Posted on 02/03/2019 7:09:40 PM PST by Theoria
After years of Republican-led debate over how to pare back Social Security’s rising costs, Democrats are flipping the script with an ambitious plan to expand the New Deal-era social insurance program while making gradual changes to keep it solvent for the rest of the century.
The Social Security 2100 Act, which was introduced this past week in the House and the Senate, represents a sea change after decades dominated by concern that aging baby boomers would bankrupt the government as they begin drawing benefits from Social Security and other entitlement programs. It would be the first major expansion of Social Security since 1972 and the most significant change in the program since 1983, when Congress stepped in to avert a financial crisis by raising taxes and the eligibility age for Social Security.
The bill would provide an across-the-board benefit increase equivalent to about 2 percent of the average Social Security benefit. It would raise the annual cost-of-living adjustment to reflect the fact that older Americans tend to use more of some services like health care. And it would increase the minimum benefit to ensure that workers with many years of low earnings do not retire into poverty.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Not an account but a record. Your SS ststement has every dime you put in.
Except for those whose earning power is slowly waning, like those in their seventies for instance. That Social Security check, small as it may be, looks pretty secure when it arrives on time every month.
I get Social Security now, and I’m not due one penny more thanI get right now.
Democrats: FU
Take yourivide and conquer tactics and shove them.
I’m reading the full article and I’m not that opposed to the plan as described. It would raise taxes on billionaires. I used to think that was wrong. But billionaires, from both the right and the left, are now the enemies of the American people, pushing for open borders, turning all America into deep-blue California. Let them be taxed to make the senior years less dismal for the people they lay off or rob of jobs through their cheap labor express machine.
If people “planned” for retirement by planning to become a ward of the state, whose fault is that?
for those whose earning power is slowly waning, like those in their seventies for instance.
You think only people in their seventies are experiencing waning earning power? With the open-borders globalists importing low-wage workers from the Third World, and laying off Americans left and right, wage growth has been stagnant for a generation. Because of this social damage done by callous billionaires, I support taxing them to help out the millions of people they’ve harmed.
And the good witch Pelosi is waving to us from a gingerbread house.
Then you will have paid in all those years for nothing.
There are a lot of people with over $100 million—many more than the billionaires. The Times just published the figures on page 3, yesterday or today. Aside from the fact that they are greedy pigs, what is the justification for this when we have so many down and out, defaulting on their cards, etc.?
I’m not a socialist. I think people should be more generous privately when they know someone is in need.
I have a friend who was a self-employed barber all his life. He never paid into SS. His problem was that he had an addiction to gambling and retired, as far as I can tell, with nothing. Bad scenario.
If people “planned” for retirement
Millions of people have been “retired” involuntarily as globalists have imported low-wage Third Worlders to replace them, or off-shored their jobs to China and India. the pre-Trump Republican party said “who cares”? But Trump promised to help these people, and not to cut their Social Security. He was booed when he made that promise at GOP debates, because the old GOP couldn’t give a damn about displace blue collar workers. Trump was different, and he won the Industrial Midwest as a result. Cutting Social Security would be a betrayal of Trump’s message - and he won’t let it happen.
I know there are others, but we were talking about those getting old-age benefits.
I made a deal with the government 48 years ago ( not by choice). Either you made a deal or you where forced into it but not both. But it doesn’t matter though because you did not do anything. Your money was taken by the government just like any tax is taken. Now you wish to have you money by the government to continue taking it from someone else.
It wasn’t borrowed it was taken. It isn’t an entitlement it is welfare.
There is no employee/employer split which is just a myth. The entire tax is born by the employee. They must earn (i.e. be worth) the entire amount of wages, taxes, and benefits that are incurred by them.
A new special tax on all incoming aliens that goes directly into the Social Security fund. It is a progressive tax based on age. Illegal aliens will not qualify for Social Security payments, ever. Aliens caught illegally working will be taxed 100 percent on their net income, to go directly to the SS fund, and deported without any recompense. After an as-yet determined date, qualification to be a future recipient for SS benefits will be ended and SS taxation will fund other existing recipients. The scam will end.
It isn’t an entitlement it is welfare.
If you consider it welfare, don’t take it in any form - not as a traditional benefit, not as a lump sum. I don’t view it as welfare, but as a government-operated insurance program.
“End Social Security. Don’t phase it out. Don’t privatize it. End it. Stop collecting the taxes. “
That is fine, just send me back all the (my) money I was forced to pay over my lifetime with interest.
” lifelong parasites.”
Where is your head? It was MY money they took.
Too many more who paid little or nothing into it are being ushered to front of the chow line.
The only logical solution is to pick an age (say, 60) where paid in obligations will be paid as promised and for those under 60, then pick a number (say 2.5% per year) where benefits will be reduced.
97.5% for 59 year olds, 95% for 58 year olds and so on. It is totally privatized in 40 years.
Chile did something similar and unleashed enough investment capital to rocket from just above third world status in 1975 to first world status today. It not only can be done, it has been done.
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.