Should the Social Security and Medicare Age be Raised

[kaz]

Doing what?

Are you a mason? Plumber? Roofer?

No?

Oh

You only cut a snippet of the quote so I don't understand your question. But I said I have cancer

 

[kaz]

Once the government takes your money, it is theirs. They offer it and I take it.

And the national debt will be a burden on your children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. And yet, you do your absolute best to pay as little as +you can in taxes.

I was with you until the last sentence. I don't understand what that means, can you clarify the question?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You only cut a snippet of the quote so I don't understand your question. But I said I have cancer

Sorry to hear that, me too.

 

[kaz]

Speaking of no money saved, how do you plan to survive during retirement? Or is it your plan to work until you die!?

Not following you down your ratholes.

Fact: There is no money, the government spent it as it came in like all other taxes
Fact: No money = no trust fund
Fact: Zero dollars of the money in your checks came from you, there is NO MONEY
Fact: Alll money in your check came from taxpayers, just like all other welfare programs

There is no money, there is no trust fund, Social Security works like welfare in EVERY RESPECT other than the compliance words government taught you and you repeat so easily. Of course you can't refute those, which is why you keep throwing up diversions hoping I'll follow them since you're getting destroyed here. You're on welfare no matter what diversions you try

 

[FA_Q2]

If I believe the government didn't save any of your money (factually it is not in question, it didn't), then I should not take a tax refund when I overpay my taxes.

Explain, I don't get it. How does A lead to B?

Because the government charged me for a product. It said that it will take X money now and in return I will get Y later. That means I have PAID for that product. It is MINE, if the government saved the money or not is actually irrelevant. Just like if I offered you a couch if you were to pay me 10 bucks a month for the next 2 years and then did not give you the couch after those 2 years.

This is the problem with these types of programs, they take money now for promises that they cannot deliver on. If the government ASKED me, you might have a point but instead they forced me to buy the product.

You bet your ass after they took all that cash from me at the point of a gun I am going to take the benefits, if any, that I can when it comes time for me to collect.

As far as it being equivalent to paying extra on your taxes (or simply giving the government money that they are not demanding) it is the same thing because that is what you are stating people should do with that product they were forced to buy - give it back to the government.

That money is theirs, they paid for the benefit. Not taking it is the same as giving government your money. It is flatly unreasonable to force people to pay into a program and then tell them that they should refuse to draw the benefits that they were required to pay for.

 

[FA_Q2]

It is not insurance. Insurance doesn't send you a monthly check. You send THEM a monthly check. You're more confused than the leftists. Calling social security "insurance" is retarded. What insurance company sends you a monthly check? Name them

Well, it really is an insurance product. It is structured like many other insurance products, paying out when specific terms are met and not paying when they are not.

The problem with this insurance product, the reason that no non-governmental insurance product will ever be comparable, is because the specific terms that must be met will be met by nearly 100 percent of all owners of the product.

And that is a massive issue. Insurance is supposed to spread out risk, that is it's sole purpose. SS is an insurance program that is trying to be a social welfare program. That is nonsensical but it is what it is.

 

[kaz]

Every insurance company. If you pay the premiums, and then qualify, they send you a check. Every insurance company that has disability insurance will send you a check if you become disabled.

You might want to actually know what you are talking about before you call someone retarded.

All those insurance companies take your and everyone else's premiums and invests the pool of money. Your payments come from that pool. It's called risk sharing.

Social Security taxes are spent as they come in. Government robs your children and grand children, wastes a bunch of the money and gives you what's left.

You don't see the difference, do you? Be honest ...

LOL, my favorite was "Every Insurance Company." So you're getting big monthly checks are you for your car insurance, homeowners, medical and all those other insurance companies huh? LOL.

Insurance = risk pooling

You don't even understand what that means, do you? LOL, dufus

 

[kaz]

Because the government charged me for a product. It said that it will take X money now and in return I will get Y later. That means I have PAID for that product. It is MINE, if the government saved the money or not is actually irrelevant. Just like if I offered you a couch if you were to pay me 10 bucks a month for the next 2 years and then did not give you the couch after those 2 years.

This is the problem with these types of programs, they take money now for promises that they cannot deliver on. If the government ASKED me, you might have a point but instead they forced me to buy the product.

You bet your ass after they took all that cash from me at the point of a gun I am going to take the benefits, if any, that I can when it comes time for me to collect.

