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.
Just like the Dems tried blocking all sorts of reform under Clinton, and then took credit for the results.. Hillary Clinton herself was blaming Republicans for wanting to kick people off of SS back then and force seniors to eat pet food..
dont you know, you have to provide a link to this kind of thing? LOL!
you are dead right. and it is a silly argument.
bottom line, the OP here is made a Boehner for telling the truth (a truth that liberals in congress admit ) related to SS. then the OP is linking this truth to Boehner's support for the Bush Tax cuts that have absolutly zero to do with SS. (and by the way, there are a lot of Dems in congress that are now coming out in support for the Bush Tax Cuts. )
I agree the retirement age should be filled. The response from SONY should have gone to the disability department. If your father can't work, then go on disability, get you SSI early, thats how the system works. If a doctor says you're capable of working, well, he is a doctor.
My Grandfather worked till 72, with bad knees, losing his mind, and still harder than any man I've ever known. But he wouldn't have had it any other way. We tried to get him to retire, be damned, he didn't want to.
That 3% tax needs to come back. Watched an interview with Erin Burnett the other day, she talked to several wall street execs, and business leaders. All of them said yes, the tax cut repeal would mean they would make slightly less money, but it would do nothing for their hiring efforts.
To me, that means they can do without the money.
The point is, there is something wrong with our government when it demands to take more then a third of a person's wages, and even worse when we have citizens who think government is justified to take even more.
The tax rate is only 3% lower with the Bush tax cuts. With our bloated federal government, we can surely find cuts to wasteful and unnecessary spending.
Why is it that the government cannot cut back, and we always are called upon to pay more? Government is even now deciding it needs to spend $24 billion more to bail out state budgets. Even with record high debt, it's still not enough money for the government, they want to borrow an additional $1,500,000,000,000 more each year.
The top earners pay over one third of all the money they own in the form of federal income taxes, and that does not even count the state and local taxes.
You dont think there has been MANY situations like this in the past? You are so wrong about it..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
And its because of the lack of compromise from either party that we find ourselves in this situation.
Wrong, we are in this situation because
1) SS shouldnt have been allowed to exist to begin with. Government should NEVER be responsible for americans retirements..
2) People keep voting for increased benefits that they havent paid for...
3) Then people allowed the government to tap into the SS "fund".. which left nothing left
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
I blame both parties, my problem is when someone says "Well those democrats did x" and they didn't do that. Lets place the blame squarely on the shoulders of where it belongs, both parties.
Absolutely both parties are to blame, its just Republicans hold blame 1/5th of the amount of Democrats, since they've held power 1/5th of the time..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Bushes idea sucked, and that was the best Republican idea for reforming it? Really?
Another example of a proposal made by Republicans.. Can you list ANY by Democrats? btw, that was a FANTASTIC idea, it was so grossly mis-understood though that its not funny. In a way I fund my retirement in a similar manner to the proposal and I can guarantee I'll be in a better position than most of americans who rely on that SS scheme
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memphis1979
Boehner's idea is ok, and I support raising the retirement age, but it prolongs the problem, doesn't fix it. And it doesn't prolong it for long.
There isnt a "fix" to the problem as long as government continues to control and decide the terms.
The point is, there is something wrong with our government when it demands to take more then a third of a person's wages, and even worse when we have citizens who think government needs to take even more.
The tax rate is only 3% lower with the Bush tax cuts. With our bloated federal government, we can surely find cuts to wasteful and unnecessary spending.
Why is it that the government cannot cut back, and we always are called upon to pay more? Government is even now deciding it needs to spend $24 billion more to bail out state budgets. Even with record high debt, it's still not enough money for the government, they want to borrow an additional $1,500,000,000,000 more each year.
They pay over one third of all the money they own in the form of federal income taxes, and that does not even count the state and local taxes.
The point is that we are fighting two wars, and have unprecedented interest on our debt. Brought about by Republican Presidencies over the last 20 out of the last 30 years.
So we need to keep taxes higher, to pay for our wars.
President Bush was the first President in our history to lower taxes during a time of war. Obviously this failed.
I'm not arguing we don't need cuts in a lot of places, but lets start in the one place that does us no good, wars for no reason.
At least SS has a purpose. And they top 5% pays a lower tax percentage rate than I do. I agree, I don't want anyone to have to pay 1/3rd of their income in on taxes. But I'm paying over that, while the top 5% is paying around 25 to 27% of their income. Thats bull.
Boehner is a disgrace to the entire country. The right need to get a clue and vote who is actually the best candidate, not who simply has an (R) next to their name, or you'll end up with clowns like this.
I think the public (including you) need to get the clue that it doesn't matter if they have the (R) or the (D) behind their names ... because they're all playing on on the same team, unless you think arrogance and corruption isn't magnificently represented in the democrats too?
Here's a fine example of your beloved (D) in action:
Congressman Stark (D-CA) "I wouldn't pee on your leg ... it would be a waste of urine"
Congressman Barney Frank (D) demonstrates his concern for the opinions of his constituency: "What planet are you from" and Arguing with you is like arguing with a dinning room table"
Now, arrogance coupled with stupidity can be a very dangerous thing ... and this Democrat fears that the Island of Guam may tip over and capsize if additional troops are deployed there:
who in their right mind would want to work up to 70, even 65 is pushing it to the limit.
cant find nothing better to do with yourself that work???
Then save money and retire at 65. Social security is to keep our elderly citizens in a comfortable state until they pass. Its not so they can go to cancun every year.
who in their right mind would want to work up to 70, even 65 is pushing it to the limit.
cant find nothing better to do with yourself that work???
Thats what I wanna know.. I was looking forward to retiring at age 30, that didnt work out so well, so I moved it to 40.. When I hit 40, I was just to young to retire, but I'll be damned I work till I turn 70.. My father died at 42.. I'm not going to make it till 70..
Then save money and retire at 65. Social security is to keep our elderly citizens in a comfortable state until they pass. Its not so they can go to cancun every year.
Actually SS is there to raise the revenue of the federal government so the deficits dont appear as bad as they are. Otherwise there would be no need to have it managed by the government..
Thats what I wanna know.. I was looking forward to retiring at age 30, that didnt work out so well, so I moved it to 40.. When I hit 40, I was just to young to retire, but I'll be damned I work till I turn 70.. My father died at 42.. I'm not going to make it till 70..
That's the whole idea ... you broke the code.
The way to FIX social security is to keep charging for it, and raise the age eligibility to the point that everyone dies BEFORE they can collect benefits. Then, there will be a windfall instead of a shortfall!
And you thought they were just a bunch of empty suits collecting paychecks in DC ! These men are financial geniuses, and that's why we pay them the big bucks.
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.