sartre play
Gold Member
- May 4, 2015
- 10,291
- 3,242
- 210
Social security has been needed and used for over 60 years. What the hell could be wrong with taking care of the elderly?
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.
I once told the owner of a golf course that if SS were to go broke, all of the golf courses would fold. After looking startled for a moment, he sudden realized what many social security checks are actually used for. Ask a bunch of old farts that play golf….Many use their SS checks. Right, it’s not a primary subsistence. It will still keep you in the poor house….It was never intended to be of "benefit" to those in need of no such assistance!
so its not all of medicare, just part A. thanks.The cold, hard, actuarial truth is that we don’t need Scott’s plan to force a debate over Medicare funding, because within five years, the trust fund that funds Medicare hospital coverage (Medicare Part A) will have a zero balance. That’s right. In their annual report, released last June, Medicare’s trustees reported that the hospital insurance trust fund will bring in $412.6 billion in 2023. It will spend $415.6 billion. That means it will spend $3 billion more than it generates in revenue this year.![]()
Analysis: Medicare and Social Security insolvency is right around the corner
The cold, hard, actuarial truth is that within five years, the trust fund that funds Medicare hospital coverage (Medicare Part A) will have a zero balance.www.cnn.com
People only need to work a decade to qualify for SS benefits. It’s a payroll tax. The amount of the benefit is based on one’s contribution over 35 years. What people contribute or don’t is on them. Asking others to make them whole is not part of the deal. The rules are the same for everyone.The evidence thus far all points to that being you.
AND...!!!? (Lemme guess.. That would be "unfair"!)
AND...!!!? Many, despite their best efforts, never qualify for any S.S. benefits. How is that not at least equally "unfair"!?
Do I really need to quote FDR stating the (his) genuine intent behind S.S. back to you again?
It's not just some fucking "retirement" plan!
"Social Security" <-- Perhaps say that out loud.. Repeatedly.. Emphasis on the "Security"!..
It was never intended to be of "benefit" to those in need of no such assistance!
Oh, you deny Obama took out OBL from the grassy knoll ?WTF. Partisans are such fools.
You are a cultist just like a rabid Trumper.
its their money, the paid into it their entire working lives, they can spend it however they want, its their money!I once told the owner of a golf course that if SS were to go broke, all of the golf courses would fold. After looking startled for a moment, he sudden realized what many social security checks are actually used for. Ask a bunch of old farts that play golf….Many use their SS checks. Right, it’s not a primary subsistence. It will still keep you in the poor house….
right 20 quarters of paying in gets you a small benefit at retirement.People only need to work a decade to qualify for SS benefits. It’s a payroll tax. The amount of the benefit is based on one’s contribution over 35 years. What people contribute or don’t is on them. Asking others to make them whole is not part of the deal. The rules are the same for everyone.
Nope….if they tried, they’d lose every election till they died. They think the public is stooopid. They’re right for the registered Republican.Why didn’t Republicans get rid of it when they controlled the WH, Senate, and House from 2017-2019?
Oh yeah, because Dimwingers are lying sacks of shit.
And your point is ????? Mine is, it’s barely enough to keep your “social” calendar filled.its their money, the paid into it their entire working lives, they can spend it however they want, its their money!
for many it is the difference between surviving and starving. yes, for most its not a big check, but it depends on how much you paid in, I paid the maximum every year for over 40 years, so my SS payment is a nice sum and really helps.And your point is ????? Mine is, it’s barely enough to keep your “social” calendar filled.
6.2% on their entire salary.What should they pay and why?
Please don’t be even more ignorant.Oh, you deny Obama took out OBL from the grassy knoll ?
I have for years advocated for eliminating the cap entirely, the rich should pay SS on their entire annual income, no caps.6.2% on their entire salary.
Because $160K is to low a cap, it should be at a minimum doubled to $320K and probably raised to $500K then indexed to inflation.
WW
we have never had a tax cut under any administration that only cut taxes on billionaires, that is leftist propaganda and a blatant lie. If the tax code favors the rich with loopholes, look at who wrote the tax code----------------the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 100 years---democrats.
ok, lacking, you claim its fake news, prove it wrong.we have never had a tax cut under any administration that only cut taxes on billionaires, that is leftist propaganda and a blatant lie. If the tax code favors the rich with loopholes, look at who wrote the tax code----------------the party that has controlled congress for most of the last 100 years---democrats.
Then they should collect proportionately to what they put in. Nope, SS is fine the way it’s is. It produces a surplus that makes it solvent indefinitely if left alone. Medicare, should be replaced by Medicare for all. That’s where the rich should be tax progressively.6.2% on their entire salary.
Because $160K is to low a cap, it should be at a minimum doubled to $320K and probably raised to $500K then indexed to inflation.
WW