Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
View Poll Results: Do you support or oppose the Social Security program?
Support SS,want it more socialistic ( "progressive") 7 14.89%
Support SS,want it as is,only minor adjustments 16 34.04%
Doubtful about SS,want it more capitalistic (partial privatisation) 6 12.77%
Against SS,want full privatisation 18 38.30%
Voters: 47. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-09-2010, 07:42 AM
 
8,263 posts, read 12,200,443 times
Reputation: 4801

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
I suggest we limit Social Security payments to anyone making more than the 90th percentile from all their sources
Hey yeah let's establish a government mandated disincentive to accumulating wealth and having personal finance discipline.

We'll just tell people "sorry pal you saved too much money during your life by living under your means, you don't get social security like your friend up the street who always bought nicer cars, houses, and ate out every night."

That's just what this country needs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-09-2010, 08:03 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,779,853 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by independentsucka View Post
if someone decided to get rid of social security, liberals would run ads depicting old people starving in the streets. this is honestly what they think would happen if old people didn't get their 500 bucks a month. social security if fraud, plain and simple.
It's hyperbole, but it's not too far from the way things were prior to SS. Ever heard of county "poor farms"? This idyllic idea that in the past, the elders lived with their kids and their families is not entirely true. Prior to medicare, about 50% of elderly did not have health insurance. These insurance companies the RW is so supportive of do not want to insure people who are going to actually use the coverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2010, 08:59 AM
 
296 posts, read 228,604 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
Privatizing SS would be a boon for charlatan financial "advisors". The ones that need the advice the most won't even know they're being fleeced until they retire.

I am a financial advisor...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2010, 09:02 AM
 
296 posts, read 228,604 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
Go back and read my prior posts in this thread. It mentions nothing about 1937 or 1965. Economic progress goes FORWARD not backward.


I'm saying if you look at virtually every major economic power on the planet they provide some social security and medical care for the elderly. A country that doesn't provide those benefits tends to have poorer health outcomes and lower life expectancy. Taking away those benefits is detrimental to a country's overall quality of life. First, without those benefits peoples’ standard of living suffers. Second, without those benefits money that could go into the economy in the form of investment or consumption ends of being saved. As quite as a it's kept saving too much money can be economically detrimental to a nation's economy. Japan experienced that in the 1990's.

Hong Kong,till unification with China (1997)

had no SS,Medicare,Medicaid...

Its 5m pop was one of the richest segments of people on earth...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2010, 01:26 PM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
90,297 posts, read 120,779,853 times
Reputation: 35920
Quote:
Originally Posted by wenge2ful View Post
I am a financial advisor...
I wasn't necessarily referring to you. We have a financial advisor who we trust. However, they are plenty of charlatans in the field.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2010, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Louisiana
1,768 posts, read 3,413,762 times
Reputation: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by JazzyTallGuy View Post
If you eliminate Social Security, and Medicare then America essentially becomes a third world country. We may be on that trajectory anyway with a inadequate educational system, a growing gap between the rich and poor, poor wage and economic growth and ineffective government.
Agreed.

I think we should all have a guaranteed annual income of $100K. In fact, the best way to do this would be to LIMIT income to $100K annually so that we all have exactly the same amount of money. Everybody should have a free car too and that car should be the same car that everyone else has -- no ands, ifs or buts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 01:07 PM
 
296 posts, read 228,604 times
Reputation: 55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana View Post
I wasn't necessarily referring to you. We have a financial advisor who we trust. However, they are plenty of charlatans in the field.

I was just humorous...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 01:11 PM
 
296 posts, read 228,604 times
Reputation: 55
The main point of pro-SS advocates is stability,peace of mind,safety net...

If a gov can create a mandate for individual retirement programs which are equal to SS in its virtues,then we have a winner.
So far the Repubs have not scored by offering a winner...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2010, 02:51 PM
 
2,541 posts, read 2,739,050 times
Reputation: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
Its gone dude, when we are $13 trillion in debt that means we don't have anything, and nothing is set aside in a lock box either.
They can borrow the money to give me back what I put in, just like they will be borrowing the money to pay for SS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2010, 07:59 AM
 
296 posts, read 228,604 times
Reputation: 55
All nations,even the richest ones,borrow money,run deficeits & carry debts...

Even small paradises,like Brunei,Monaco,Luxemburg...

The terms : deficeit,debt,borrow,lend are not negative...

They are essential factors of economic reality...
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
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:17 AM.

© 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