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 ...
I think we’ve pretty much wasted each other’s time here. You’re not going to change my mind, nor will I change yours.
You do what you have to do and I shall do what I have to do.
How about cutting out handouts to able-bodied people who are on the take for generations. There’s the biggest problem.
The other welfare
A legacy of unintended side effects
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/12/12/with_ssi_program_a_legacy_of_unintended_side_effects/?page=1
An excerpt:
As the Globe investigated the surge in SSI cases — mostly by visiting housing projects, Social Security offices, and downtown districts — many parents were reluctant to talk, fearful of losing this coveted benefit. Still, some two dozen families agreed to be interviewed, in part to vent their frustration at what they perceive to be the government’s arbitrary approval process in mental disability cases. Some wanted only their first names to be used as they described their persistent efforts to figure out what Social Security wanted, and their growing conviction that medication for the child was a critical step.
Waiting on a bench in a rundown commercial strip of Lawrence, Yessenia was among the frustrated.
The 28-year-old woman said late last summer that she will be trying, for the third time, to obtain SSI payments for her 7-year-old son based on his ADHD symptoms: impulsivity and inattention.
Yessenia said she is convinced her son’s first two applications were rejected because she had nothing to list in the section labeled “medications.” But in recent months, she has convinced the boy’s doctor to write a prescription. Her son is now taking a stimulant often used for ADHD.
“If you child doesn’t have medications, the SSI office thinks he doesn’t have any big problem,” she said.
Yessenia and her extended family have long experience with the SSI program. As a child, she said, she qualified for SSI based primarily because of learning disabilities, and after her 18th birthday, she requalified as an adult on the same basis. Her older sister, diagnosed with bipolar disorder, has been receiving SSI benefits since childhood.
Yessenia said she has other reasons to be optimistic that her son’s new application will be approved.
“Since he was denied all the time, the therapist said she’d give him another diagnosis, and that’s when she said he’s got depression,” said the mother, who has yet to submit the new application. “She’s also recommending another drug.”
Easy solution, just eliminate COLA to all recipients with household income above the poverty line. Reduce starting benefits 10% for (2011) age 65, 11% age 64, etc. Raise retirement age to actuarial life expectancy plus one year or legitimate disability.
Over time, all recipients will be limited to payments providing only enough to live at just above the poverty line.
This should result in enough savings that FICA can be lowered until Social Security becomes what it should have been all along - Old Age Insurance. That should cost about 2% from each the employer and the employee on the first 100K of income.
Privatize everything else using Chile as a model. Social Security payouts should not be a source of retirement income for anybody, it should only be enough to keep you from starving. Anything above that level should be based on your personal initiative and the family and community you cultivate during your life.
I’ll give you an alternative view while I zip up my asbestos suit here.
There is some validity to Linda’s position. But making the wealthy pay a percentage of their income and then paying them a lesser percentage at a later time is indeed a tax increase. There are no if’s, and’s or but’s about that, and it’s wrong. But the idea of paying less to people who don’t depend on it for their sustenance is not a bad idea. It’s really no different from the notion of not paying people to not work at all or do pump out kids they can’t afford that the rest of us pick up the tab for. It’s all wasteful and doesn’t need to be if we just say, “Hell NO!”
Cash out those with incomes high enough that they would be impacted down the road by reductions with a lump-sum refund of what they paid in and a reasonable interest rate on what they paid in and leave them to their own devices, which is probably what they wanted in the first place way back when. Raise the retirement age and change the entire structure of SSI and all the other welfare programs attached to the social security program umbrella. Completely revamp the entire program with the focus strictly on waste and fraud. After restrucuring and implementing new safeguards, fire half the federal SSA staff, delete those jobs and cut the SSA budget in half.
Now, fire away!!!! ;)
There.
Go after illegals, cull the welfare rolls, quit subsidizing pet projects, no more foreign aid, no more foreign bases, etc...
I agree totally. Thanks for the reply. When I hear the incompetent politicians who have over the last 30 years succeeded in sending the greatest manufacturing economy on Earth to China, and say their pet pork project or foreign aid only represents 1% of GDP or budget it drives me nuts. These are compromised corrupt fools for the most part.
We need symbolism of austerity from everyone in government and we need real expense cuts. BUT before Americans are cut we must end foreign aid (and Federal Reserve handouts) to every other and that includes Israel, Ireland, Germany, Egypt and all of our so called allies. We need to end the entitlements to them now and get rid of the military bases unless they pay us fully for our defense costs.
Politicians work only for lobbyists, elitists and big NY money interests and they do not care about average law abiding hard working citizens. I'm in pretty good shape financially only because I've always been fiscally conservative and invested conservatively and I live beneath my means, and most importantly have lived in the USA instead of Somalia. The latter is a real big deal when I hear some people tout just how wonderful they are in getting rich. Had they lived in Somalia they'd have nothing. They OWE this country big time.
Illegals are a huge entitlement expense for health, education, etc and they are here only because they work cheap and provide profits to corrupt businesses. End the jobs and entitlements and they will go back home and it would save us more billions. I'm for hanging the employers of these people and that will stop it. I don't trust Rs to take care of this and never the Ds. Sorry for the length of this but it really ticks me off that the politicals such as Graham etc are honing in on Americans first instead of the foreign interests sucking and living on our dole.
I hear you.
OK, you're fired. Wow, that wasn't that hard at all...
I believe he’s gone.
I do think it’s a nice gesture, but it is ultimately pointless either way. Congressional salaries are currently at $174,000 a year (if I remember correctly). Most congressmen are fairly wealthy as it is. No one will be woken up to do anything.
Here's the conservative way.
1.) Stop FICA collection.
2.)Cash everybody out based on a minimal annuity value and not the ponzi scheme value.
3.)Make everyone, across the board, pay for the ponzi scheme shortfall.
The joke's on you.
Did you keep voting for the same politicians who spent your SS/Medicare "contributions" on pointless exercises in Big Government, and yes, that includes (but is not limited to) a bloated, top-heavy military organization and countless foreign entanglements and adventures)?
The problems inherent in Social Security and in Medicare has been known for decades, yet nobody did anything about them. Unfortunately, it's far too late in the game for a nice, painless "solution," and I can assure you that younger Americans with actual brains won't stick around to get raped by Fedzilla like their predecessors did.
Excellent point. It would be very misleading when such a mere pittance means nothing to them. They need to be hit in such away as to feel the pain.
LOLOL!
68% of "younger Americans", voters in the 18 to 24 age group, voted for Obama.
I wish you were correct but I see the once great independent culture of us Americans as being brainwashed and hijacked by a consolidated corporate media, big government and a corrupt bunch of politicians. Some think that this guy has it nailed. Warning it ain’t pretty and don’t watch if you don’t like 4 letter words. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
Precisely, and the same principle was mentioned above. For sure, the fact that 100K$ was paid in is no guarantee of receiving 100K out. That is actuarial, and is central to the whole system. But yes, reduce the payouts across the board according to what was paid in, in terms of the pot at a given point in time. Now there should be some provision for the freeloaders; however, it should not be over weighted to screw-up the system. Freeloader payout should not based on kids, or any other parasitic criteria. One adult = one payout as an adult, and as a freeloader, at a very minimal level (nothing that invokes motivation to do so).
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.