lpnmajor wrote:
Yep, nanobot rejuvenation. Just around the horizon. Can you imagine a world full of nothing but uber rich people? Who the hell would they prey on then?
what will they do for bodies?
isn't it just their heads that are froze?
Who are you trying to kid trump has said many he will not cut ss or medicare.why dont you find out the truth before you open your mouth.
badbobby wrote:
great news Seniors
for those who are existing on Social Security
for the most of you your 3% increase for 2017 wont cover the increases in your Social Security and other insurance that covers the 20% that Social Security does not pay.
then when you add in the insurance that covers your drugs,it's even more of a blow.
It's getting harder and harder to be old
Becoming old is no problem at all.
Being old is the problem.
Pennylynn wrote:
When I first saw the release from SS Admin, I too thought it read 3 percent... which as you noted, would not pay for an extra loaf of bread .... but a .3 percent is an insult to seniors.
We are fortunate Congress didn't take the .3% also. I guess it is only because they didn't think of it in time.
Nothing more could or should be said, your observation is spot on!
PoppaGringo wrote:
Becoming old is no problem at all. Being old is the problem.
Unbelievable, put congress voted themselves a raise this year with their approval rate at 23%. Try that in the real world!!
Term limitation needs to be set in motion!
Merry Christmas to all🇺🇸🙏🏻
And obama demanded and received an 18 percent increase in retirement pay for presidents leaving office.. Former President Act.... So while he gets a thousands in his retirement pay... you will get by somehow on less than nothing....
.
Bun723 wrote:
Unbelievable, put congress voted themselves a raise this year with their approval rate at 23%. Try that in the real world!!
Term limitation needs to be set in motion!
Merry Christmas to all🇺🇸🙏🏻
I believe you have it wrong, it is 0.3 % for 2017!
badbobby wrote:
great news Seniors
for those who are existing on Social Security
for the most of you your 3% increase for 2017 wont cover the increases in your Social Security and other insurance that covers the 20% that Social Security does not pay.
then when you add in the insurance that covers your drugs,it's even more of a blow.
It's getting harder and harder to be old
Ask the people of Chile how their privatization of their retirement system has worked for them, Blade.
In the fall of 2000, a theater in Santiago’s Bellavista district featured the play Con Flores Amarillas, the story of a computer hacker who breaks into the accounts of Chile’s big banks to send checks to the poor, to Mapuche Indians—and to retirees. The inclusion of retirees among those aided by this fictional, high-tech Robin Hood reflects a growing awareness among Chileans that the privatized social security system bequeathed to them by General Augusto Pinochet may not be all it was cracked up to be. The tale may hold lessons for the United States as well as the rest of Latin America.
But from the perspective of many Chileans, the system has shown itself to be more problematic: Many working people are never able to pay in enough to qualify for the minimum retirement income. Many others risk seeing their retirement funds decimated by stock market downturns. The few private companies that make up the system are able to wield oligopoly power; they charge hefty fees and make large profits. And the new system has not, in fact, reduced the burden on the public treasury, which continues to pay out large sums for retirement benefits.
http://nacla.org/article/retiring-free-market-chiles-privatized-social-securityThe solution to the funding crisis of SS would be fairly simple if politics weren't standing in the way. Growing income inequality is one reason the problem has gotten worse faster. While wages for most Americans have stagnated over the past three decades, earnings for the top 2 percent have increased dramatically (95% of income gains during obammy's rule has gone to the wealthy 1%). That means an increasing percentage of earnings fall outside the wage cap for payroll taxes. Simple solution - eliminating the wage cap altogether would close 75 percent of the long-term funding gap.
Then raise the payroll tax from 6.2% to 7.2% over a 20 year period. This would mean about .50 cents per week for an employee making $50,000/year.
Then pass a law (ha ha) that would make it illegal for politicians to continue to steal...er...loot...er...raid, whatever, the excess (when there is one again) SS funds to offset their overspending.
The missing decimal point was already mentioned on page 1.....
Does anyone read threads before they make observations? Lately, I see a lot of this along with duplicate threads....
danang wrote:
I believe you have it wrong, it is 0.3 % for 2017!
Obama never asked for raise for his retirement,thats just more bs,like his mother inlaw getting a 160.000 dollar pension.
roy wrote:
Obama never asked for raise for his retirement,thats just more bs,like his mother inlaw getting a 160.000 dollar pension.
Yeah, roy, that's like Congress getting its automatic pay raise EVERY year UNLESS they vote NOT to take it. LOL That way they can lie to you idiot moonbats and say they did not vote themselves a pay raise.
Sorry, it was already mentioned on P1! Just keeping you guys sharp!
woffie: Who let you out of your troll hole?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.