"If you've been working for any number of years, but especially if you've been working for two or three decades, you've been paying in not only money for current beneficiaries but additional money which was invested in US government bonds to make it possible for Social Security to pay benefits of Baby Boomers and Gen-Xers.
The additional money was required since there will be more seniors relative to the working age population.
This plan appears to foresee the government never paying that back to Social Security.
In other words, your payroll taxes have been socking away additional money to cover the growing senior population.
But this bill says too bad. That money goes for high income tax cuts."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/...+%28TPMNews%29
that money gets spent as fast as it comes in and always has been.
There is no Social Security lockbox.
The government IOU's that the "lockbox" got in exchange for the money the government has already pissed off has ALWAYS depended on the government being able to come up with real "new" cash when the IOU's came due.
GOP introduces plan to massively cut Social Security
On Thursday, Rep. Sam Johnson, a Republican from Texas and chair of the Ways and Means Committee, introduced legislation to significantly cut Social Security.
The bill introduced by Johnson, who is also the chair of the Social Security subcommittee, slashes benefits, adds means testing, and would raise the retirement age from 67 to 69.
For most workers, the bill would cut Social Security benefits substantially. As Michael Linden, associate director for tax and budget policy at Center for American Progress, pointed out on Twitter, a letter from Social Security’s Office of the Actuary calculated workers making around $50,000 would see checks shrink by between 11% and 35%.
Nearly every income bracket would see a reduction, save for the very bottom. People making around $12,280 in 2016 who have worked for 30 years would see an increase of around 20%. But young people making the same amount would be hit hard by the changes. If they had 14 years of work experience by 2016, they would see their benefits cut in half.
The plan would also cut entirely cost of living adjustments (COLA) for retirees earning above $85,000.
If nothing happens, Social Security will start to lose its ability to pay benefits in full in the 2030s. However, Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo notes that by 2090 it will still be paying at 74%.
Democrats, expectedly, are not pleased with Johnson’s plan, preferring strategies like increasing taxes above the Social Security cap—billionaires pay the same amount as someone making less than $118,000—or raising the Social Security tax itself. There has, however, been a bipartisan effort for a payroll tax to help keep Social Security funded. For now, Congress will deliberate on Johnson’s proposal in 2017.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-in...222200857.html
They should slowly increase the age for SS - we are living longer now. It's the least painful way.
Hillary would disagree with you, wouldn't she?
Though I don't like what it means for me personally, I agree with you. But then I'm not a silly lib expecting cradled to grave coverage by our Nanny state system.
Haven't read it yet, but here is a snippet from a 30 page do ent:
The proposal includes fifteen basic provisions with direct effects on the OASDI program. The following list briefly identifies each provision:
1) For retired worker and disabled worker beneficiaries becoming initially eligible in January 2023 or later, phase in a new benefit formula (from 2023 to 2032). Replace the existing two PIA bend points with three new bend points and modified benefit formula factors.
2) Use an annualized “mini-PIA” formula beginning with retired and disabled worker beneficiaries becoming newly eligible in 2023, phased in over 10 years. The mini-PIA calculation would use a single year’s average monthly indexed earnings (mini-AIME) and primary insurance amount (mini-PIA) for each year with taxable earnings.
3) Replace the current-law Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) with a new calculation for most OASI and DI benefits based on covered and non-covered earnings, phased in for beneficiaries becoming newly eligible in 2023 through 2032.
4) After the normal retirement age (NRA) reaches 67 for those attaining age 62 in 2022, increase the NRA by 3 months per year starting for those attaining age 62 in 2023 until it reaches 69 for those attaining age 62 in 2030. Increase the age up to which delayed retirement credits may be earned from 70 to 72 on the same schedule.
5) Beginning with the December 2018 COLA, provide no COLA for those with modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) above specific thresholds and compute the COLA using the chain-weighted version of the CPI-U (C-CPI-U) for all other beneficiaries.
6) For spouses and children of retired workers and disabled workers becoming newly eligible beginning in 2023 and phased in for 2023 through 2032, limit their auxiliary benefit to the amount based on one-half of the PIA of a hypothetical worker with earnings equal to the national average wage index (AWI) each year up to his or her eligibility year, and who has the same eligibility year as the worker.
7) Beginning in January 2019, require full time school enrollment as a condition of eligibility for child benefits at age 15 up to 18.
8) Provide a new minimum benefit for workers with more than 10 years of covered earnings above a specified level, phased in for retired and disabled worker beneficiaries becoming newly eligible in 2023 through 2032.
9) Beginning in January 2019, eliminate the retirement earnings test for all beneficiaries under NRA.
10) Eliminate federal income taxation of OASDI benefits that is credited to the OASI and DI Trust Funds for 2054 and later, phased in from 2045 to 2053.
