Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
96 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I'm in the camp that says increase Social Security benefits. .. (Original Post) trumad Apr 2013 OP
Generally speaking yes - i don't know if now is the right time for that debate el_bryanto Apr 2013 #1
Just curious - Cal Carpenter Apr 2013 #7
It's hard to say - truthfully the debate should be turned away from the budget deficit el_bryanto Apr 2013 #8
I agree, austerity is not the solution--too many countries have tried with devastating results AndyA Apr 2013 #30
Have you read this from Krugman? snappyturtle Apr 2013 #43
I agree nt steve2470 Apr 2013 #2
By how much? How will that affect the the solvency of Social Security? Freddie Stubbs Apr 2013 #3
Solvency can easily be fixed... trumad Apr 2013 #6
Yep I agree nt newfie11 Apr 2013 #12
How easy would it be to pass such a proposal? Freddie Stubbs Apr 2013 #57
So we shouldn't think about it and do what the republicans say? Kingofalldems Apr 2013 #61
Perhaps we should spend our time working on realistic solutions rather that pipe dreams Freddie Stubbs Apr 2013 #91
It always looks easy to us "out here" -- but if it were I think gateley Apr 2013 #77
That is also my camp, seems mostly populated by tumbleweeds since the opposite has been sold TheKentuckian Apr 2013 #4
Yes. Social Security needs to become the national retirement plan. byeya Apr 2013 #5
We need stimulous, not austerity. Scuba Apr 2013 #9
We need both - but switch the targets demwing Apr 2013 #21
Absolutely buzzroller Apr 2013 #10
And they need to keep their hands out of the cookie jar too Puzzledtraveller Apr 2013 #11
Exactly Mnpaul Apr 2013 #16
Not if it means that pipoman Apr 2013 #13
We need to lower the age to 50yr of age, until the cyber-era adjust to the jobs situation. CK_John Apr 2013 #14
I'm wondering if the President has a personal interest in brain research, winter is coming Apr 2013 #15
Yes please. Myrina Apr 2013 #17
Increase the cap and the benefits, especially on the lowest payments. JDPriestly Apr 2013 #18
I'm in your camp. forestpath Apr 2013 #19
I'd love to be part of that camp. raouldukelives Apr 2013 #20
Sure thing, but does it matter? demwing Apr 2013 #22
yes indeed rurallib Apr 2013 #23
Do you favor increasing SS taxes to cover this? MjolnirTime Apr 2013 #24
I do. And by increasing SS taxes, I mean lifing the Raygun era caps and fully taxing ALL INCOME, Raster Apr 2013 #25
Do those people get increased benefits? joeglow3 Apr 2013 #51
would those people get extra SS benefits? Perhaps. Raster Apr 2013 #70
I would favor those that pay in more get bigger pension checks. byeya Apr 2013 #72
I don't oppose means testing or lifting the cap alcibiades_mystery Apr 2013 #92
I agree with you , but many disagree joeglow3 Apr 2013 #93
My 7 year old daughter will never see a dime of Social Security, ever alcibiades_mystery Apr 2013 #94
Absolutely. Raise the cap. What do you think? nm rhett o rick Apr 2013 #75
whole heartedly. nt xchrom Apr 2013 #26
I'm with you. Lugnut Apr 2013 #27
I'm just DONE Glitterati Apr 2013 #28
Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2013 #60
Thank you, Trumad! Yes yes yes! loudsue Apr 2013 #29
K&R nt caseymoz Apr 2013 #31
Absolutely agree. nt bananas Apr 2013 #32
Bottom line jambo101 Apr 2013 #33
I really think we should extend the age slowly at efhmc Apr 2013 #34
Why? zipplewrath Apr 2013 #42
Really---?? trumad Apr 2013 #45
Aw, fuck that. You must have a desk job Lars39 Apr 2013 #81
It always amazes me that people here can efhmc Apr 2013 #96
No, we should lower it a2liberal Apr 2013 #84
Yes, and lower the retirement age back to 65. closeupready Apr 2013 #35
Agree AsahinaKimi Apr 2013 #36
I'm in your camp. hamsterjill Apr 2013 #37
Can we join your camp? walkerbait41 Apr 2013 #38
What would retirees do with the money? MrYikes Apr 2013 #39
Count me in, baby! nt SunSeeker Apr 2013 #40
The more I see 50+ yr olds... WaitWut Apr 2013 #41
they did a REPAIR of SS in the 80's for the baby boomers. WE NEED TO FIX IT AGAIN! pansypoo53219 Apr 2013 #44
"Pay More to Get More" option for SS, now!!!! (401K's are a scam.) grahamhgreen Apr 2013 #46
(401K's are a scam.) joesdaughter Apr 2013 #56
Fuckin' A!!! Fuddnik Apr 2013 #47
Thats is a logical conclusion FogerRox Apr 2013 #48
Nope--did not... trumad Apr 2013 #49
The doors opened March 14th after I petitioned SKinner for a week. FogerRox Apr 2013 #82
Yep, I think the benefits should be raised. juajen Apr 2013 #50
K&R though I'd be willing to show patience Babel_17 Apr 2013 #52
agreed subject Apr 2013 #53
THAT would be the Most Effective Economic Stimulus... bvar22 Apr 2013 #54
I am in the camp of doubling Social Security benefits airplaneman Apr 2013 #55
I am right by the fire with you. ZombieHorde Apr 2013 #58
Alas, the establishment party bosses are backing the opposite. Tierra_y_Libertad Apr 2013 #59
I'll vote for that. Lower the age. harun Apr 2013 #62
Say, that'd be great! MineralMan Apr 2013 #63
Nope it does not... trumad Apr 2013 #64
Well, then. I guess I'll just keep on writing websites MineralMan Apr 2013 #65
Well Network Security is pretty recession proof. trumad Apr 2013 #66
Good luck to you. MineralMan Apr 2013 #67
If the repubs and some Dems don't F it up... trumad Apr 2013 #68
definitely--raise the cap and double the benefits for gawd's sake!!! librechik Apr 2013 #69
HUGE K & R !!! WillyT Apr 2013 #71
End the drug war, legalize and tax marijuana, cut the Military Budget 50% & institute a SPHC system. Warren DeMontague Apr 2013 #73
I agree but...... Swede Atlanta Apr 2013 #74
And raise Medicare age. nm rhett o rick Apr 2013 #76
I'm of the camp to make the full benefit retirement age 58 and open up all those Kip Humphrey Apr 2013 #78
Good idea and actually something that is good for the economy, not Cleita Apr 2013 #80
Up, up, and away, to recovery. blkmusclmachine Apr 2013 #79
Me too. (n/t) a2liberal Apr 2013 #83
I'm in that camp too! Auntie Bush Apr 2013 #85
Maybe we need a name change Iwillnevergiveup Apr 2013 #86
Absolutely yes... Aquavit Apr 2013 #87
For the poor treestar Apr 2013 #88
If I could keep 1/3 what I put in I'd be set. Well off, even. Zax2me Apr 2013 #89
I'm with you on this... midnight Apr 2013 #90
Count me in the SS benefit hike camp meow2u3 Apr 2013 #95

