Republicans Are, And Have Been, Attacking Social Security

[Ray From Cleveland]

You know i get that you don’t trust or like democrats which is fine. That doesn’t matter much. What matters though is the trust you have in republicans. It’s wildly misguided. You better believe republicans are willing to pass legislation that will fuck you over. You really need to wise up to that dude. They don’t give a flying fuck about you and their legislation proves that.

Which legislation are you talking about?

Our federal government was not created to give a fuck about anybody. Our federal government was created to govern.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

"Am I an actuary?" No. I'm an information system guy for Human Resources. My boss is quite a visionary, I'm a behind the scenes technical guy. If it's computer system related she tells me what she want's as an outcome, we discuss details. Then she gets out of the way while I roll up my sleeves. Very good working situation to be honest and why I enjoy my job. But it means I need to peek behind the curtain and think beyond the bump-sticker and think through details of how something works.

I work with benefits systems, recruiting systems, the HR side of payroll, ya-da ya-da ya-da.



My parents were older when I was born and their own retirement was just a few years away. They would have tried to help, but I left home at 18 with nothing on but the clothes on my back and joined the Navy. My rating was in Aviation Electronics, which led to computers, then databases and now information systems. Forty-Five years later I'm looking at our own retirement. We have - well - some solid retirement assets (home equity, 401K's, some stocks, CD's, etc.). The retirement budget has 6 sources of revenue (military pension, current employer pension, and SS for each of us). Our revenue steams will cover retirement living without having to touch retirement assets, including not touching the 401Ks.

Right now (in addition to employer health insurance) we have TRICARE Select which transitions to TRICARE for Life once we reach 65. We'll have TRICARE and MediCare in retirement and Medicare premiums won't be a problem. Will probably pick up either an Advantage or MediGap policy to cover the holes in coordinated medical coverage. As military retirees we are enrolled in the BENFEDS program where we access Dental and Vision coverage, those premiums already come out of my military retirement.

Personally speaking, if I assume a 25% reduction (worst case) in SS payments in 2035 - in other words SS check are reduced to 75%. That 25% drop in SS results in a 9.3% reduction in Gross Income (pre-tax) because SS is only 2 of the 6 streams. Because of the reduction in income, some napkin calculations show the effective negative impact on disposable income is 7.36% because of the standard deduction for taxes.***

WW

*** Take Gross Income, subtract the standard deduction for married filing jointly with the Senior provision, calculate Federal & State income tax on that amount, then subtract the taxes from Gross to get disposable income to build the budget. Then repeat the process based on a SS income reduction of 25%. The difference is the true impact of the SS reduction on our personal retirement budget based on the 6 revenue streams. Even then, if SS is reduced by 25%, the direct impact on disposable income isn't dollar-for-dollar because there is less income on which to pay Income Taxes.

Of course what Joe Bidiot did with the economy, necessarily causing gasoline prices to skyrocket, then food prices and housing prices, Social Security is like being taxed to death. But a Marxist/Democrat doesnt care about this hidden tax on SS, just that Joe Bidiot, was able to steal the election and Orange Man Bad is out who had kept all those prices low.

 

[Red Front]

Obama also acknowledged that entitlements was driver of high debt

The truth is that the federal government doesn't have a "debt" in the same way that a household or business does. When a household or business borrows money, they must pay it back with interest, or risk going into default. This is not the case with the federal government, which can always print more money to pay its debts.

While this may sound alarming, it's important to note that the federal government has a number of tools at its disposal to manage its debt and ensure that it does not become a burden on the economy. It can raise taxes, it can sell its assets, or even better, It can invest in national infrastructure that increases productivity and hence the nation's GDP, allowing the federal government to print more money without causing inflation. Inflation occurs when there's too much money in the private sector, without adequate production. When consumers have a lot of money and there aren't enough products and services for them to purchase, that causes scarcity and increases prices, i.e. inflation.

The reality is that the "government debt" rhetoric is often used by both Republicans and Democrats to push their political agendas and advance their interests. By creating a sense of panic around the issue, they can justify policies that are aimed at cutting spending or reducing government services, which can have serious consequences for everyday Americans.

