One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Should we tax billionaires to save social security?
Page 1 of 2 next>
Apr 24, 2024 13:31:36   #
XXX Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
 
https://www.newsmax.com/finance/streettalk/social-security-benefits-poll/2024/04/24/id/1162192/

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 13:41:12   #
guzzimaestro
 
XXX wrote:
https://www.newsmax.com/finance/streettalk/social-security-benefits-poll/2024/04/24/id/1162192/


No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The only way to save Social Security is to cut out the fraud, cut out the people that don't need it, ( like those with generous pensions and the billionaires mentioned) and (choke) cutting benefits. I don't like it but that's reality. There are not enough new workers entering the labor pool to support the system. Why? That's a whole other subject. You can start with abject laziness, welfare, automation and democrats penchant for shipping jobs overseas with their ridiculous policies. Vote Republican

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 13:48:00   #
XXX Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
 
guzzimaestro wrote:
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The only way to save Social Security is to cut out the fraud, cut out the people that don't need it, ( like those with generous pensions and the billionaires mentioned) and (choke) cutting benefits. I don't like it but that's reality. There are not enough new workers entering the labor pool to support the system. Why? That's a whole other subject. You can start with abject laziness, welfare, automation and democrats penchant for shipping jobs overseas with their ridiculous policies. Vote Republican
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The o... (show quote)


I agree with everything except the last part. It isn't jazziness as you mentioned but the lack of jobs that pay enough to thwart the inflation caused by Bidenomics.

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2024 13:57:24   #
guzzimaestro
 
XXX wrote:
I agree with everything except the last part. It isn't jazziness as you mentioned but the lack of jobs that pay enough to thwart the inflation caused by Bidenomics.


Yes, lack of GOOD jobs

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 13:58:58   #
AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State
 
guzzimaestro wrote:
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The only way to save Social Security is to cut out the fraud, cut out the people that don't need it, ( like those with generous pensions and the billionaires mentioned) and (choke) cutting benefits. I don't like it but that's reality. There are not enough new workers entering the labor pool to support the system. Why? That's a whole other subject. You can start with abject laziness, welfare, automation and democrats penchant for shipping jobs overseas with their ridiculous policies. Vote Republican
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The o... (show quote)


What should be done is return the program to trust fund status. Congress has used it for pet projects.

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 14:04:08   #
XXX Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
 
guzzimaestro wrote:
Yes, lack of GOOD jobs


Agree

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 14:04:43   #
XXX Loc: Somewhere north of the Mason-Dixon
 
AuntiE wrote:
What should be done is return the program to trust fund status. Congress has used it for pet projects.


Yea but that won't work by it's self

Reply
 
 
Apr 24, 2024 14:05:08   #
guzzimaestro
 
AuntiE wrote:
What should be done is return the program to trust fund status. Congress has used it for pet projects.


Good point. I think LBJ started that back in the sixties

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 15:23:59   #
SeaLass Loc: Western Soviet Socialist Republics
 
AuntiE wrote:
What should be done is return the program to trust fund status. Congress has used it for pet projects.


In a way it already is. The cash the government took out to pay for all their pet projects were replaced with treasury IOU's (surplus fund) which SS is currently drawing down and is expected to be drained in about 8-10 years. At that point SS will be in exactly the same financial bind that would exist if not a nickel of SS taxes had ever been taken out. The root problem is a large population of long-living people drawing SS and much smaller number of people paying into SS, i.e. outgo>income.

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 16:48:30   #
bggamers Loc: georgia
 
SeaLass wrote:
In a way it already is. The cash the government took out to pay for all their pet projects were replaced with treasury IOU's (surplus fund) which SS is currently drawing down and is expected to be drained in about 8-10 years. At that point SS will be in exactly the same financial bind that would exist if not a nickel of SS taxes had ever been taken out. The root problem is a large population of long-living people drawing SS and much smaller number of people paying into SS, i.e. outgo>income.
In a way it already is. The cash the government t... (show quote)


This admin is acting like kids in a candy store they think this country is the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow

Reply
Apr 24, 2024 20:05:07   #
F.D.R.
 
