We pay a tax for Social Security. That money needs to be put in an interest bareing account and used only for Social Security.
If those benefuts are cut off from the next generation there will be a huge class action lawsuit to get all that money back they took from us. It is considered a contract.
“We pay a tax for Social Security. That money needs to be put in an interest bareing account and used only for Social Security.”
It already is - in US Treasuries!
BTW, ‘Angels27’ - anything to do with Mike Trout or just coincidence?
That honestly doesn’t help.
Just like the looming issue with 401K’s, when a larger amount of money is being taken out of the accounts than going in, the accounts won’t perform well.
Unless you mean true savings accounts, which would be a net loss of value with inflation.
Unfortunately, that money was spent on all sorts of things, and is gone.
Actually it’s not a contract. There have already been lawsuits about it, the money belongs to the government, you are owed not one penny, they can do with it as they will.
I would say that it has been debated, but the wistful assertion that a way to fund the program is a crappy defense of the program, and the solution of printing fiat money was always what it was going to come down to.
There is no solution.
It is inherently insolvent.
There are zero victims.
The voters have rejected plan after plan which would have privatized the system.
Those who will receive Nothing after paying in for years will deserve the nothing they will get.
Including me, and including you.
I have no valid defense, and neither do you.
No offense, but what planet are you living on?
“It is considered a contract.”
Wrong. See Fleming v Nestor.
L
In other words,
the U.S. Constitution has the takings clause
covers Social Security default.
Re: “It is considered a contract.”
It may be a “political” contract, but Social Security and Medicare are absolutely not “legal” contracts.
Congress, with the president’s signature, can terminate both of those programs any time they want to.
LOL. You are 50 years too late for that.
You mean it's like......NEKKID!
This must be one of those accounts that strips away all the principle, and leave the interest hanging out there in its birthday suit.
You are correct, but the amount of money-printing that may be required to pay those benefits in the future, could destroy the country, in the future.
The steadfast insistence of the nation to even consider the mildest reforms to the benefit structure, a penny a month lower benefit next year, is a sign of the stupidity and insanity of Socialism. Thanks.