Look at the voting RECORD of Paul Ryan . Some people do research .
Do you need to replay the media tapes ? Yes , Republican economic guru , Paul Ryan , served on the Simpson / Bowles Commission and immediately voted AGAINST IT because it closed tax loopholes . Revenue increases .
You can expect the Republicans to continue there long standing of protecting tax loopholes to the wealthiest among us . The Koch brothers and Exxon do .
Cantor , for lack of political correctness , is a hedge fund stooge known for his lunches with the managers and has been a leader in the effort TO STALL WALL ST. REFORM ... Because of people like Eric Cantor the " too big to fail " banks are BIGGER than ever and with Glass / Steagal gone they invent new " financial instruments " every year .
Both men cow tow to the banking lobbyists .
Another subject for you to research ...

They counted for the sixty years it ran a surplus. Now, however, it runs a 170 billion deficit every year. It runs out of money in 2033. Then benefits will be cut roughly 25% unless contributions are increased. Lifting the cap on earnings is one approach as you note. Means testing benefits is another. Reining in the COLA is another. But social security is peanuts. The big one is medicare. That one has projected liabilities of 73 trillion. That one single program is going to bankrupt us unless we deal with it head on.

Dummy Boy - Your parents are very blessed that they have several means of income and I truly hope that they have a good return for their payments made into SS. I only have the one means of SS that is paid to me and continue praying from month to month that I can make all of required payments in order to live.
If the government takes away my SS, I then have to have my family support me. That is not fair. I am 70 years old, disabled, and sometimes in a wheelchair. I cannot work. My income would be $0.

In reply to Quizzal on the subject of federal pirating of the Social Security Trust. The unfortunate truth is that the masters of smoke and mirrors, without regard to purported political affiliation, cannot stand to see resources sit idle. The intent of the Social Security system was to afford survival funds for those Americans who are unable, resulting from advanced age or disability, to have the meager existence that such resources can supply. As America is a Republic loosely based upon democratic principles, the effect of the election process weighs heavily upon the distribution of resources. If one researches the structure of the national debt one will find the bulk of the publicly held portion of that debt is held by various retirement fund trusts, such as the Social Security Trust. This nation's "esteemed" leaders would have the public believe that Social Security is an entitlement or welfare program rather than a subsistence which is levied as a payroll deduction or forced retirement program throughout ones working lifetime. The thought train offered by the government leadership is that the multitudes who have paid into the trust for decades should not receive any return on funds taken on the pretense of return when one can no longer pay in.

Since when did they adopt the phrase of teabagger as homophobic . I guess that is another part of the gay agenda to redefine the English language as they see fit . Absolutely pathetic ... First off , the TEA Party as they called themselves was Taxed Enough Already . A definition that needed no interpretation . Secondly I will assume for the sake of argument , since you brought it up , that you are referring to a sexual act that needs no defining . That particular act has been around for a very long time and as a straight recipient I can say is very enjoyable . Yea , girls do it too ... Who's " phobic " now ?
Keep your comments on topic so this site doesn't turn into another Yahoo answers ...
The TEA Party has been hijacked and set off course by the Koch money and the stupidity of a single issue stopping the ACA . Koch bought and paid for the Cruzade because one thing any Koch wants off the table is HIS government subsidies in the form off huge tax loopholes . Hopefuilly the TEA Party can find someone without the baggage of Cruz , Lee , Bachmann , et al whose only cause is publicity and the diversion of the Koch message and get back to the original intent OF CLOSING TAX LOOPHOLES that are currently $ 2.8 trillion a year that rob the treasury of " We The People " . I as an Independent surely would support such serious effort . Why people don't stand up and demand a proposal such as Simpson / Bowles is a mystery politically . We don't need to change the Constitution and their diversion of a balanced budget amendment , we need to change Washington ...

You have no idea why the % is important? What if it were a hundred %? What would it mean if it were 0.05%? (40% of children made poor choices being born?)

Anderson Cooper, before he came out, used that snide slur to describe honest American citizens that he wanted to insult. If you don't know that, so be it, but that is the origin of using that particular intended insult for the Taxed Enough Already supporters.

I, too, am straight - and I did not start this - a gay liberal did.

The idea that the Koch brothers have hijacked the tea party movement has no more validity that the allegation that Soros hijacked the Obama movement. Both are mindless attempts to keep people from thinking of issues and focusing on personalities and envy.

As an independent I too support Simpson-Bowles - and let's remember who has the most responsibility to advance such ideas - the president who asked them to make the recommendations, not the Koch Brothers (or Soros).

Why must the government always put the topic of "Social Security" as one of their main topics about cutting finances? They should not have anything at all to do with what belongs to any senior person at all. We need a separate business (or whatever) to handle everything for social security and the federal government needs "HANDS OFF" completely. Their finances should be handled by the income tax received only and nothing more. The government has no right to continually throw social security in our face all of the time. Social security belongs to all of the seniors who have paid in it for years and years - not the federal government.

What did you pay into S.S.? What are you owed? The average recipient paid in far less than their entitlement. I'm not suggesting that it is fair, but what is unfair are those who have no need for such benefits due to other income "streams". Each department needs to offer real savings. The SSA needs to start negotiating those benefits-look at this way, sounds to me like you need more money. Why should my parents receive that same amount of money, in that, he has 3 other income streams? How is that fair to you. The social security administration has misused these funds long enough and it needs to stop.