Will Republicans end social security?

[sealybobo]

Your lying doesn't matter?
No wonder you support Democrats - you're just like them.

People actually didn't vote as if inflation was their number one priority. Maybe they didn't think Republicans would do any better. In fact, the way Republicans act, they should all be run out of office. Defending even going along with insurrection.

People figured a woman's choice was at stake here and democracy was at stake. Why would we elect election denier nuts and think they could fix anything? They'd just make everything worse.

That's how bad Republicans are. With sky high inflation and still voters said no thanks.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just like we don't need any more proof ...

All I see here is your continued inability to prove your claim.
I do not expect this to change.

 

[M14 Shooter]

That's how bad Republicans are. With sky high inflation and still voters said no thanks.

More mindless, meaningless opinion

 

[M14 Shooter]

Here is proof the scientific community accepts.

Nothing here proves your claim.
Disagree?
Copy/paste the text to that effect.

 

[Leviticus]

Even though republican rhetoric is that anyone who needs government assistance (except for corporations and the wealthy) are stupid and lazy and that welfare is evil, they never publically bash Medicare or social security even though they are forms of welfare, because their biggest voting block are senior citizens who use those programs. I could easily see a Trumper being dmb enough to call for medicare and social security to be abolished and calling anyone who uses them lazy, but most Republicans are smart enough to exclude their primary supporters from their attacks.

 

[Billo_Really]

It wasn't discussed during the elections but does any one doubt SS is going to be put on the chopping block?

No way one usmb Republican will say they like and want to keep SS.

And if they want to at least tell us in 2019 so we can vote on it.

Everyone likes SS, whether they admit it or not.

 

[dblack]

Even though republican rhetoric is that anyone who needs government assistance (except for corporations and the wealthy) are stupid and lazy and that welfare is evil, they never publically bash Medicare or social security even though they are forms of welfare, because their biggest voting block are senior citizens who use those programs.

Exactly. They like the power that these programs grant to Congress as much as the Dems do.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Even though republican rhetoric is that anyone who needs government assistance (except for corporations and the wealthy) are stupid and lazy and that welfare is evil, they never publically bash Medicare or social security even though they are forms of welfare, because their biggest voting block are senior citizens who use those programs.

I think you will find an number of Republicans are more than willing to discuss Medicare/Social Security reforms.
How much you consider this to be "bashing" or "destroying" Medicare/SS depends on your level of ignorance and/or hyperpartisan bigotry.

 

[Leviticus]

Exactly. They like the power that these programs grant to Congress as much as the Dems do.

No, they will attack medicare and social security behind closed doors and back weakening them if they can ensure that their supporters won't find out about it. Plenty of Republicans have done this. They will pledge to their older supporters that they will defende the programs while doing their best to destroy them behind those supporters backs..

I mean, we are talking about a party that campaigned against giving 9/11 first responders healthcare benefits for illnesses that they got from their own at ground zero, while at the same time talking about how much they support those same people and how they would "always remember"

 

[dblack]

No, they will attack medicare and social security behind closed doors and back weakening them if they can ensure that their supporters won't find out about it. Plenty of Republicans have done this. They will pledge to their older supporters that they will defende the programs while doing their best to destroy them behind those supporters backs..

Well, good for them if that's the case, but I'm not seeing it.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, they will attack medicare and social security behind closed doors and back weakening them if they can ensure that their supporters won't find out about it.

Huh. What did I say?
Oh yeah.
How much you consider this to be "bashing" or "destroying" Medicare/SS depends on your level of ignorance and/or hyperpartisan bigotry.
How prescient of me.

 

[sealybobo]

Even though republican rhetoric is that anyone who needs government assistance (except for corporations and the wealthy) are stupid and lazy and that welfare is evil, they never publically bash Medicare or social security even though they are forms of welfare, because their biggest voting block are senior citizens who use those programs. I could easily see a Trumper being dmb enough to call for medicare and social security to be abolished and calling anyone who uses them lazy, but most Republicans are smart enough to exclude their primary supporters from their attacks.

It's why they won't admit Republicans want to end those two programs. Meanwhile, you can easily find them on other threads calling those programs socialism.

And they (Republicans) have been telling me since I was a child to NOT EXPECT TO GET MY SOCIAL SECURITY. Don't count on it they said. Am I suppose to not believe them? I'm taking them at their word on this one. And I know Democrats would NEVER end these programs.