11) Provide an option to split the 8-percent delayed retirement credit (DRC) to offer a lump sum benefit at initial en lement equivalent to 2 of the 8 percent DRC earned, and a 6 percent DRC on subsequent monthly benefits, effective for workers attaining age 62 in 2023 and later.
12) Beginning in January 2023, provide an addition to monthly benefits for all beneficiaries who have been eligible for at least 20 years. The additional amount is calculated based on 5 percent of the PIA for a hypothetical worker with earnings equal to the national average wage index each year.
13) Beginning in January 2023, for new and current disabled widow(er) beneficiaries, change the requirement that disability must occur no later than 7 years after the worker’s death, or after surviving spouse with child-in-care benefits were last payable, to no later than 10 years.
14) Beginning in January 2023, for new and current disabled surviving spouse beneficiaries, eliminate the requirement to be age 50 or older for receipt of benefits.
15) Beginning in January 2023, for new and current beneficiaries, waive the two-year duration of divorce requirement for divorced spouse benefit eligibility in cases where the worker (former spouse) remarries someone other than the claimant before the two-year period has elapsed.
Link from SSA dot gov: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/SJohnson_20161208.pdf
I wish Shazbot and others wouldn't be so lazy. Is it too much to ask, to accompany a thread with good links?
Here is where the progress of the bill will reside:
link: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-...6489/text?r=37
As of 12/10/2016 text has not been received for H.R.6489 - To preserve Social Security for generations to come, reward work, and improve retirement security. \n\n Bills are generally sent to the Library of Congress from GPO, the Government Publishing Office, a day or two after they are introduced on the floor of the House or Senate. Delays can occur when there are a large number of bills to prepare or when a very large bill has to be printed.
cutting SS reduces US obligation to people who depend on SS, freeing up $Ts of govt obligations for more tax cutting the wealthy/BigCorp.
Another tactic is to give people the option, maybe force them, to put some or all of their SS contributions into Wall St (aka privatization) where $100Bs of can pilfered over the decades. state and union pension funds have figured out hedge funds have been secretly fleecing them and have started pulling the $100Bs out of hedge funds.
Imagine if people had put their 401K funds into SS instead of "failed" 401K
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/03/20/l-it-...a-failure.html
http://www.forbes.com/forbes/welcome...ww.google.com/
of course, 401Ks haven't "failed" for 401K fund managers who have fleeced Americans for $100Bs in fees.
With the VRWC/1% Repugs, ALWAYS assume incorrigible BAD FAITH and LYING.
Bend over, I'll show you a big enchilada.
#6 I wonder why they want to de-couple what a spouse gets based on the worker (usually you get 1/2 of what worker gets). Maybe Congress thinks that they're all trophy wives with husbands who earn huge amounts? This will especially hurt a spouse who is divorced after decades of staying at home taking care of kids (and doesn't have his/her own benefit).
#8 I guess they mean LOWER the benefit.
Honestly I have no idea why I am paying into social security when I will never get that money back. Either shore it up or give me a private option. I get that most people aren't responsible enough for a private option so make it a completely inaccessible account until you hit 65. I shouldn't have to pay for government incompetence
Exactly. SS needs to be fully privatized
"I will never get that money back"
You Lie
Where is the money going to come from? All the "trust fund" has is a bunch of IOU's. The US will either have to have a load of real revenue to pay off all those IOU's or just keep borrowing and increasing the national debt.
From the US govt, like always.
You assholes support tax avoidance and evasion by the 1%/BigCorp/BigFinance, wasting $600B on military that can't win , while supporting cutting the entire social safety net.
G F Y
Yeah if they fix our and the govt remains solvent. But I still don't get the same returns I could get by managing my own.
US govt can't go bankrupt, won't default, won't fail to pay SS. Y'all's beloved fantasies and ed up priorities are beyond insane.
So we can just spend indefinitely and there's nothing to worry about, gotcha. Why not just borrow more money and give it to the poor to even out income inequality? Or plant money trees on federal land
No doubt they can print the 'money" to pay the IOU's. The question is, what will the "money" be worth? Funny thing Boo, my will be taken care of without SS...will yours?
no that's why he's on here raving like a lunatic. If he put half the effort into something fruitful he'd be set. Let him wallow in his own
yeah, yeah, we've heard. Your financial is bigger than anybody else's. Congrat, now go whine about your taxes and go suck yourself.
I think people should be allowed to fail. Our grandparents are so frugal because they witnessed people who failed and why they failed. People today need to see that you can indeed starve to death, that you can be homeless, that you can be without medical help. It might take some years, but eventually people would learn to take care of themselves or they would die off.
Need to get rid of charity soup houses as well. You need to tell these religious Christian nuts to quit feeding and housing these folks. And while you are at it the charity medical clinics wtf... Good thing the Doctors Without Borders go elsewhere.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