 

[WorldWatcher]

No because Wall Street has no claim on it. The money gets transferred to the state as unclaimed funds. The state holds the money until somebody does claim it. What they do with it after X period of time I don't know. But it doesn't go to Wall Street so I have no idea where you got that from.

I don't believe this is true. My MIL passed last summer and my wife is the executor of her estate which just recently finally cleared probate. There were a few thousand dollars of stocks that my MIL held.

What happened was:

• My wife setup an Estate Trust with Bank of America (my MIL's main bank) to handle the finances of closing the estate out, paying final bills and distributing bequeaths and final splits to beneficiaries.
• Once the Death Certificate was received and court documents from probate were available.
• Morgan Stanley (MIL's broker agency) was able to sell the stocks at market prices.
• The funds were deposited in the Trust Account.
• Funds were distributed equally to the beneficiaries of the Trust (my wife and her 3 siblings).

It was much cleaner to do it that way then to try to transfer the various stocks to individuals as part of probate. The stocks were not kept by Wall Street nor were they transferred to "the state" as they were part of the estates.

WW

 

[francoHFW]

There's not enough income among the rich to fund half of the things the usual suspects bleat about. And would you rather small towns become Road Warrior territory?

We are by far the richest country in the world We can handle it, Super Dupe. Everybody else does in the modern world

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't believe this is true. My MIL passed last summer and my wife is the executor of her estate which just recently finally cleared probate. There were a few thousand dollars of stocks that my MIL held.

What happened was:

• My wife setup an Estate Trust with Bank of America (my MIL's main bank) to handle the finances of closing the estate out, paying final bills and distributing bequeaths and final splits to beneficiaries.
• Once the Death Certificate was received and court documents from probate were available.
• Morgan Stanley (MIL's broker agency) was able to sell the stocks at market prices.
• The funds were deposited in the Trust Account.
• Funds were distributed equally to the beneficiaries of the Trust (my wife and her 3 siblings).

It was much cleaner to do it that way then to try to transfer the various stocks to individuals as part of probate. The stocks were not kept by Wall Street nor were they transferred to "the state" as they were part of the estates.

WW

If a claim is made, yes. But if there are no beneficiaries, it gets transferred to the state. Our state advertises the site once in a while on the news. For shits and giggles I went there and typed in all kinds of names. My mothers name came up because she was the beneficiary for her mother. It was only a few hundred bucks, but the state held it for over 25 years. She filed a claim and got the money. Why they couldn't find her in the first place I have no idea. My parents number was in the phone book.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The truth is that the federal government doesn't have a "debt" in the same way that a household or business does. When a household or business borrows money, they must pay it back with interest, or risk going into default. This is not the case with the federal government, which can always print more money to pay its debts.

While this may sound alarming, it's important to note that the federal government has a number of tools at its disposal to manage its debt and ensure that it does not become a burden on the economy. It can raise taxes, it can sell its assets, or even better, It can invest in national infrastructure that increases productivity and hence the nation's GDP, allowing the federal government to print more money without causing inflation. Inflation occurs when there's too much money in the private sector, without adequate production. When consumers have a lot of money and there aren't enough products and services for them to purchase, that causes scarcity and increases prices, i.e. inflation.

The reality is that the "government debt" rhetoric is often used by both Republicans and Democrats to push their political agendas and advance their interests. By creating a sense of panic around the issue, they can justify policies that are aimed at cutting spending or reducing government services, which can have serious consequences for everyday Americans.

I dont know, i just remember back in the 1930s when the Weimar Republic thought they could print money to pay down their debt, and that was only about 200 billion dollars. Look what happened after that.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

I don't believe this is true. My MIL passed last summer and my wife is the executor of her estate which just recently finally cleared probate. There were a few thousand dollars of stocks that my MIL held.

What happened was:

• My wife setup an Estate Trust with Bank of America (my MIL's main bank) to handle the finances of closing the estate out, paying final bills and distributing bequeaths and final splits to beneficiaries.
• Once the Death Certificate was received and court documents from probate were available.
• Morgan Stanley (MIL's broker agency) was able to sell the stocks at market prices.
• The funds were deposited in the Trust Account.
• Funds were distributed equally to the beneficiaries of the Trust (my wife and her 3 siblings).