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
1. Generally speaking yes - i don't know if now is the right time for that debate
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:11 AM
Apr 2013

but in general terms yes.

Bryant

el_bryanto

(11,804 posts)
8. It's hard to say - truthfully the debate should be turned away from the budget deficit
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:19 AM
Apr 2013

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)
30. I agree, austerity is not the solution--too many countries have tried with devastating results
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 10:50 AM
Apr 2013

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.

 

trumad

(41,692 posts)
6. Solvency can easily be fixed...
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:16 AM
Apr 2013

Pay the old folks more each month and do it with cuts from the military budget.

See how easy that is.

gateley

(62,683 posts)
77. It always looks easy to us "out here" -- but if it were I think
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 07:59 PM
Apr 2013

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)
4. That is also my camp, seems mostly populated by tumbleweeds since the opposite has been sold
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:12 AM
Apr 2013

by a charismatic Democrat to the worshipers of the cult of personality.

Mnpaul

(3,655 posts)
16. Exactly
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:35 AM
Apr 2013

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)
13. Not if it means that
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:31 AM
Apr 2013

SS will be insolvent when I am ready after paying in already for 35 years..

CK_John

(10,005 posts)
14. We need to lower the age to 50yr of age, until the cyber-era adjust to the jobs situation.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:33 AM
Apr 2013

More people than jobs for at least the next 25yrs, and the collapse of the university system.

winter is coming

(11,785 posts)
15. I'm wondering if the President has a personal interest in brain research,
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:34 AM
Apr 2013

because this is the stupidest idea to come out of the WH since he took office.

raouldukelives

(5,178 posts)
20. I'd love to be part of that camp.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:50 AM
Apr 2013

Sadly, I feel like I'm joining Camp Crystal Lake right before summer vacation.

