General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm in the camp that says increase Social Security benefits. ..
Not cut them.
How about you?
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)but in general terms yes.
Bryant
Cal Carpenter
(4,959 posts)when is 'the right time'?
el_bryanto
(11,804 posts)to stimulus - and increasing SS would fit in the middle of that. But right now the debate is the budget deficit - and in the middle of a deficit it's hard to propose increasing programs without sounding like you are in favor of wasting money.
Bryant
AndyA
(16,993 posts)We need stimulus to increase employment and improve the economy. That alone will help the deficit, as more taxes will be collected.
An increase in SS would fuel the economy, as people would have more to spend, and SS recipients will spend it. They could also dump the SS cap, which would have little impact on those effected and it would greatly improve the stability of SS for many years.
SS has no business being a part of deficit reduction talks, as SS doesn't increase or decrease the deficit.
Overall, very unhappy that President Obama has included SS in this discussion, as he promised he wouldn't cause further harm to middle America and the elderly, and that's exactly what a reduction in SS benefits will cause.
snappyturtle
(14,656 posts)steve2470
(37,457 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)trumad
(41,692 posts)Pay the old folks more each month and do it with cuts from the military budget.
See how easy that is.
newfie11
(8,159 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,361 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)gateley
(62,683 posts)he'd do something like that.
Sounds logical, makes sense, and I like it! But not sure it's that easy.
TheKentuckian
(24,949 posts)by a charismatic Democrat to the worshipers of the cult of personality.
byeya
(2,842 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)demwing
(16,916 posts)Stimulus for the 99%, austerity for the 1%
buzzroller
(67 posts)There have been concrete proposals explaining how, such as:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/dont-cut-social-security-double-it/266095/
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)Mnpaul
(3,655 posts)They need to cut military spending and start paying the interest on the money they borrowed from SS and other federal retirement programs. Bush stole 1 trillion in interest payments from 2003 to 2007 alone. They steal the money and replace it with more IOU's. They are borrowing money to pay interest payments on the money borrowed.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)SS will be insolvent when I am ready after paying in already for 35 years..
CK_John
(10,005 posts)More people than jobs for at least the next 25yrs, and the collapse of the university system.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)because this is the stupidest idea to come out of the WH since he took office.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)n/t
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)forestpath
(3,102 posts)raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)Sadly, I feel like I'm joining Camp Crystal Lake right before summer vacation.
demwing
(16,916 posts)when the drum beat continues on and on for cuts, coming even from the party that is supposed to defend the program.
What's the answer?
rurallib
(62,346 posts)MjolnirTime
(1,800 posts)Raster
(20,996 posts)...INCLUDING INVESTMENT INCOME.
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)While I don't have a problem with your proposal, but that is dramatic shift from what the program is (which is the same reason many people oppose means testing SS benefits).
Raster
(20,996 posts)And maybe WE SHOULD ALL get access to those nifty tax breaks and loopholes that only the rich seem entitled to.
Behind every great fortune and the man or woman that fronts it, is public infrastructure helping to create it and support it.
byeya
(2,842 posts)alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)If somebody has guaranteed monthly income of $10,000, say, it's not clear why a collective social program needs to cut them an additional $1000 check. Especially if those same monies could go to increase the payment of people living on *only* a $1000 SS check! Oh, the principle! Yeah, I don't get it. Oh, but then it will look like a welfare program, which is easier to cut! It is a fucking welfare program, and we should be unapologetic about caring about the welfare of seniors! Lift the cap, means test, and increase payments to those who need more. Enough acceding to the neoliberal language of having "earned" your personal retirement: we pay people who cannot work because it's the right thing to do morally, not because they "earned" it. It's a collective social program, not a individual retirement account.
joeglow3
(6,228 posts)That is the reason I have always said it should be means tested. It is intended to be a social program.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Her cut will be 100%, and that's if nobody does anything. As far as I can tell, the program pushes insolvency when I turn 67.
Many of us don't expect to get anything. The notion that our children will see a red cent from Social Security is laughable under the current plan.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)xchrom
(108,903 posts)Lugnut
(9,791 posts)SS recipients are way behind due to the unrealistic real world annual COLA increases.
Glitterati
(3,182 posts)We talk, beg, plead, cajole until we're blue in the face.
And, then they do what the hell they want anyway.