It was much cleaner to do it that way then to try to transfer the various stocks to individuals as part of probate. The stocks were not kept by Wall Street nor were they transferred to "the state" as they were part of the estates.

WW

I have already set up three trust accounts for my children to inherit what i will leave them. With the trust, the money is taxed at a much lower rate with the dividends those stocks will pay out. That is a dirty little secret the government never tells their voters, because they dont want to share the spotlight with the riff raff.

Just look at how they treat the voters...

 

[WorldWatcher]

If a claim is made, yes. But if there are no beneficiaries, it gets transferred to the state. Our state advertises the site once in a while on the news. For shits and giggles I went there and typed in all kinds of names. My mothers name came up because she was the beneficiary for her mother. It was only a few hundred bucks, but the state held it for over 25 years. She filed a claim and got the money. Why they couldn't find her in the first place I have no idea. My parents number was in the phone book.

Okay, I misunderstood what you were saying earlier.

Don't take this personally as dig against your family, but in the grand scheme of things the breakdown wasn't in the system. The breakdown was with whomever was (or should have been) the executor of the estate. It sounds like it wasn't closed out properly. Which, to give the executor the benefit of the doubt, they can't do their "job" without being familiar with the financial situation of the person for whom they are acting as executor.

In my wife's case my MIL passed in her late 80's and my wife had been assisting her Mom with managing finances for the last decade. So my wife knew were where all the pieces of the puzzle were, that helps and it helps A LOT.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have already set up three trust accounts for my children to inherit what i will leave them. With the trust, the money is taxed at a much lower rate with the dividends those stocks will pay out. That is a dirty little secret the government never tells their voters, because they dont want to share the spotlight with the riff raff.

Just look at how they treat the voters...

Transition financial planning can make the whole process a lot easier.

Agreed 100%

WW

 

[Thinker101]

I don't believe this is true. My MIL passed last summer and my wife is the executor of her estate which just recently finally cleared probate. There were a few thousand dollars of stocks that my MIL held.

What happened was:

• My wife setup an Estate Trust with Bank of America (my MIL's main bank) to handle the finances of closing the estate out, paying final bills and distributing bequeaths and final splits to beneficiaries.
• Once the Death Certificate was received and court documents from probate were available.
• Morgan Stanley (MIL's broker agency) was able to sell the stocks at market prices.
• The funds were deposited in the Trust Account.
• Funds were distributed equally to the beneficiaries of the Trust (my wife and her 3 siblings).

It was much cleaner to do it that way then to try to transfer the various stocks to individuals as part of probate. The stocks were not kept by Wall Street nor were they transferred to "the state" as they were part of the estates.

WW

If, technically, the Trust sold the stocks, was the Trust hit with capital gains? I know if stocks are transferred to beneficiaries they are revalued and can be sold without capital gains.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Okay, I misunderstood what you were saying earlier.

Don't take this personally as dig against your family, but in the grand scheme of things the breakdown wasn't in the system. The breakdown was with whomever was (or should have been) the executor of the estate. It sounds like it wasn't closed out properly. Which, to give the executor the benefit of the doubt, they can't do their "job" without being familiar with the financial situation of the person for whom they are acting as executor.

In my wife's case my MIL passed in her late 80's and my wife had been assisting her Mom with managing finances for the last decade. So my wife knew were where all the pieces of the puzzle were, that helps and it helps A LOT.

WW

Well grandma didn't have much so I guess she just assumed the life insurance company would contact my mother which they didn't.

 

[WorldWatcher]

If, technically, the Trust sold the stocks, was the Trust hit with capital gains? I know if stocks are transferred to beneficiaries they are revalued and can be sold without capital gains.

The stocks weren't held by the Trust the stocks were in MIL's name.

Yes there were taxes (capital gains) on the sale of the stocks (IIRC it was 15 or 16%).

My MIL lived in CA and we live in VA. We aren't talking millions here as that would have been worth it. But for the few thousands of $$$ in stock it was WAY WAY easier to just sell them and deposit the funds in the trust over trying to balance the values of individuals stocks then split them to the siblings. It just wasn't worth the time.

WW

 

[Billy000]

Which legislation are you talking about?

Our federal government was not created to give a fuck about anybody. Our federal government was created to govern.

