Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And if nothing is done before 2037 the Government still has to find the money from somewhere to pay back the IOU's and as your link states that will cause problems long before 2037.
If nothing is done BEFORE 2037, in 2037, assuming ( big assumption) that the current rate of people paying in stays the same and the number drawing benefits does not increase more then projected, only 75 percent of the money needed to pay for benefits will be available.
The program is in jeopardy and no one seems to want to do anything about it. And no we can't just keep changing when people are eligible to draw their money.
Since you are a lefty, perhaps you could tell us what the left plans to do about Social Security? The right has presented several plans over the years and all have been ignored.
This is the 4th post since the thread was started 45 minutes ago. Why is it still labelled "Old"?![]()
This is the 4th post since the thread was started 45 minutes ago. Why is it still labelled "Old"?![]()
Its a liesmatters thread....
her hack shit gets old fast.![]()
What has the right presented besides "partial privitization"? That would have only reduced the money being paid into it even more (worsening the situation) and face it, we all know how the stock market has been doing. Diverting SS money into investments would have proved disasterous.
What has the right presented besides "partial privitization"? That would have only reduced the money being paid into it even more (worsening the situation) and face it, we all know how the stock market has been doing. Diverting SS money into investments would have proved disasterous.
So assuming you have a 401K, are you going to be OK when the powers that be decide to roll them into your SSI "account" ?
And if nothing is done before 2037 the Government still has to find the money from somewhere to pay back the IOU's and as your link states that will cause problems long before 2037.
If nothing is done BEFORE 2037, in 2037, assuming ( big assumption) that the current rate of people paying in stays the same and the number drawing benefits does not increase more then projected, only 75 percent of the money needed to pay for benefits will be available.
The program is in jeopardy and no one seems to want to do anything about it. And no we can't just keep changing when people are eligible to draw their money.
Since you are a lefty, perhaps you could tell us what the left plans to do about Social Security? The right has presented several plans over the years and all have been ignored.
What has the right presented besides "partial privitization"? That would have only reduced the money being paid into it even more (worsening the situation) and face it, we all know how the stock market has been doing. Diverting SS money into investments would have proved disasterous.
And if nothing is done before 2037 the Government still has to find the money from somewhere to pay back the IOU's and as your link states that will cause problems long before 2037.
If nothing is done BEFORE 2037, in 2037, assuming ( big assumption) that the current rate of people paying in stays the same and the number drawing benefits does not increase more then projected, only 75 percent of the money needed to pay for benefits will be available.
The program is in jeopardy and no one seems to want to do anything about it. And no we can't just keep changing when people are eligible to draw their money.
Since you are a lefty, perhaps you could tell us what the left plans to do about Social Security? The right has presented several plans over the years and all have been ignored.
What has the right presented besides "partial privitization"? That would have only reduced the money being paid into it even more (worsening the situation) and face it, we all know how the stock market has been doing. Diverting SS money into investments would have proved disasterous.
So assuming you have a 401K, are you going to be OK when the powers that be decide to roll them into your SSI "account" ?
And if nothing is done before 2037 the Government still has to find the money from somewhere to pay back the IOU's and as your link states that will cause problems long before 2037.
If nothing is done BEFORE 2037, in 2037, assuming ( big assumption) that the current rate of people paying in stays the same and the number drawing benefits does not increase more then projected, only 75 percent of the money needed to pay for benefits will be available.
The program is in jeopardy and no one seems to want to do anything about it. And no we can't just keep changing when people are eligible to draw their money.
Since you are a lefty, perhaps you could tell us what the left plans to do about Social Security? The right has presented several plans over the years and all have been ignored.
What has the right presented besides "partial privitization"? That would have only reduced the money being paid into it even more (worsening the situation) and face it, we all know how the stock market has been doing. Diverting SS money into investments would have proved disasterous.
Chris keeps posting links to claims that the Stock market is better then ever and has been for years. Are you calling him a liar?
And I notice you didn't answer my question, WHAT has the left proposed?
The stock market IS finally improving (I can see it in my 401k) but still far behind what it should be now with the piss poor performance during the Bush years.
And HERE is what the "left" proposed.......
Social Security Tax Increase For Rich Proposed By House Liberals, Democrats
And as you can see in my above post I have no problem taking a reduction in my SS if my finances are in that good of shape.
The stock market IS finally improving (I can see it in my 401k) but still far behind what it should be now with the piss poor performance during the Bush years.
And HERE is what the "left" proposed.......
Social Security Tax Increase For Rich Proposed By House Liberals, Democrats
And as you can see in my above post I have no problem taking a reduction in my SS if my finances are in that good of shape.
Better yet, do not put a cap on SS withholding @ $106k. There is no dam good reason to cap it!
Interesting our elected officials enjoy this cap.
Salaries of members of the United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
US Congress Salaries and Benefits Salaries and Benefits of US Congress MembersSenate Leadership
Majority Party Leader - $193,400
Minority Party Leader - $193,400
House Leadership
Speaker of the House - $223,500
Majority Leader - $193,400
Minority Leader - $193,400
Here's how they think they're going to avoid the gallows when the system collaspes:
"Over the years, the surplus has been lent to the federal government to pay for other programs. In return, the trust fund received IOUs in the form of special-issue, interest-paying Treasury bonds. These bonds are backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government, just as regular Treasurys are."
Note "Special issue" bonds, these are bonds that can't be sold to anyone other than the US government (ie: Wampum)
Sad huh?
How can any American fight for the rich and spit on everyone else.
Its UnAmerican