I'm done. There's simply no reason to fight to vote, deal with Republicans trying to take away my vote, stand in horrendous lines, be attacked when I ask for a DEM ballot in Republican hell, just to have my own party betray me over and over.
I'm finished.
Blue dogs can thank me now for staying home in 2014. I'm not going to bother voting, nor will I cajole my family into going to the polls.
Let's see the Blue Dogs win an election without Progressives.
Response to Glitterati (Reply #28)
Name removed Message auto-removed
loudsue
(14,087 posts)That would actually help to STIMULATE the economy.
caseymoz
(5,763 posts)bananas
(27,509 posts)jambo101
(797 posts)Obama and the Democrats want the rich to pay much more to help America solve its fiscal problems.
Republicans want the poor and those on social programs to foot the bill for America's financial problems..
I'm retired and bring in a $20K per year pension.Democrats in 2016
efhmc
(14,709 posts)six months interval over 6 years.
The life expectancy of the lower economic working classes is not increasing at that kind of rate. Truth is, their vocational life expectency is DEFINITELY not increasing at that kind of rate.
Why--what reason?
Lars39
(26,093 posts)efhmc
(14,709 posts)make such sweeping assumptions about others based on a thought or an idea posted on a website. I am a 70 year old widow who is still working outside on the family ranch, doing some paper work, not at a desk as you suggested but on the dining room table. I am still paying part of my tiny salary into social security. I wonder if you are aware that one can start ss at 62. You get less money but can opt for this payout. To me extending the age, while still being able to take your deserved payout sooner if you want is a very viable idea. This to me is a much more workable solution that the chained CPI. BTW, I am pretty sure since I was a "nonworking" housewife until not very long ago, I will never get any SS money.
a2liberal
(1,524 posts)67 or 68 or wherever it is now is absolutely barbaric
closeupready
(29,503 posts)K&R
AsahinaKimi
(20,776 posts)hamsterjill
(15,214 posts)Look, I don't want more than I'm supposed to be entitled to. But I've worked my ass off since I was 16 years old and have paid in more than I will EVER see back.
I'm just tired of getting screwed at every turn!
The first step would be to make Social Security funds untouchable. The reason the current system isn't working is because those funds contributed to SS have been hijacked for other programs.
walkerbait41
(302 posts)I get my first SS check in May
MrYikes
(720 posts)They would spend it. Therefore it would help the economy
Many single person households are trying to live on $600 per month SS income. This is one of the reasons that food pantries are kept busy; though these people amount to only 10% of the pantry clients, they can never stop returning.
SunSeeker
(51,378 posts)WaitWut
(71 posts)Bagging groceries, working at drive through windows, and pan handling, the more I get in the camp with Medicare kicking in at 50 and SS kicking in at 60 (or 58.)
I personally have seen too much talent and knowledge leave my workplace within this age group.
Raise the tax cap to 200,000, lower the age minimums, and allow our elders to be entrepreneurs that hire people.
Just sayin',
pansypoo53219
(20,908 posts)WHO WON???? fuck the publikkklans.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)joesdaughter
(243 posts)True that.
Fuddnik
(8,846 posts)Had they not tinkered with COLA formulas since the early 70's (every President), SS benefits would be nearly double what they are now.
Taxes on the rich and corporations keep going down, and services and benefits keep going down.
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)DId you know DU has a SS & Medicare group?
trumad
(41,692 posts)I need to stick my head out of GD more often..
Thanks
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)juajen
(8,515 posts)Over the years SS payments keep getting smaller when measured by inflation. We have also lost benefits that were very important, in years past. One being the raised age for beneficiaries after death of a breadwinner. College benefits for deceased's children have also been cut, not to mention that the age for drawing benefits keeps rising. This, in itself, is unconscionable, as everyone knows the dearth of jobs available to anyone over 50 years old.
So, the mantra should be, "Raise SS Benefits, No Reduction!
Babel_17
(5,400 posts)as we took care of those most in need first.
wholeheartedly. k&r
bvar22
(39,909 posts)...that the government could produce.
It would also save lives.
airplaneman
(1,237 posts)And funding them properly.
Read Steven Hill on this subject:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/dont-cut-social-security-double-it/266095/
-Airplane
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)Have a marshmallow.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)harun
(11,348 posts)MineralMan
(146,192 posts)I'm on Social Security. My monthly payment covers my Medicare supplement and my wife's health insurance premium. After that there's nothing left of it. So, more would be great! However, that's not what I'm looking for. I'm still working, and will probably keep working until I slump over my keyboard and die.