As far as it being equivalent to paying extra on your taxes (or simply giving the government money that they are not demanding) it is the same thing because that is what you are stating people should do with that product they were forced to buy - give it back to the government.

That money is theirs, they paid for the benefit. Not taking it is the same as giving government your money. It is flatly unreasonable to force people to pay into a program and then tell them that they should refuse to draw the benefits that they were required to pay for.

So in your mind the government isn't controlled by the people, huh? It's just a third party? I'm a libertarian, not how I see it. And sure not what the Constitution says. No offense, but since you're making a proposal to change the nature of government rather than making a fact base argument like WinterBorn who doesn't understand risk pooling than I could debate it.

So to be clearer, I concede, but only to this line or argument since it can't really be rebutted logically

 

[kaz]

Well, it really is an insurance product. It is structured like many other insurance products, paying out when specific terms are met and not paying when they are not.

The problem with this insurance product, the reason that no non-governmental insurance product will ever be comparable, is because the specific terms that must be met will be met by nearly 100 percent of all owners of the product.

And that is a massive issue. Insurance is supposed to spread out risk, that is it's sole purpose. SS is an insurance program that is trying to be a social welfare program. That is nonsensical but it is what it is.

OK, I addressed this with lots of flowery words, but insurance refers to risk pooling PERIOD. There is zero risk pooling in social security since EVERYONE IS A WINNER.

Don't you people know basic adult things, like what insurance is?

 

[FA_Q2]

OK, I addressed this with lots of flowery words, but insurance refers to risk pooling PERIOD. There is zero risk pooling in social security since EVERYONE IS A WINNER.

Don't you people know basic adult things, like what insurance is?

Yes, I do.

The purpose of insurance is risk pooling, yes. That does not mean you cannot apply an insurance model to something else. And it is worth noting that day one of SS it WAS risk pooling.

The original retirement age was set to an age you were likely not to meet. IOW, most people were DEAD by the time they could draw benefits. It was true insurance.

That concept ended very quickly though because government cannot run an insurance product. The old saying goes, "[Democracy] can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." SS exemplifies this concept.

 

[Lesh]

Fact: There is no money, the government spent it as it came in like all other taxes

That was the deal (as explained at length above) Reagan made. Excess payroll taxes went into the General Fund and were "accounted for" by "purchasing" Treasury Bills which of course are very real things

Fact: No money = no trust fund

Treasury Bills that when redeemed are paid out as benefits. THAT was the deal.

Fact: Zero dollars of the money in your checks came from you, there is NO MONEY

That's how Social Security as always worked. From it's inception

Fact: Alll money in your check came from taxpayers, just like all other welfare programs

Calling it welfare is dishonest. I paid for my parents retirement and my kids are in turn paying for mine. Their kids will pay for theirs...unless Republicans screw the pooch and shoot the whole thing down

 

[1stNickD]

SS and MC were started in 1934 and 1965 respectfully. In 1934 job were much more physical and people’s bodies broke down starting in their 50s. Nowadays go to any company and you see people working well into their 70s… heck even construction are less strenuous on the person’s body. The trend is only going to increase. In addition, medicine is getting better and people are living longer. This reality should be recognized.

In addition it is much easier to take care of oneself and eat better and feel better at older ages.

Our safety nets need to reflect this new reality.

You don't have a clue about construction and extraction. You do not see 65- and 70-year-old construction workers on jobsites. Most workers are still broken down by age 55. The life expectancy in the USA has been dropping now for years and wages have stagnated. multiple waves of financial crashes and now massive inflation are destroying the older working-class population. rather than raising the age, the politicians t ned to replace the money that was stolen for feel good social projects. Workers paid into the system all of their lives and it was matched by their employers, damn you for wanting to deny what they have earned.

 

[FA_Q2]

So in your mind the government isn't controlled by the people, huh? It's just a third party?

Controlled? To a degree. But that is meaningless.

The facts do not care what the political theory is. It is a cold hard fact that the government forced me to buy a financial product called Social Security. There is no way around that.

I'm a libertarian, not how I see it. And sure not what the Constitution says. No offense, but since you're making a proposal to change the nature of government rather than making a fact base argument like WinterBorn who doesn't understand risk pooling than I could debate it.

Where have I changed the nature of government?

I am referring to how the government stands right now. Those were facts kaz, not philosophical points based on a fantastical idea of government. It is what was ACTUALLY done.

 

[1stNickD]

Yes, I do.