Give a fuck about anybody? So you’re saying that governing doesn’t include caring about the population of the country? I hate to break it to you but governing means addressing people.

 

[badbob85037]

Biden refused to name them, but here's the names of some of the loudest ones...



Do the USMB rightwing Republican-voters agree w/this attack on social security?

What's your position on this matter?

For the lasttime

Back in the day, the Socialist Roosevelt realized that most Progressives dont care about their future, just what they did for the day, so he had to created the Ponzi scheme so those lazy fucks could have a retirement even though many thought they wouldnt live long enough.

He I go again. For the last time. Social Security is a left over from the DemocRats New Deal that was mostly found unconstitutional at the end of WWII. Why it was left is beyond my. It was billed by the democRats sa your private saving account, no one could touch, there when ever you needed it. It was Jimmy Carter, a democRat who started giving it away to people never paying a dime into it. It was a democRat Congress that voted to 'borrow' it and 'borrow' every penny they did. It was a democRat Congress that voted to tax it with Algore casting the deciding vote. It was obama who used it to build upper middle class homes for immigrants from the middle east proving once again a member of the democRat party have the mental capacity of a rock.

 

[Thinker101]

The stocks weren't held by the Trust the stocks were in MIL's name.

Yes there were taxes (capital gains) on the sale of the stocks (IIRC it was 15 or 16%).

My MIL lived in CA and we live in VA. We aren't talking millions here as that would have been worth it. But for the few thousands of $$$ in stock it was WAY WAY easier to just sell them and deposit the funds in the trust over trying to balance the values of individuals stocks then split them to the siblings. It just wasn't worth the time.

WW

Yep, much easier. Having been through the exercise, it's a pain in the rear no matter what.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Transition financial planning can make the whole process a lot easier.

Agreed 100%

WW

Most people rely on a pension for their retirement, pensions being promised by Union members who are in the pockets of the Marxist politicians. Pensions are taxed as normal income, so while the retiree thinks he is getting tons of money for retirement, about 35% of what he earns goes to the government. So if they make $5,000 a month till they die, the government is there taking over $1,750, thus leaving the guy with really $3,250. My quarterly income from dividends is over $100,000 ever 3 months with about 12% taxation on dividends. Most rich people know of this trick, and legally follow the tax code that allows it.

Dividend Tax Rate: What It Is, How to Calculate - NerdWallet

Here's a guide to calculating your dividend tax rate, plus how to report dividend income and how to score some tax advantages.

www.nerdwallet.com

	0% tax rate	15% tax rate	20% tax rate
Single	$0 to $44,625.	$44,626 to $492,300.	$492,301 or more.
Married, filing jointly	$0 to $89,250.	$89,251 to $553,850.	$553,851 or more.
Married, filing separately	$0 to $44,625.	$44,626 to $276,900.	$276,901 or more.
Head of household	$0 to $59,750.	$59,751 to $523,050.	$523,051 or more.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

If, technically, the Trust sold the stocks, was the Trust hit with capital gains? I know if stocks are transferred to beneficiaries they are revalued and can be sold without capital gains.

If there was a large enough profit on the stocks yeah, but i think the amount has to be over 10 million dollars for capital gains to be used on inheritance.

Estate Tax | Internal Revenue Service

Get information on how the estate tax may apply to your taxable estate at your death.

www.irs.gov

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

The stocks weren't held by the Trust the stocks were in MIL's name.

Yes there were taxes (capital gains) on the sale of the stocks (IIRC it was 15 or 16%).

My MIL lived in CA and we live in VA. We aren't talking millions here as that would have been worth it. But for the few thousands of $$$ in stock it was WAY WAY easier to just sell them and deposit the funds in the trust over trying to balance the values of individuals stocks then split them to the siblings. It just wasn't worth the time.

WW

I guess you would pay the state, but you wouldnt have to pay federal as the inheritance was below the cap.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

Give a fuck about anybody? So you’re saying that governing doesn’t include caring about the population of the country? I hate to break it to you but governing means addressing people.

Only caring about people other than "White, Male, Christian, Heterosexual, and employed". Anyone else, yeah, to a point, unless the person has a vagina, then another person with tits and a dick, with ball, is more important than the vagina person. Shall i go on?