|
demiu5
humans, lol


Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: Morel Guy]
#23952458 - 12/23/16 06:16 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
the better option is to send them ALL upriver (or maybe heads-on-stakes), including lobbyists, CxO's of major, socially-/environmentally-destructive corporations, and start anew, with the visible warning of what happens when they fuck around and forget who they're supposedly representing and looking out for
pipe dreams, lol
|
Luddite
I watch Fox News


Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: demiu5]
#23953565 - 12/24/16 08:18 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The Demokkkrats embezzled all the money already.
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: Luddite]
#23953766 - 12/24/16 09:44 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
They are trying to keep it solvent. Both sides are guilty of looting the SS Trust Fund to buy votes. Period.
But let's try an experiment. Let's make SS mandatory, but give people a choice between a private investment firm and the government SS. Who would people choose? More than likely, they would choose a private investment firm, because PEOPLE NO LONGER TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: starfire_xes] 2
#23953875 - 12/24/16 10:32 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: let's try an experiment. Let's make SS mandatory, but give people a choice between a private investment firm and the government SS. Who would people choose? More than likely, they would choose a private investment firm, because PEOPLE NO LONGER TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT.
That's a false choice.
The fact of the matter is that what working people pay into Social Security today is used to pay retired people today. There is no "saving" or "investment".
In order to privatize Social Security, we would need to cut all payments to retirees today so that working people could invest that money instead. Or we could do a 50/50 split, so that retirees get only 1/2 of what they get today, and working people can only invest 1/2 of what they pay in.

The fact that Republicans are even talking about this proves they are still the party of stupid.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: This would also raise the full retirement age from 67 to 69. Are there any conservatives here that support these big cuts to Social Security?
No one believes we should raise the retirement age from 67 to 69? Yet you continue to elect Republican politicians that support this in order to protect the rich from paying the same percentage into Social Security as the rest of us pay?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 6 hours, 38 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: This would also raise the full retirement age from 67 to 69. Are there any conservatives here that support these big cuts to Social Security?
No one believes we should raise the retirement age from 67 to 69? Yet you continue to elect Republican politicians that support this in order to protect the rich from paying the same percentage into Social Security as the rest of us pay? 
Have any Democrats advocated for moving the SS tax onto higher incomes? I'm pretty sure Hillary never talked about it, did Bernie?
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: qman]
#23956493 - 12/25/16 01:42 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: Have any Democrats advocated for moving the SS tax onto higher incomes? I'm pretty sure Hillary never talked about it, did Bernie?
Absolutely.
Bernie wants to remove the cap entirely (the best solution).
Quote:
Right now a billionaire pays the same amount of money into Social Security as someone who makes $118,500 a year. That’s because there is a cap on taxable income that goes into the Social Security system.
Even Hillary insists the rich need to pay more:
Quote:
Preserve Social Security for decades to come by asking the wealthiest to contribute more. Social Security must continue to guarantee dignity in retirement for future generations. Hillary understands that there is no way to accomplish that goal without asking the highest-income Americans to pay more, including options to tax some of their income above the current Social Security cap and taxing some of their income not currently taken into account by the Social Security system.
It appears conservatives voted republican without knowing what they would get. Now that Trump is in office they know exactly what they will get. Lots of tax breaks for the super rich, paid for by everyone else.
If you think income inequality is bad now, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 6 hours, 38 minutes
|
|
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
qman said: Have any Democrats advocated for moving the SS tax onto higher incomes? I'm pretty sure Hillary never talked about it, did Bernie?
Absolutely.
Bernie wants to remove the cap entirely (the best solution).
Quote:
Right now a billionaire pays the same amount of money into Social Security as someone who makes $118,500 a year. That’s because there is a cap on taxable income that goes into the Social Security system.
Even Hillary insists the rich need to pay more:
Quote:
Preserve Social Security for decades to come by asking the wealthiest to contribute more. Social Security must continue to guarantee dignity in retirement for future generations. Hillary understands that there is no way to accomplish that goal without asking the highest-income Americans to pay more, including options to tax some of their income above the current Social Security cap and taxing some of their income not currently taken into account by the Social Security system.
It appears conservatives voted republican without knowing what they would get. Now that Trump is in office they know exactly what they will get. Lots of tax breaks for the super rich, paid for by everyone else.
If you think income inequality is bad now, you ain't seen nothin' yet.
But why would anyone believe a bought and paid for Hillary who represented the very rich people she bashed?
Remember Obama bashing the very NY bankers that paid for his 2008 campaign?
And yes I agree, wealth/income inequality is going to grow even larger.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: qman]
#23956529 - 12/25/16 02:01 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
I don't know if Hillary would have gotten the rich to pay more, but at least we know the rich wouldn't pay less, which will likely now happen under Trump.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,369
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 2 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: qman] 1
#23956544 - 12/25/16 02:10 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: This would also raise the full retirement age from 67 to 69. Are there any conservatives here that support these big cuts to Social Security?
No one believes we should raise the retirement age from 67 to 69? Yet you continue to elect Republican politicians that support this in order to protect the rich from paying the same percentage into Social Security as the rest of us pay? 
Have any Democrats advocated for moving the SS tax onto higher incomes? I'm pretty sure Hillary never talked about it, did Bernie?
Obama and Hillary both are in favor of modifying SS qualifications.
--------------------
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 6 hours, 38 minutes
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: The Ecstatic]
#23956567 - 12/25/16 02:22 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The Ecstatic said:
Quote:
qman said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said:
Quote:
Falcon91Wolvrn03 said: This would also raise the full retirement age from 67 to 69. Are there any conservatives here that support these big cuts to Social Security?
No one believes we should raise the retirement age from 67 to 69? Yet you continue to elect Republican politicians that support this in order to protect the rich from paying the same percentage into Social Security as the rest of us pay? 
Have any Democrats advocated for moving the SS tax onto higher incomes? I'm pretty sure Hillary never talked about it, did Bernie?
Obama and Hillary both are in favor of modifying SS qualifications.
And in 8 years Obama marketed what about SS?
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,369
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 2 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: qman] 1
#23956632 - 12/25/16 03:07 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Marketed?
Idk. But he didnt dismantle or privatize it.
--------------------
|
snatch
Old Hat
Registered: 12/28/16
Posts: 11
Last seen: 4 years, 8 months
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: The Ecstatic] 1
#23963943 - 12/28/16 09:18 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
67 is even a pretty old age for retirement. Some of us will be lucky to see 60...
-------------------- Old Hat - New Account
|
demiu5
humans, lol


Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: snatch]
#23964226 - 12/28/16 10:58 PM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
some of us aren't counting on 60 and don't want to have to lose money that could be helping us right now, instead of banking on a future that may or may not exist for a government fund that may or may not exist
the fukkers
-------------------- channel your inner Larry David
|
Brian Jones
Club 27



Registered: 12/18/12
Posts: 12,342
Loc: attending Snake Church
Last seen: 12 hours, 11 minutes
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: demiu5]
#23964659 - 12/29/16 04:29 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
From my understanding the age for regular full social security had long been raised from 65 to 66.5 for me and I'm 59.5. As generations aged it was gradually going to go up progressively beyond 66.5. I think for people 5 years younger than me it was at least 67. and projected to gradually go up. This happened through, I believe, several Presidential administrations and poitical parties.
I don't know how this effects taking early social security at 62 for less, or late social security at 70 for more.
At any rate it's about actuarial tables, and people living longer, but I also think its trying to salvage a dying system.
As far millennials getting screwed, grow up; everybody got screwed.
-------------------- "The Rolling Stones will break up over Brian Jones' dead body" John Lennon I don't want no commies in my car. No Christians either. The worst thing about corruption is that it works so well,
|
demiu5
humans, lol


Registered: 08/18/05
Posts: 43,948
Loc: the popcorn stadium
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: Brian Jones]
#23964791 - 12/29/16 07:32 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Brian Jones said: At any rate it's about actuarial tables, and people living longer, but I also think its trying to salvage a dying system.
this
Quote:
As far millennials getting screwed, grow up; everybody got screwed.
fuck that attitude. it's one thing to get [relatively] unknowingly screwed, but to continue paying into a failing, soon-to-be-dead system with, essentially, no hope of ever reclaiming WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY ONE'S is insane. it's not immature to consider demanding what one feels is right. it is immature to not get one's way and then continue to bitch and moan about it.
-------------------- channel your inner Larry David
|
hostileuniverse
Stranger



Registered: 05/14/15
Posts: 8,602
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 6 years, 7 months
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: demiu5]
#23964951 - 12/29/16 09:06 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
The government will continue to steal your money with promises of riches and returns bestowed upon you by them. It's all BS
***sad people still fall for this in this day and age
|
The Ecstatic
Chilldog Extraordinaire


Registered: 11/11/09
Posts: 33,369
Loc: 'Merica
Last seen: 2 hours, 3 minutes
|
Re: GOP trying to screw mellenials retirement [Re: starfire_xes]
#23964957 - 12/29/16 09:08 AM (7 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: They are trying to keep it solvent. Both sides are guilty of looting the SS Trust Fund to buy votes. Period.
But let's try an experiment. Let's make SS mandatory, but give people a choice between a private investment firm and the government SS. Who would people choose? More than likely, they would choose a private investment firm, because PEOPLE NO LONGER TRUST OUR GOVERNMENT.
And people DO trust the big banks.
--------------------
|
|