You refer to an "agreement the people and government made.", as if it was some sort of contract between two parties. The "people" (Congress) and the "government" (also Congress) are one in the same. Social Security was originally set up to pay benefits beginning at age 65, as you say. The life expectancy back then was around age 70, and SS was only expected to pay benefits for 5-10 years. As Americans began living longer and longer (life expectancy for a 65-yr-old today is about another 15-20 years), it made/makes perfect sense to increase the age to receive full benefits. For people age 53 and younger today, the full retirement age is currently 67. And since our life expectancies keep creeping upward, increasing the full retirement age is a necessity.


I fully support periodic increases in the full retirement age (by we, the people (Congress)).

I agree! The current (2013) "Guide to Social Security" clearly states that:

"To qualify for disability benefits, you must be so severely impaired, physically or mentally, that you cannot perform any substantial gainful work. The impairment must be expected to last at least 12 months or result in death and based on medical evidence. Disability benefits are not payable to people disabled solely due to alcoholism or drug addiction."

Yet so, so many people are collecting SS disability benefits who don't meet those criteria. Massive fraud is surely occurring! I don't have the data handy, but I recall seeing within the last few years that the rate at which people have applied for SS disability has sky-rocketed since the 2008 financial collapse. Same thing goes for Medicaid. There are billions and billions of dollars being paid out through SS disability and Medicaid to people who -- if truth be told -- don't qualify for it.

But...rather than slash the SS disability and Medicaid budgets without discrimination, we (the U.S. govt) should spend a couple of billion to hire investigators to uncover fraudulent claims. I support both of these programs, but let's do them right.

Corporate subsidies and fraudulent Medicaid claims by the wealthy are two places to start (right alongside with fraudulent claims by the unemployed and poor). Do GE and Exxon-Mobile really need government subsidies? Do the wealthy -- who fraudulently falsely impoverish themselves to qualify for Medicaid nursing home care (and it happens a lot - there's a whole legal industry devoted to it) -- really need the government to pay for their care?

Congress always tries to enact new laws, when what the government should be doing is enforcing existing laws.

LOL! I know the news that bin Laden was killed by U.S. forces under Obama's direction happened late in the evening, but were you asleep?

Unbelievable!

Whatamess wrote:

I personally hope they pay for reelecting that crook.

_________________________

Reelecting? McAuliffe has never won an elected office before.

Unfortunately, the reality is that the vast majority of Americans of all ages aren't able to vote intelligently either. Those "Jaywalking" bits with man-on-the-street interviews show just how dumb typical Americans are. They fall for whatever politicians tell the best lies. One bit I saw recently asked passersby first if they approved of Obamacare, then asked if they preferred the Affordable Care Act. The majority of them said they preferred the Affordable Care Act. They knew nothing more than the derisive terms associated with Obamacare and the appealing nature of the word "Affordable."

I'm not sure whether 18-yr-olds are smart enough or mature enough to vote intelligently, but I have no doubt that the vast majority of Americans of all ages aren't well-read enough about the issues of the day to vote intelligently about them.