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.
You are correct the Problem is that Fox News and others, have refered to SS as an entitlement for so long and so loud that many believe what they say.. (do any of you see a history here?? ) Unless you did the cash only thing you paid SS al your life.. if you did the cash only thing and now have no savings and no SS Too Bad.. One of the issues that does arise is the number of those who paid in minimally and for a short duration are collecting life time benefits and many say/report the numbers could be as high as 50% are fraudulent claims for SSDI..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist
"Social Security" when taken out of your paycheck, is labelled FICA. FICA stands for Federal INSURANCE Contributions Act. It's a required insurance program into which everyone must pay.
This ill-conceived idea by Christie (who I could have considered voting for, up until today) of means-testing would be like paying your car insurance premiums, having a fender-bender and allowing the Insurance Company to look at your income and say, ya know what....you can afford to pay for those damages out of pocket.
As long as people pay their premiums (payroll withholding taxes) into Social Security, no politician should be allowed to deny them their benefits for any reason.
Amen. A politician with guts -- the rarest of things! He's got my vote.
Christie's proposal isn't going to be the final fixing of SS, but let's give the man credit for speaking the truth.
Without action, SS will not be able to pay what has been 'promised'.
What are the alternatives? Continue to delay and do nothing, aka 'kick the can down the road'?
Guts is one thing, and is usually associated with a principled stand on something, a stand which has objective merit but which is unpopular. But pandering to the lowest common denominator, hoping to get an emotional hook in people who just resent everyone who is comfortable and are ignorant about Social Security already being means tested, is another thing altogether.
I have to wonder how many low wage earners even realize that their SS retirement benefits are being generously subsidized by higher wage earners. I rather imagine not very many.
If You Pay IN You should get back, case closed this is just pandering to the ignorant.. How about the government cuts back on the WORLDS MOST EXPENSIVE MILITARY and pays back SS all it owes it????
BTW if you list EVERY COUNTRY in the world by Military size (Number of personel) Its China #1. The USA #2. But fully 1/3rd of Chinas military has NO WEAPONS.. IF YOU list every country by the cost of its military The USA is #1. and Spends more than the following 8 countryies COMBINED.. Thats Nothing Less Than Stupid..
Quote:
Originally Posted by dothetwist
NO ONE should be required to pay into a retirement system from which they can be denied all of their benefits, whether that denial is made via means-testing, IQ testing or genetic testing.
It's not a low level of income but nobody will save enough to produce that income if it means losing their SS. Christie's plan is not very good but I agree with whoever said that he deserves credit for bringing SS reform into the spotlight. Of course, that's easy for him to do because he's not going to win the nomination.
Still, he's a pretty good governor.
Thank you. If people want to present a solid argument opposing Christie's proposal, they should avoid shooting themselves in the foot when they cry that an income shared by less than 2% of retirees is "low income".
FWIW, I don't agree that high earners will not save enough to avoid losing their SS as evidenced by those who would rather earn a higher income and pay taxes than choose to make less and pay less taxes. The end game is and always has been net income and net worth.
What I find fascinating is that no one is objecting to the proposals put forth by Rand Paul and Marco Rubio. Like Rubio and Paul, Christie could have modified his plan in an effort to deceive and modify the average voter but chose not to do so. My guess is he wanted to grab the nation's attention and he certainly succeeded.
I also find it interesting that everyone is focused on the Social Security proposal and have paid little, if any, attention to his Medicare proposal. How much is two years of lost Medicare benefits worth to the affluent? (I say affluent because those who are not affluent would either continue to work or obtain subsidized Obamacare policies).
Congress has been using SS monies for years to balance the budget at their discretion which is one of the reasons they say "SS is going broke." AFA Christie's proposal, Congress wouldn't touch the issue because they might lose votes, rather keep pilfering the money. I agree with Christie's proposal that those getting $200K+ should not collect SS. When there are people getting $1-2K per month and living on that, there is no reason someone who has a pension of $200K (and probably big investment accounts) should collect, whether they paid in or not. There are people collecting SS in prisons, from dead relatives, etc. They need to crack down on those people as well as SS disability. I know several people that know how to play the system and their doctors too.
there is no reason someone who has a pension of $200K (and probably big investment accounts) should collect, whether they paid in or not.
That seems like a legit reason right there.
Anyone forced to pay into a system from day #1 of their working career should be able to collect it's returns no matter how successful they are later in life.
There are societal consequences to the Christie proposal. One if which is the loss of revenue at the state and federal level. Those means tested out pay the highest rate of taxes on their benefits. Will it impact consumer discretionary spending? Especially since higher income seniors do more of that. Obviously there would be a law of diminishing returns on investments when the dollar increase in investment income results in a dollar decrease in SS income. Just what your neighborhood CPA needs to increase business. Oh wait software and apps will do it for us.
Unintended consequences are a bite in the ...
Then I want it all back with interest. I will sue if I don't get it back.
That's a lot ofModerator cut: delete money.
Seriously, that one-cheeburger-short-of-a-heart-attack loser may suggest that in a speech but if he ran on that platform he'd get fewer votes than Mr. Ed.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 04-17-2015 at 12:56 PM..
Reason: attempt to override the language filter
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.
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.