XXX wrote:
https://www.newsmax.com/finance/streettalk/social-security-benefits-poll/2024/04/24/id/1162192/


The cap on income for SS tax should be removed so that Everyone pays in, millionaires and billionaires can afford it.

Reply
 
 
Apr 25, 2024 17:52:36   #
JuristBooks Loc: North Carolina
 
guzzimaestro wrote:
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The only way to save Social Security is to cut out the fraud, cut out the people that don't need it, ( like those with generous pensions and the billionaires mentioned) and (choke) cutting benefits. I don't like it but that's reality. There are not enough new workers entering the labor pool to support the system. Why? That's a whole other subject. You can start with abject laziness, welfare, automation and democrats penchant for shipping jobs overseas with their ridiculous policies. Vote Republican
No. Put simply, it wouldn't be enough money. The o... (show quote)


Sounds pretty good .

Reply
May 1, 2024 16:42:24   #
Oldsalt
 
AuntiE wrote:
What should be done is return the program to trust fund status. Congress has used it for pet projects.


Congress has to repay the trust fund all that it has taken. No foreign aide until it is payed back. Then the system must be over hauled. Those of us on the system MUST be the last on the system. It is obviously a Ponzi scheme. And you can't keep raising the age of retirement. No the money that you pay in MUST be put in your account with a real interest rate that will be paid back to you! If you die before collecting it all the remainder will go into a pot for those that have not earned it. The fraud has to be taken out, more oversight at the local offices. It cannot be operated at the DC level. Hell, they have sent multiple checks to the same address and not questioned it. SSI and the IRS both need to be overhauled. Congress is the responsible party it is on them. Unfortunately they don't care, they are only concerned with lining their own pockets.

Reply
May 1, 2024 17:41:02   #
SeaLass Loc: Western Soviet Socialist Republics
 
Oldsalt wrote:
Congress has to repay the trust fund all that it has taken. No foreign aide until it is payed back. Then the system must be over hauled. Those of us on the system MUST be the last on the system. It is obviously a Ponzi scheme. And you can't keep raising the age of retirement. No the money that you pay in MUST be put in your account with a real interest rate that will be paid back to you! If you die before collecting it all the remainder will go into a pot for those that have not earned it. The fraud has to be taken out, more oversight at the local offices. It cannot be operated at the DC level. Hell, they have sent multiple checks to the same address and not questioned it. SSI and the IRS both need to be overhauled. Congress is the responsible party it is on them. Unfortunately they don't care, they are only concerned with lining their own pockets.
Congress has to repay the trust fund all that it h... (show quote)


Congress (or maybe I should say the treasury) is paying back all of the money it took from SS. Current estimates are that it will be fully paid back sometime around 2033 or 2034, then what? As for multiple payments, I can see the problem when you have to write out what, 2,000,000 checks a day, not hard for things to slip through. No need to keep raising the retirement age, as soon as it gets within a year or two of the average life expectancy things will quickly improve for the SSA, SS recipents, not so much .

Reply
May 2, 2024 09:53:11   #
Oldsalt
 
SeaLass wrote:
In a way it already is. The cash the government took out to pay for all their pet projects were replaced with treasury IOU's (surplus fund) which SS is currently drawing down and is expected to be drained in about 8-10 years. At that point SS will be in exactly the same financial bind that would exist if not a nickel of SS taxes had ever been taken out. The root problem is a large population of long-living people drawing SS and much smaller number of people paying into SS, i.e. outgo>income.
In a way it already is. The cash the government t... (show quote)


So you agree that it is a Ponzi scheme. The hole thing needs an overhaul. Those that are on it should be safe and their benefits continued. Those that are close should have their benefits too. Those that are a couple of decades out need to have the system modified to an investment system that actually grows their payments, and has more to payback than they put in.

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.