give FR posters a D for understanding simple economics. Layout all the factual numbers and yet everybody refuses to acknowledge them, the problem, or the required solutions!
And to put it bluntly, you don't know whose side your on.
Most military people get paid well, nowadays. Five figure bonuses. Many make high 5 figures and even 6 figures, now (Wasington Times). Add in housing allowances, etc. In fact, Gates said not too long ago that one of his main concerns is how fast the payroll is increasing. The money has been increasing in the last 5 years. I’m not complaining, just stating.
America is going to find out very quickly that sides don’t matter when it comes to economics. Everyone will suffer immensely if significant cuts are not made to Soc security, Medicare, Medicaid, Military, and Welfare.
My argument is where to begin, not that cuts are needed. It is political stupidity of the highest order to begin a negotiation with the enemy (and the Marxists who want it ALL are our enemy) by ceding that “well maybe we producers do need maybe to pay a little bit more in taxes.”
Anyone, and I mean anyone who is that stupid is too stupid to post on FRee Republic.
And just who does he consider wealthy? Probably anyone just above the poverty line.
Would you advocate for Death Panels to reach your goal?
The most common dance steps are:
the "Cutting Waste and Fraud Will Solve The Problem Two-Step"
the "Get Rid of Every Government Program (Except The One That Covers Me) Tango"
the "Economic Growth Will Take Care Of It Waltz"
and that evergreen favorite, the "Kick The Can Down The Alley (Until After I'm Dead) Fox Trot"
Just a couple more Start Treaties and we won’t need a military...
Ahh, but we have enough money for tarp, bailouts, health care, pelosi’s marsh mice and other ridiculous pork projects, - you get the picture. I’m for helping those who need it, but you realize how many are sponging off the system and it’s an art form.
There is absolutely no excuse for taking someone’s money because someone thinks they already have enough. Baloney. What’s theirs is theirs, period - we/they worked and paid for it, it belongs to us. We are not playing Robin Hood economics.
the "Tax the S--t out of my Kids and Grandkids Soft Shoe".
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid take up a combined 43% of the federal budget today; these programs are all mainly utilized by retirees. Over the next few years the percentage is set to explode to a much higher rate as the boomers retire.
Don't you think these programs would be a good starting point??? It is political stupidity of the highest order to begin a negotiation with the enemy (and the Marxists who want it ALL are our enemy) by ceding that “well maybe we producers do need maybe to pay a little bit more in taxes.”
You are letting yourself get distracted. The impact of not making painful choices will impact dems, repubs, marxists, capitalists, etc... equally. We will all be in the poor house. Focus on the economics and it makes the politics simple.
Changing the name of a government entitlement to "Welfare" doesn't change a thing except branding seniors as "being on the dole".
'What's in a name' to proud seniors? Plenty, Mr. Buzzard.
P.S., it's very egotistical of you to believe that you're the only one who recognizes the dire straits we're in. You've spent an inordinate amount of time here advocating cutting SS benefits for the American retiree. I'll be looking forward to reading similarly long screeds by you advocating stopping billions in foreign aid to Egypt and other muzzie countries, free medical care and education for illegals and their countless offspring, and millions in vacations and junkets for Obama and his hangers-on in just the past twenty -four months.
This country's older generation is one of the last groups to fasten on to punish for the wasteful monetary bubble machine merrily bouncing away in D.C.
Leni
Baloney!! Economics IS politics. Wealth redistribution is what the other side is and always has been about. What about "from each according to his means, to each according to his needs" do you not understand?
The solution is to make the OTHER SIDE (at least those who don't produce a damned thing) go to the poor house. I subscribe to a quaint theory that the product of a man's labors belong to him first always.
And I figure that money's gone. As gone as if I'd spent it all on lotto tickets.
This has clarified my mind, my financial planning, and my position on the issue wonderfully.
There is nothing the government has which "belongs to me" and nothing to which I am "entitled". I expect to work until I can live frugally on my savings, and to receive only such medical care as I can pay for.
Yep, it sucks to have paid that all in for decades and get bupkis, but it certainly has enabled me to have a consistent view of what needs to be done to the entitlement programs.
And if I may say so, you cut quite a rug!!
No matter what he says, people in SC still believe in him, the way their MA counterparts did with “the dream” of EMK.
“So, if someone works their tail off at a well-paying job all their life, they’re not allowed to enjoy the fruits of their labor?”
Oh, but they did. They used their SS to finance the Chicago Housing Authority. They used it to send every Tom, Dick, and Harry to college. They used it to pay for Maplethorpe art work. They certainly did (collectively) enjoy the fruits of their labor. If they REALLY wanted to save up for retirement, they would have taxed themselves at the necessary rate, to cover both the above indulgences, PLUS their retirement. But they chose not to. No different than wanting to buy two cars, but only having the money for one.
“After all, they’ve paid the most into the system.”
Not really - they essentially paid nothing into “the system” - otherwise the money would be there waiting for them and this debate would not take place.
“Let me give you the flip side. My MIL never worked a day in her life. My FIL never made over $14K a year. After he passed in 1994, his SS benefits went to her. She got $1550 a month for the rest of her life. She lived another 15 years. Are you OK with your kids paying for that?”
Fair question - personally, yes - I don’t like the idea of seeing millions of old people starve. I certainly prefer giving them welfare rather than giving it to working-capable people. But that is a question for the country as a whole to answer.
“According to you, I guess that’s ok, just as long as somebody doesn’t have a Winnebago. You’re just another class warfare socialist.”
Obviously the term Winnebago is a metaphor - but it does get the point across. As to a class-warfare type - I’m actually trying to prevent one. The young people will stand for SLAVERY to finance the indulgences of rich seniors - you will see a class war that will make Russia 100 years ago look like child’s play.
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.