Should the Social Security and Medicare Age be Raised

[Winco]

That takes me back to the Bill Clinton days when the mantra of the left was what a man does on his own time is his own business. My how things change. I never hear the phrase my body--my choice anymore from you leftists either. Why is that?

Because you RWI's stopped ranting about abortion, (Her body her choice, I still support that up to like 10 weeks or death to the mother)
Now your focus is on MASKS and you have taken over the phrase "my body my choice"

 

[WinterBorn]

Lesh, Flopper, WinterBorn

They argue that a welfare program is "insurance," they don't understand that insurance is defined as a type of risk sharing, they don't grasp that if you borrow $10 million and you owe $10 million that your net worth is zero, they think your net worth is $10 million.

Lush and flopper and Winterborn say they are stupid, why would I argue with them instead of just believing them? They say they are morons, I believe them

Morons? Funny, the things you have said have either been ridiculous or off-topic insults. Neither matter to me.

I would disagree with any attempt to raise the age for social security and medicare.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Because you RWI's stopped ranting about abortion, (Her body her choice, I still support that up to like 10 weeks or death to the mother)
Now your focus is on MASKS and you have taken over the phrase "my body my choice"

Stopped ranting about abortion? WTF did that happen? They never stopped. In fact their last bitch was about Texas and their limitations they just placed on abortions.

Yes, we used your phrase my body-my choice to demonstrate the never ending hypocrisy of the left. My body-my choice is fine when it comes to killing babies but outlandish when it comes to being forced to take a vaccine that was developed in less than a year.

 

[Winco]

Stopped ranting about abortion? WTF did that happen? They never stopped.

Your reading and comprehension skills are lacking.
I said,
Because you RWI's stopped ranting about abortion, (Her body her choice, I still support that up to like 10 weeks or death to the mother)
Now your focus is on MASKS and you have taken over the phrase "my body my choice"

And you respond, "They never stopped."
When you say they, you mean the left, correct?

I'm saying the left hasn't had to defend abortion (thus the lack of the phrase) because RWI's are focused on Mandates and trucker convoys.

 

[Flopper]

The last thing in the world Flopper or Lesh want are "informed" voters. The last thing they are is informed voters. The morons actually believe that 1 - 1 = 1. What a couple of dumb asses

When a select group of informed citizens select the leadership, we are moving away from a democratic form of goverment to one where leaders are selected and ruled by those with political knowledge. When you do this, those you exclude from voting join the disenfranchised who become bystanders who are neither supportive nor loyal to the government.

​

 

[Flopper]

Morons? Funny, the things you have said have either been ridiculous or off-topic insults. Neither matter to me.

I would disagree with any attempt to raise the age for social security and medicare.

in 12 years there will be no Social Security trust funds to pay benefits. So if no changes are made to benefits or retirement age, social security will be short 238 billion dollars a year. That amount can come from increased payroll taxes, increase income taxes, or go unfunded and add to the yearly deficit and debt. The payroll tax would be paying 75% of the benefits and the government would be paying 25%. This is how most social systems are funded which include Canada, UK, and Australia. The worker share of the funding runs from zero to 75% with government paying the remainder. I think this is a far better method than relying on a trust fund.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

in 12 years there will be no Social Security trust funds to pay benefits. So if no changes are made to benefits or retirement age, social security will be short 238 billion dollars a year. That amount can come from increased payroll taxes, increase income taxes, or go unfunded and add to the yearly deficit and debt. The payroll tax would be paying 75% of the benefits and the government would be paying 25%. This is how most social systems are funded which include Canada, UK, and Australia. The worker share of the funding runs from zero to 75% with government paying the remainder. I think this is a far better method than relying on a trust fund.

It actually reveals it's a Ponzi scheme. I like GW's idea the best, you can keep SS but also use a small portion of your retirement for your own IRA.

 

[beagle9]

What makes a good voter is certainly not knowledge of politics or government but rather one that takes the time to become informed on the issues and candidates, making a decision, and voting. I would rather see voters that become informed on the issues and candidates than passed a test about politics and government.

Huh !!!!!! Becoming informed on the issues, and on the candidates that will be residing over the issues is definitely the very definition of politics, being political and of government. So I agree with Rays phrasing of the issue exactly in the way that he did.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When a select group of informed citizens select the leadership, we are moving away from a democratic form of goverment to one where leaders are selected and ruled by those with political knowledge. When you do this, those you exclude from voting join the disenfranchised who become bystanders who are neither supportive nor loyal to the government.

​

You joined this discussion late, but I posted a scenario early on so I'll reiterate:

The MLB decided to let citizens of their city pick players instead of management. Your city allows anybody to clip out the ballot from the newspaper to vote. In my city, you had to answer questions to demonstrate you had an acute knowledge of baseball to vote on players.

In your city women are selecting players by how cute they are. The guys are selecting players based on race or their ethnicity. Which one of our cities do you suppose would have the better team?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your reading and comprehension skills are lacking.
I said,
Because you RWI's stopped ranting about abortion, (Her body her choice, I still support that up to like 10 weeks or death to the mother)
Now your focus is on MASKS and you have taken over the phrase "my body my choice"

And you respond, "They never stopped."
When you say they, you mean the left, correct?

I'm saying the left hasn't had to defend abortion (thus the lack of the phrase) because RWI's are focused on Mandates and trucker convoys.