Living on Social Security is not in the cards at all. It's simply not enough.
So, trumad, if you can get my SS payment increased that'd be great. There doesn't seem to be much possibility of that, though, does there?
Things will improve in 6 years, when my wife starts Social Security and there's no more huge health insurance bill every month. In fact, there's a good chance we'll be paying less for that when President Obama's ACA comes into full force next year. Every little bit helps.
trumad
(41,692 posts)which is a sad shame.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)for a living. I like doing that, anyhow. I get to sit in front of my computer, type away, and go to the bank to deposit the checks. From time to time, someone tells me how much in increased business. I talked to a guy yesterday. He said that business increased enough for him to hire two new full-time employees. That's a good thing.
If you can't get what you want, you keep trying to get what you need. That's always been my motto.
I'm glad you managed to keep your job.
trumad
(41,692 posts)Bad guys aplenty.
MineralMan
(146,192 posts)When your time for Social Security arrives, I hope it's there for you and that you get more than I do. Seeya!
trumad
(41,692 posts)It will be there.
librechik
(30,663 posts)good for the economy, good for seniors...
seriously, I've been a wreck all day due to this. Nightmare!
WillyT
(72,631 posts)HELL YES !!!
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)After crunching those numbers, including society-wide savings on health care paired with taxes commensurate with at least some portion of what we've been spending on private insurance, adjusted upwards depending on income level-- see what shakes out.
I bet we could increase SS benefits, then.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)we are dealing with a substantial number of people who do not share the concept of "society" and what membership in that society both provides and demands.
Those on the right are very much Ayn Randian - they believe you make or break yourself and if you end up in retirement with not having amassed a huge amount of money then go hang yourself.
They don't want any social safety net. They also think that employers should be able to rape their employees mercilessly and leave them hanging themselves when they get to retirement. Those people were expendable.
Until we change this mentality and embrace the concept that we are all in this together there will be no hope for improving SS and Medicare, two stellar programs.
They talk about personal responsibility and accountability. I don't disagree that people should be thinking, planning and saving. But when the majority of the available jobs hardly afford an income above the poverty level let alone saving for a rainy day or retirement, that concept goes out the window.
I prefer to talk in terms of "humanity". We are still a wealthy country. I expect China to pass us in the next 20-30 years based on population, resources, etc. But we are still immensely wealthy. We CAN afford to treat our seniors and less advantaged better than we do. But those with the money think they deserve it because they have earned it. They never reflect on how they have earned it. They never think about the pitiful wages, deplorable working conditions or for financial services how much they screwed their clients to get their $10M annual bonus.
Most of these cretins claim to be Christians but I suggest Christ will not know them.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Kip Humphrey
(4,753 posts)baby boomer jobs!
Cleita
(75,480 posts)this austerity shit that doesn't work.
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)a2liberal
(1,524 posts)Auntie Bush
(17,528 posts)SS is NOT keeping up with inflation now...and OB and Rethugs want to slow it down! WTF?
Iwillnevergiveup
(9,298 posts)"Social Security" doesn't really drive home the dire necessity for the program. Being "socially secure" to me means you have a few friends you can get together with for meals, outings, phone calls, celebrations, maybe even advice...or a middle-of-the-night emergency.
How about "Life Security" or "Survival Benefit." Either of these represents what it truly is. Otherwise, I'm here at the campsite and I've got s'mores.
Aquavit
(488 posts)And while we're at it, let's lower the eligibility age!
treestar
(82,383 posts)I don't really care about the middle class and upper middle class. They have their pensions and 401ks. These are things I've never had. So why am I supposed to pity them? I pity only the poor (who are not affected by the budget Obama proposed with the motive of keeping the government going against Republican intransigence).
Zax2me
(2,515 posts)But I won't get even that. 90 million Americans out of work, almost 15% of country on food stamps...
Some are not pulling their weight.
This is not sustainable.
It will collapse.
The health care system will crush system prematurely so we won't have to wait much longer.
Then we can start over.
midnight
(26,624 posts)meow2u3
(24,746 posts)Cuts are cruel.
Instead of cutting Social Security benefits, we should cut--or even eliminate--preferential treatment of billionaires.