The purpose of insurance is risk pooling, yes. That does not mean you cannot apply an insurance model to something else. And it is worth noting that day one of SS it WAS risk pooling.

The original retirement age was set to an age you were likely not to meet. IOW, most people were DEAD by the time they could draw benefits. It was true insurance.

That concept ended very quickly though because government cannot run an insurance product. The old saying goes, "[Democracy] can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." SS exemplifies this concept.

Except that it was mandatory t for people to pay into the program and it was a promise this society made to workers. The only problem we have today is that both the democrats and republicans took this money from workers and their employers and spent it on other things. so they need to not receive one penny of pensions or life-time healthcare until they fix the system and replace what they stole. Or until they throw themselves into the mouth of an active volcano.

 

[Lesh]

The only problem we have today is that both the democrats and republicans took this money from workers and their employers and spent it on other things.

You don't get it.

There is no way to "bank" Federal funds.

All they CAN do is borrow against Treasury Bills and put that money into the General Fund. When the T Bills come due the General Fund repays it and that is NOT a big deal.

That was always the plan and it works

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

OK, I addressed this with lots of flowery words, but insurance refers to risk pooling PERIOD. There is zero risk pooling in social security since EVERYONE IS A WINNER.

Don't you people know basic adult things, like what insurance is?

People who pass away before retirement are not winners, they are losers. They paid into the system all of their lives and got nothing in return, and because it's government operated, their heirs won't see a dime of that money either.

Insurance works the exact same way. You pay auto or home insurance all your life, but if you never got into an accident, got your car stolen, have a house fire or major water damage, you get nothing back for all the years you paid your premiums.

Also insurance works the same way as in there is no real account in your name but on paper. They don't take your money and save it for when you need it. They use your money to payoff claims of people currently in need of help.

 

[WinterBorn]

All those insurance companies take your and everyone else's premiums and invests the pool of money. Your payments come from that pool. It's called risk sharing.

Social Security taxes are spent as they come in. Government robs your children and grand children, wastes a bunch of the money and gives you what's left.

You don't see the difference, do you? Be honest ...

LOL, my favorite was "Every Insurance Company." So you're getting big monthly checks are you for your car insurance, homeowners, medical and all those other insurance companies huh? LOL.

Insurance = risk pooling

You don't even understand what that means, do you? LOL, dufus

You ask a question, and then get all crazy when someone doesn't answer what you didn't ask.

You asked "It is not insurance. Insurance doesn't send you a monthly check. You send THEM a monthly check. You're more confused than the leftists. Calling social security "insurance" is retarded. What insurance company sends you a monthly check? Name them"

I answered. It is that simple.

 

[WinterBorn]

We were discussing how you saved shit now you want government checks from the government when they SPENT IT AS IT CAME IN LIKE EVERY OTHER TAX. None of this has anything to do with that you want to live on your children's money forcibly confiscated by government.

None of this has ANYTHING to do with that, Howdy Doody. Did you reply to the wrong post, greedy bastard who wants to live on other people's money?

No, that is not what we were discussing. At no time did I say I had not saved. Not once. You were the one who did not save anything.

I paid into an insurance that promised to pay be a retirement stipend when I reached certain age. I have reached that age and now they are going to send me a check.

 

[Blues Man]

they are bonds of general fund debt payable to social security

The only "fiction" is that unless social security taxes collect enough each year to pay soc sec benefits each year, we have to use general funds to pay benefits

The temptation will be to just have the Fed buy more general obligation debt to pay benefits. But that could be inflationary .... of course inflation makes debt worrth less

They are bonds that no one else can buy therefore they are a government invented instrument for the sole use of the government meant as a tool for fudging the books

 

[Blues Man]

How is SS designed to keep people dependent on the government, when all it is supposed to be is a retirement plan for citizen's who have paid into it all their lives while working a job ??? The problem is how it is being raided, and then the citizen's are getting screwed over in the end because the return sucks when it's time to retire. Now it's correct that people should absolutely not rely on SS only for their retirement, but it's a shame after paying in all of those years that the citizen gets screwed over by the government in a corrupt (as Ray calls it "ponsi scheme").

For one no one in the government will tell you that SS is supposed to be a retirement plan.

2) It has been shown that if even a person with a modest income could save that 12.4% of his lifetime income in a balanced portfolio then that person would indeed retire wealthy and the 1200 a month that SS pays out in retirement is a pittance in comparison

A pittance meant to keep people dependent on the government