No, I meant the right never stopped. I watch those evil right-wing shows on Fox. They constantly talk about abortion. When Trump was President he too talked about getting pro-life judges on the bench. It never stopped. You just watch those left-wing shows and if they're not talking about it, it's not happening in your view.

The left and right have to keep people in their tent and expand it when possible, so the right wants to keep the religious vote happy so they're not going to drop it unless the religious kind no longer cares about the abortion issue which I doubt will happen anytime in our lives.

 

[Flopper]

You joined this discussion late, but I posted a scenario early on so I'll reiterate:

The MLB decided to let citizens of their city pick players instead of management. Your city allows anybody to clip out the ballot from the newspaper to vote. In my city, you had to answer questions to demonstrate you had an acute knowledge of baseball to vote on players.

In your city women are selecting players by how cute they are. The guys are selecting players based on race or their ethnicity. Which one of our cities do you suppose would have the better team?

I don't doubt that the most knowledgeable people will pick better players than those with less knowledge. I also doubt that most of those that were not given the option to vote on the players failed to become strong supporters of of the team.

When people are not allowed to vote for their leaders and those that would represent them, they lose faith in the government and government loses their support. This is exactly what lead to the American Revolution. England believed the colonist lacked the loyalty to the king and the judgement to select their leaders or have representation in parliament. This was a primary factor that lead to the revolution. Prior to 1828, non-property owners in the US did have the right to vote because it was felt they did not have the ties to the community needed to make good voting decisions. In 1820, non-property owners began refusing to pay taxes because they were denied the vote. In 1828 non-property owners got the right to vote. In the 19th century women were not allowed to vote because men believe they lacked the intellect and knowledge needed to make voting decisions. And today, you want to disenfranchise voters that you believe don't have the knowledge to make good voting decisions.

It seems you don't think much of democracy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't doubt that the most knowledgeable people will pick better players than those with less knowledge. I also doubt that most of those that were not given the option to vote on the players failed to become strong supporters of of the team.

When people are not allowed to vote for their leaders and those that would represent them, they lose faith in the government and government loses their support. This is exactly what lead to the American Revolution. England believed the colonist lacked the loyalty to the king and the judgement to select their leaders or have representation in parliament. This was a primary factor that lead to the revolution. Prior to 1828, non-property owners in the US did have the right to vote because it was felt they did not have the ties to the community needed to make good voting decisions. In 1820, non-property owners began refusing to pay taxes because they were denied the vote. In 1828 non-property owners got the right to vote. In the 19th century women were not allowed to vote because men believe they lacked the intellect and knowledge needed to make voting decisions. And today, you want to disenfranchise voters that you believe don't have the knowledge to make good voting decisions.

It seems you don't think much of democracy.

If your version of democracy is allowing people to vote money out of the pockets of other people, no I don't. Outside of payroll taxes (which you get back when and if you retire plus local services) half of our country pays no federal income tax that funds most of our welfare programs.

Voting was very important to people of yesteryear which is why they offered resistance. Today if you don't have the rudimentary understanding of our government, country or policies, chances are you're not very interested in voting either. If you are interested, then you can put a little effort to understand these things, and it's never been easier to do since the invention of this internet. You have access to hundreds of opinions and reporting at your fingertips in the comfort of your own home. If you don't have that luxury, then you can get it from the comfort of you local library. Nobody is shut out unless they don't care enough to be let in.

"When people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of our Republic."
Benjamin Franklin

What really bugs you is the idea of shutting out politically ignorant people because most if not all of them vote Democrat.

 

[Jarlaxle]

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.

Social security should revert to its original status: the age to collect should be raised to the average life expectancy, plus two.

 

[dblack]

Social security should revert to its original status: the age to collect should be raised to the average life expectancy, plus two.

Social Security should be converted into a safety net, and not a forced government retirement plan.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Social Security should be converted into a safety net, and not a forced government retirement plan.

Social Security should have been strangled in the cradle and should not exist. It's a giant Ponzi scheme.

 

[Lesh]

Social Security should have been strangled in the cradle and should not exist. It's a giant Ponzi scheme.

And there is the Republican attitude towards social security.

Kill it.

Always has been

 

[Blues Man]

POS trump, a so called Billionaire, is notorious for nonpayment of contractors work, stopping them from “improving their own financial position “

That’s what scum like trump do to other people.

IDGAF what Trump does.

Why do you seem to think I do?

 

[Blues Man]

You can not combine SS trust fund assets with treasury debt to determine the government net worth because they are separate entities both legally and in government accounting. In government accounting, the treasury bills held by trust funds are carried as a liability of the federal government and are part of the national debt. These treasury bills are trust fund assets but they are not assets of the federal government.

They are not assets at all.

They are an IOU issued by the government to a government agency

They have absolutely no value outside of the government

 

[Lesh]

They are not assets at all.

They are an IOU issued by the government to a government agency

They have absolutely no value outside of the government

All financial obligations (and these are those) are based on faith. Full Faith and Credit

Bonds, checks, even dollars are nothing but promises to pay.

You very simply want to reneg on that promise and screw over Social Security Beneficiaries

 

[Blues Man]

All financial obligations (and these are those) are based on faith. Full Faith and Credit

Bonds, checks, even dollars are nothing but promises to pay.

You very simply want to reneg on that promise and screw over Social Security Beneficiaries

LOL

Social security is screwing people out of millions of dollars