But I bet they can be talked into cutting them 20%. I believe 20% cuts to everyone would "save" the program. And if Trump is president we know 45% of America will go along and bend over and take it. Even defend it. Hell, blame Democrats. Just like they blamed the Bush Great Recession on everyone but Bush.

 

[healthmyths]

Go to NASA's website. And if you have a better source than them, provide it please.

Why don't you? Are you that truly inept in using the Internet or too lazy or just to pompous thinking everything you post is 100% accurate?
Which is it?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Go to NASA's website.

So... you have no proof.
Gosh. I'm surprised.

 

[M14 Shooter]

It's why they won't admit Republicans want to end those two programs.

Still waiting for you to prove your claim.

 

[healthmyths]

It's why they won't admit Republicans want to end those two programs. Meanwhile, you can easily find them on other threads calling those programs socialism.

And they (Republicans) have been telling me since I was a child to NOT EXPECT TO GET MY SOCIAL SECURITY. Don't count on it they said. Am I suppose to not believe them? I'm taking them at their word on this one. And I know Democrats would NEVER end these programs.

But I bet they can be talked into cutting them 20%. I believe 20% cuts to everyone would "save" the program. And if Trump is president we know 45% of America will go along and bend over and take it. Even defend it. Hell, blame Democrats. Just like they blamed the Bush Great Recession on everyone but Bush.

It is not the GOP saying this
but the SS/Medicare Trustees:
So you should talk to them...
By law, there are six Trustees, four of whom serve by virtue of their positions in the Federal Government: the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and the Commissioner of Social Security.

Check what the Trustees say :
Social Security and Medicare both face Social Security and Medicare both face long-term financing shortfalls under currently scheduled benefits and financing. Costs of both programs will grow faster than gross domestic product (GDP) through the mid-2030s primarily due to the rapid aging of the U.S. population. Medicare costs will continue to grow faster than GDP through the late 2070s due to projected increases in the volume and intensity of services provided.Costs of both programs will grow faster than gross domestic product (GDP) through the mid-2030s primarily due to the rapid aging of the U.S. population. Medicare costs will continue to grow faster than GDP through the late 2070s due to projected increases in the volume and intensity of services provided.

The Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund, which pays retirement and survivors benefits, will be able to pay scheduled benefits on a timely basis until 2034, one year later than reported last year. At that time, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing tax income will be sufficient to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits.

The Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund, or Medicare Part A, which helps pay for services such as inpatient hospital care, will be able to pay scheduled benefits until 2028, two years later than reported last year. At that time, the fund's reserves will become depleted and continuing total program income will be sufficient to pay 90 percent of total scheduled benefits

Trustees Report Summary

A SUMMARY OF THE 2024 ANNUAL REPORTS

www.ssa.gov

 

[sealybobo]

Still waiting for you to prove your claim.

Prove we are fascist commie pedophiles who want to teach your kids how to become trannies. You can't. Yet you continue to push those narratives. LOL

 

[M14 Shooter]

Prove we are fascist commie pedophiles...

All I see here is continued confirmation that you cannot prove your claim.

 

[sealybobo]

All I see here is continued confirmation that you cannot prove your claim.

Are you suggesting Republicans like and want to keep Social security because they like it? Fuck you! You want people to be able to opt out. Which would further defund the program.

Hell, Trump tried to bankrupt SS during the pandemic. He asked for a "temporary" hold on that tax. But as we saw the pandemic continued on 2 plus years. He would have continued that tax cut and bankrupted the program. Luckily he got booted in 4 years. Slick though. He would have used the pandemic as a reason to cut benefits 20%. Rich people would have loved him. Put him on the $100 bill.

 

[sealybobo]

All I see here is continued confirmation that you cannot prove your claim.

To me this is fun. I know you hate and want to end social security. I know every Republican in Congress does too. And the House. Hell, the new Supreme Court I'm sure can find a reason why it's unconstitutional. Right?

Who do you agree with here? Helvering or Davis?

Helvering v. Davis (1937), was a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that held that Social Security was constitutionally permissible as an exercise of the federal power to spend for the general welfare and so did not contravene the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Tenth Amendment expresses the principle of federalism, also known as states' rights, by stating that the federal government has only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution, and that all other powers not forbidden to the states by the Constitution are reserved to each state.

I bet you would agree SS is unconstitutional. Bet!