U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 03-09-2016, 07:17 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,911 posts, read 14,235,190 times
Reputation: 16091

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
It's not the President that matters it's Congress.
Indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
What do you think of the likely outcomes and -- beyond the useless act of voting -- what can we do to adapt?
The outcomes are irrelevant as it is Congress, and specifically the House initiates taxing and spending bills.

You would do well to focus on races in the House, and to some extent the Senate.

I'm curious why you'd ignore the role of your State in these matters.

You specifically said:
Quote:
Even with the current programs I have concerns about healthcare costs. My supplement and out of pocket costs are very high. The future need for skilled nursing care is always a possible concern.
Those are issues your State can address best and quickest.

 
Old 03-09-2016, 07:51 PM
 
6,620 posts, read 3,748,154 times
Reputation: 13693
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
I certainly don't want to discuss politics. There is a separate forum for that. I am concerned about the results of the next election on those of us who are retired or already retired.


As a retiree, I have certain needs and expectations from government. I need to see social security remain viable. I need to see Medicare/Medicaid remain intact. Even with the current programs I have concerns about healthcare costs. My supplement and out of pocket costs are very high. The future need for skilled nursing care is always a possible concern. In addition to social security and healthcare costs, many of us are also dependent on withdrawals and returns on our investments. Also I live in a very high cost area. To some extent my income matches those costs but I am also at risk for seeing some of my costs increase and for seeing additional taxation.


Again, I do not want to discuss who should be the next President, but I do want to predict and potentially adjust to the likely outcomes. As I see it there are some likely trends.


If Bernie is elected we can expect he will push for added benefits. Unfortunately those benefits seem to involve things like free college tuition which does not help us seniors. Taxes are likely to increase. In addition Bernie talks about "going after Wall Street." I am not sure what that means except he wants to increase capital gains taxes. In addition to more taxes when we try to withdraw from our investments, the stock market is likely to slide severely. I am not sure what Hillary want to do. She is perhaps more moderate on spending but she for sure wants to increase capital gains taxes.


On the Republican side, I have an even harder time understanding the platform. Trump seems to enjoy making outrageous statements to gain attention and he also makes lots of promises but beyond those I am lost. Cruz and Rubio don't seem to have much of a chance for being elected, but they seem more interested in evangelistic ideals such as killing gay marriage and eliminating abortions. The Republicans seem to want to spend much more on the military so costs and taxes are not likely to remain constant with them either.


What do you think of the likely outcomes and -- beyond the useless act of voting -- what can we do to adapt?
Without getting into particular people, you should know that it is part of the Republican party platform, I believe (there is a written party platform...you should be able to find it on the internet) to privatize Social Security, or start the privatizing of it. So there's that. If it's not in the platform, it is part of the GOP official position. Having said that, Trump is not on board with that. He has stated that he regards it as a "deal" that was made with people and which should be kept, but needs to be tweaked. Take that FWIW.

The Democratic Party platform or official policy position is that Social Security serves a vital need for our seniors, and has been immensely successful at staving off extreme poverty for our seniors, as a supplemental income program that recipients paid into. All or most Dems would work to maintain it as is, and if cuts are made, it would be as little as possible so as to affect seniors no more than is necessary. The SS program has been tweaked a couple of times before.

SS is solvent, actually. In 10 or so years, it will begin to pay out more than it takes in. That doesn't make it bankrupt. It could go on that way for years. But experts say something should be done so this payout more than receipts doesn't happen. (Personally, I think it'll correct itself next generation, when once again, there are more workers than retirees; the problem we are having now is because of so many baby boomers retiring, and the disability part of SS, which was never intended as part of the original program, is being an immense burden on the program; recipients of disability can get the disability w/o paying in much at all).

Medicare, OTOH, is in financial trouble. Both parties are looking at things to do to make it healthier. The Republicans as part of the party position think that Medicare would be best served by dismantling it and the private insurance companies take over. Dems think it should remain as a govt program with supplemental coverage through private insurers, but needs to be reformed in some way to save it.

For both programs, it's a general rule, safe to say, that the Dems would work to retain the programs, but tweak them to make them more efficient and/or reform them without hopefully interfering too much with senior benefits. The Republicans, generally speaking, would pursue privatization of both programs, though they may start with privatizing parts of them, with the end goal being to dismantle them from govt entirely.

I'm not being partisan. I have this concern, too, and have been reading up on this. Plus I have independent recollections of things that the different politicians in prior years have said or done. Back to Newt Gingrich's plan to "reform" Medicare so that it would "wither on the vine," as he put it. That was back in the Clinton days. Then George W. Bush tried to get it privatized. And so on and so forth.