 

demwing

(16,916 posts)
22. Sure thing, but does it matter?
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:56 AM
Apr 2013

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?

Raster

(20,996 posts)
25. I do. And by increasing SS taxes, I mean lifing the Raygun era caps and fully taxing ALL INCOME,
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 10:19 AM
Apr 2013

...INCLUDING INVESTMENT INCOME.

 

joeglow3

(6,228 posts)
51. Do those people get increased benefits?
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 01:31 PM
Apr 2013

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)
70. would those people get extra SS benefits? Perhaps.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 05:50 PM
Apr 2013

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.

 

alcibiades_mystery

(36,437 posts)
92. I don't oppose means testing or lifting the cap
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:21 PM
Apr 2013

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)
93. I agree with you , but many disagree
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 01:32 PM
Apr 2013

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)
94. My 7 year old daughter will never see a dime of Social Security, ever
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 02:28 PM
Apr 2013

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.

 

Glitterati

(3,182 posts)
28. I'm just DONE
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 10:31 AM
Apr 2013

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)

jambo101

(797 posts)
33. Bottom line
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 10:59 AM
Apr 2013

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

zipplewrath

(16,646 posts)
42. Why?
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 11:59 AM
Apr 2013

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.

efhmc

(14,709 posts)
96. It always amazes me that people here can
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 09:24 PM
Apr 2013

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.

hamsterjill

(15,214 posts)
37. I'm in your camp.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 11:21 AM
Apr 2013

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.

MrYikes

(720 posts)
39. What would retirees do with the money?
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 11:30 AM
Apr 2013

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.

WaitWut

(71 posts)
41. The more I see 50+ yr olds...
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 11:45 AM
Apr 2013

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)
44. they did a REPAIR of SS in the 80's for the baby boomers. WE NEED TO FIX IT AGAIN!
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 12:38 PM
Apr 2013

WHO WON???? fuck the publikkklans.

Fuddnik

(8,846 posts)
47. Fuckin' A!!!
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 01:17 PM
Apr 2013

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.

juajen

(8,515 posts)
50. Yep, I think the benefits should be raised.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 01:31 PM
Apr 2013

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!

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
54. THAT would be the Most Effective Economic Stimulus...
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 01:52 PM
Apr 2013

...that the government could produce.
It would also save lives.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
63. Say, that'd be great!
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 04:22 PM
Apr 2013

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.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
65. Well, then. I guess I'll just keep on writing websites
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 04:29 PM
Apr 2013

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.

MineralMan

(146,192 posts)
67. Good luck to you.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 04:32 PM
Apr 2013

When your time for Social Security arrives, I hope it's there for you and that you get more than I do. Seeya!

librechik

(30,663 posts)
69. definitely--raise the cap and double the benefits for gawd's sake!!!
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 04:37 PM
Apr 2013

good for the economy, good for seniors...

seriously, I've been a wreck all day due to this. Nightmare!

Warren DeMontague

(80,708 posts)
73. End the drug war, legalize and tax marijuana, cut the Military Budget 50% & institute a SPHC system.
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 06:40 PM
Apr 2013

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)
74. I agree but......
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 06:49 PM
Apr 2013

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.

Cleita

(75,480 posts)
80. Good idea and actually something that is good for the economy, not
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 09:03 PM
Apr 2013

this austerity shit that doesn't work.

Auntie Bush

(17,528 posts)
85. I'm in that camp too!
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 10:04 PM
Apr 2013

SS is NOT keeping up with inflation now...and OB and Rethugs want to slow it down! WTF?

Iwillnevergiveup

(9,298 posts)
86. Maybe we need a name change
Fri Apr 5, 2013, 11:50 PM
Apr 2013

"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.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
88. For the poor
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 01:14 AM
Apr 2013

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)
89. If I could keep 1/3 what I put in I'd be set. Well off, even.
Sat Apr 6, 2013, 01:19 AM
Apr 2013

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.

meow2u3

(24,746 posts)
95. Count me in the SS benefit hike camp
Mon Apr 8, 2013, 03:01 PM
Apr 2013

Cuts are cruel.

Instead of cutting Social Security benefits, we should cut--or even eliminate--preferential treatment of billionaires.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I'm in the camp that says...