That is already done.
Besides, no discussion of SS is complete without the realization that the SS Trust Fund is a fiction; SS is a cash flow program commingled with general funds. Whether there's bookkeeping entries one way or the other to the Trust Fund is irrelevant to the finances of the country, although not the politics.
No kidding.
Still, insisting that the parent of the baby be legally in the country is a pretty low bar. Not even insisting that they be citizens, just here legally. Thats not much to ask.
The SS money was robbed and the pyramid is going upside down, so raise the age or expect a 73% payment.
Polls are very clear. The American People are with Trump on immigration.
Unfortunately they are with Bernie Sanders on Social Security. They don’t want it touched. They want benefits increased. They want the EEEEVIL rich to pay for it.
As for raising the retirement age, they have to decide. If the money is mine, its mine. If its not mine, then its charity. Which is it?
If we went back to the original intent of Roosevelts SS scheme we’d need to raise the eligibility age to 76 because that is the current average life expectancy for U.S. males. When SS was begun the average male lifespan in the US was 65 therefore statistically SS would never have to pay out more than it took in.
Retirement age is problematical for Americans who work with their backs. I am 64 in a month and though still in good shape the 200 pound lifts are not like they used to be. I have no plans at all to retire but the insurance people told me that maybe 1% of people who had back surgery similar to mine return to work.I believe it not because the rehab was not successful to a point but because the memory of and constant reminder of intolerable pain was enough to almost dissuade an independent guy like myself from returning to the same kind of work.
As for anchor babies, it is a magnet attracting illegals and needs to be legislated out of existence for unlawful trespassers.
Raising the retirement age doesn’t have to be done to make Social Security solvent: The growth of benefits for people with high lifetime earnings could instead be moderated. That will have to be done anyway, even if the retirement age is raised. (Obviously, I’m not considering raising it to 100. Then, it’s true, you’d have a nice surplus.) And trying to raise the retirement age opens you up to a potent line of attack–what about the guy who’s had to do backbreaking labor all his life?–that changing the benefits formula wouldn’t. Notice that Paul Krugman, in attacking Republicans this week for being willing to make Social Security solvent, merely mentions the idea of changing the formula and concentrates his fire on the retirement-age proposal.
So Ramesh just wants to means test SS and redistribute benefits. In other words he wants to perpetuate the Ponzi scheme. Why not personal accounts and privatization? Why not reduce benefits or increase taxes or both to make the system solvent?
Merely end birthright citizenship, and there would still be a lot of illegal immigration. To get it down to tolerable levels you’d still have to impose e-verify requirements for new hires, build a border wall or walls, and crack down on visa overstayers; and if you did those things, there would be a lot fewer illegal immigrants with citizen-children. Going after birthright citizenship also puts conservatives on weak ground. Notice how much advocates of liberal immigration policies have wanted to make illegal immigrants’ children the subject all along.
Birthright citizenship is not a minor issue. One out of every 10 children in this country is born to an illegal alien. 300,000 to 400,000 born every year combined with 1.1 million legal permanent immigrants a year and 640,000 guest workers.
They become US citizens eligible for Medicaid, food stamps, housing assistance. etc. When they reach 21 they can sponsor their relatives to join them. At 18 they can sponsor a spouse. These are enormous costs and hurt our social safety net. As it is, 40% of all children born in the US are funded by Medicaid. One third of all children in poverty are children of immigrants, legal and illegal. Our schools and hospitals are being overrun.
They can also vote. Immigrants vote more than two to one Dem.
We can chew gum and walk at the same time. We can have e-verify and track down visa over stayers. We can also pass a law eliminating birthright citizenship. We are only one of two developed countries that still has it.
Duh. Hiding behind the skirts of women and children is all they know. The Left is all about emotional appeals (including intimidation, eg the Race Card). They have nothing else. Logic, history, human nature, and reason are not on their side.
National Review IS the GOPe. I can barely stand to read them anymore. And they are supposedly our elite opinion makes.
So, Ponnuru outs himself as a RINO on immigration.
It is articles such as this one which prompted me to sever my relationship with NR and cancel my subscription several years ago.
Sure, and they will make sure there are jobs for white American
males nearing retirement age.
Well if your name is Rammesh Ponneru, the article makes perfect sense.
This krap is being driven by polling reflecting a 60’s lifstyle philosophy which is what’s wtong with the GOPES.
“Merely end birthright citizenship, and there would still be a lot of illegal immigration.”
This guy should visit hospitals along the border (he can start in McAllen, Texas) to see how many pregnant women come there from across the border specifically to ensure their kid is a US citizen. Happens every day.
I am so sick of these do nothing establishment dopes.
I just looked up the author - Ramesh Ponnuru. Wikipedia calls him ‘conservative’....