Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-14-2015, 04:12 PM
 
Location: New Jersey
11,387 posts, read 16,771,780 times
Reputation: 13483

Advertisements

I'm now done with Christie as he turns to socialism. Hey!!! Christie, whether I need the money or not, it's mine..Keep your hands off it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~

Gov. Chris Christie was in New Hampshire on Tuesday to unveil a package of national proposals aimed at reforming Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and disability insurance — or so-called “entitlements.”

On Social Security, the potential 2016 Republican presidential candidate proposed gradually raising the national retirement age to 69, hiking the early retirement age to 64 and imposing income caps on payments. Under Christie’s plan, future retirees making $80,000 annually in income exclusive of Social Security will see benefits gradually phased out and those making in excess of $200,000 annually will see them eliminated entirely.

In N.H., Christie proposes raising national retirement age to 69 | NJBIZ
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:41 PM
 
Location: Arizona
8,286 posts, read 8,697,862 times
Reputation: 27736
The people affected by age 69 are not even in the workforce yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Austin
15,662 posts, read 10,439,676 times
Reputation: 19584
Spelling out his plans in detail for the first time, Christie proposed:

-- Raising the retirement age for Social Security to 69 from 67, for those born in 1960 or later;

-- Raising the age to qualify for Medicare by one month per year until it reaches 67 from the current 65.

-- Eliminating payroll taxes for seniors who remain in the workforce.


He also called for phasing out retirement payments to those with more than $200,000 a year in other income and smaller reductions for those earning $80,000. Together, he said, the overhaul would save $1 trillion over a decade.

Bloomberg, "Chris Christie Pushes Means Test for Social Security in New Hampshire"
Apr 14, 2015

“We spend over 56 percent of the income per every worker on seniors, while spending only 8 percent on children,” said Christie. (This sentence didn't make much sense to me. Maybe he was misquoted.)



I'd like to hear more, but his start to this discussion seems sensible so far.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:49 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
7,541 posts, read 10,283,002 times
Reputation: 3510
Quote:
Originally Posted by camaro69 View Post
I'm now done with Christie as he turns to socialism. Hey!!! Christie, whether I need the money or not, it's mine..Keep your hands off it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~


Governor Christie isn't going to be the nominee anyhow.


If the Republicans decide to nominate a moderate, it will be Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:52 PM
 
Location: USA
806 posts, read 1,087,596 times
Reputation: 1433
Why is this not a rational plan?

"When the Social Security program was initiated in 1935, the average life expectancy was 61 years old. Considering that the average age for retirement has remained consistently around 65, beneficiaries in the early years of the program were receiving payment for a much shorter time."

https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c...hsocialsec.htm

I don't see why he's receiving flak for this. Common sense says that with SS/Medicare deficits looming hugely in the future, something needs to be done as Americans are living much longer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:53 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,980,013 times
Reputation: 7458
Agree with Christie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 08:56 PM
 
20,524 posts, read 15,940,244 times
Reputation: 5948
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyyfanatic85 View Post
Why is this not a rational plan?

"When the Social Security program was initiated in 1935, the average life expectancy was 61 years old. Considering that the average age for retirement has remained consistently around 65, beneficiaries in the early years of the program were receiving payment for a much shorter time."

https://web.stanford.edu/class/e297c...hsocialsec.htm

I don't see why he's receiving flak for this. Common sense says that with SS/Medicare deficits looming hugely in the future, something needs to be done as Americans are living much longer.
I'd agree but; many of us who've worked physical jobs DON'T make it to 65 before our bodies start giving out. 69 would be tougher yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 09:01 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,646,436 times
Reputation: 27720
Actually just scrap the entire program.
Give us back the money we put in and let us figure out how to save for retirement.

FYI..over $2.5 TRILLION in the Fund in Treasuries from when Congress "borrowed" the surplus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 09:07 PM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,980,013 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Actually just scrap the entire program.
Give us back the money we put in and let us figure out how to save for retirement.

FYI..over $2.5 TRILLION in the Fund in Treasuries from when Congress "borrowed" the surplus.
Agree with HappyTexan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2015, 09:13 PM
 
Location: Gone
25,231 posts, read 16,978,544 times
Reputation: 5932
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Actually just scrap the entire program.
Give us back the money we put in and let us figure out how to save for retirement.

FYI..over $2.5 TRILLION in the Fund in Treasuries from when Congress "borrowed" the surplus.
I'll go for that, pay back what they took and I would be fine with it, some interest should be included, I believe there is no reason they should not pay at least the going interest rate, thing is that will not happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:23 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top