As for the role of Congress, they pass the bills and fund the programs, but it is the President's administration that pushes an agenda. There are consequences to elections, and that is one of them, no matter who wins. The Prez is the leader of his party. The members of that party will try to follow the Prez's agenda, generally speaking. The President carries a lot of weight in that regard. Also, the President has veto power.

Last edited by bpollen; 03-09-2016 at 08:01 PM..
 
Old 03-09-2016, 08:03 PM
 
Location: Purgatory
6,322 posts, read 4,760,408 times
Reputation: 9765
Retirees depending on SS want a Democrat in the WH at the very least. They won't priavitize ss and have less incentive to cut it. (Remember, Trump, the GOP frontrunner, wants to do away w the EPA, department of ed etc. I don't think it's a coincidence that he's not saying much about ss.)

Beside from that, if you have a lot of capital gains income, Hillary is prob in your best interest. If not, Bernie.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 09:09 PM
 
Location: SoCal
13,227 posts, read 6,331,374 times
Reputation: 9844
Privatization of SS has not been suggested since the Great Recession, I have never heard of it mentioned since George Bush. So give it a rest. Trump said he would keep SS, whether he can is another story.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 09:33 PM
 
5,426 posts, read 3,449,470 times
Reputation: 13709
Implementation of new policy or changing existing policies is not dependent solely upon who is elected President.

Legislation for new policy or legislation to change existing legislation is dependent on the Congress....the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S Senate.....and who is elected to the House and Senate....and who has control of Senate and House committees.

The President can propose legislation and set an agenda, but it still must be passed by Congress. The President can implement regulations & executive orders. The President can veto legislation, but the veto can be overridden, which does not often happen.

Always stick with the Democrats if you want Social Security to exist for your use. (and privatization of Social Security is an agenda item of many Republicans)

I would not dream of voting Republican for any level of office.... for issues of concern to seniors & retirees, and for every other issue in the U.S. and world.

(unless the Democrat running for president, U.S. Senate and House, & state legislature was somehow completely unacceptable which has never happened so far for me, having lived in 8 states)

Last edited by matisse12; 03-09-2016 at 10:04 PM..
 
Old 03-09-2016, 09:33 PM
 
6,253 posts, read 4,731,924 times
Reputation: 12844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utopian Slums View Post
.............

Beside from that, if you have a lot of capital gains income, Hillary is prob in your best interest. If not, Bernie.

Both Hillary and Bernie are on record about wanting to increase capital gains taxes. Bernie is constantly talking about "taking on" Wall Street and "speculators." It is by no means clear what that means except that he claims he will gain a lot of tax money in the process. Again, I think that largely means capital gains taxation.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 09:56 PM
 
Location: Out there somewhere...a traveling man.
39,541 posts, read 47,732,905 times
Reputation: 110380
As said before, the President cannot do anything with approval from congress. You need to be worried about who is elected to congress. And whatever is done wouldn't effect you for several years anyway.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 10:07 PM
JRR
 
Location: Middle Tennessee
3,679 posts, read 2,226,353 times
Reputation: 5230
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
What do you think of the likely outcomes and -- beyond the useless act of voting -- what can we do to adapt?
Just out of curiosity, why would you think that voting is useless? Going back to the 2000 Presidential election, if 538 people who didn't bother to vote in Florida had got out and voted for Gore, we probably would not have invaded Iraq. How that would have changed history would be interesting to contemplate. But we'll never knows for sure as they didn't bother to vote.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 10:12 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Beach
1,499 posts, read 1,190,426 times
Reputation: 3790
If Social Security Had Been In Private Accounts The Stock Market Drop Could Have Been A Disaster | ThinkProgress

From the article - "In June, presidential candidate Jeb Bush said that he thinks the next president will have to try to privatize Social Security. Others have gotten behind the idea as well: Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) drafted a plan in 2013 that included partial privatization, and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is in favor of using private accounts. Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) has included privatization in his budget blueprints."

The above, plus the fact that Republicans are now calling SS an "Entitlement" bother me to no end.
 
Old 03-09-2016, 10:15 PM
 
6,253 posts, read 4,731,924 times
Reputation: 12844
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRR View Post
Just out of curiosity, why would you think that voting is useless? Going back to the 2000 Presidential election, if 538 people who didn't bother to vote in Florida had got out and voted for Gore, we probably would not have invaded Iraq. How that would have changed history would be interesting to contemplate. But we'll never knows for sure as they didn't bother to vote.
I did not live in Florida during 2000. But you are right, voting is not useless. It is equivalent to trying to put out a forest fire with an eyedropper.....not very effective, not but useless.
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top