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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-14-2016, 09:55 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,753,611 times
Reputation: 10789

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NxtGen View Post
Oh look, another progressive fear mongering talking point. Odd, haven't seen this one except for EVERY REPUBLICAN ELECTION WIN!
You might want to read about this guy called Paul Ryan and his plans for Medicare and Social Security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:12 AM
 
78,013 posts, read 60,221,209 times
Reputation: 49404
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
I honestly get mixed messages about the solvency of both programs.
If you want an honest assessment then stay away from Rush, Hannity, MSNBC, FOX or the Daily Kos and instead just go to the American Academy of Actuaries for information.

The big wildcard in any projection is that yes, they can change the plans.

P.S. Solvency is a word better used in regards to funded plans like private pensions....but even then they changed the rules by which they estimated liabilities for those which has helped companies like GE delay funding their pension plans shortfall under the old rules. The change wasn't without some merit but it's funny how most people are unaware it actually happened. If you happen to be someone that is or will be collecting from it in the future then each year they send you a piece of paper showing the funding position under the old and new rules but most people either throw it out or don't know how to read it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:27 AM
 
4,504 posts, read 3,017,538 times
Reputation: 9631
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
You might want to read about this guy called Paul Ryan and his plans for Medicare and Social Security.
lol.


Oh, look! There's one!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:31 AM
 
10,226 posts, read 7,538,680 times
Reputation: 23155
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
How many times did Trump have to say, he's not touching either one.
You haven't read his written positions, have you?

He never said he wouldn't "touch" them. He used, once again, soundbites that are vague, giving people a false impression.

He said Social Security is a deal that he thinks should be kept. So...what does that mean? Apparently, it means that partial privatization and the de-pooling of Social Security is what that means, because that is Trump's position (in writing). Do a google search, or read up in the retirement forum for threads on Social Security and Medicare.

If part of SS is privatized, and the pool removed, the benefits will be significantly decreased, and it will "wither on the vine," as the saying goes.

The SS plan is written up, has been presented to Congress before, and is ready to go as a priority, according to Ryan. So is his Medicare plan, which is a voucher system. His plan is to partially privatize it, more and more, until it's gone.

SS for sure is planned to be partly privatized, causing it to die, since that is Trump's plan. It's unclear what he thinks of the medicare plan. I suspect he'll be bamboozled into that, since he's inexperienced in government, and Ryan is tying it to the repeal/"reform" of Obamacare.

This is a plan. Not an idea that is floating out there.

I would have thought Trump supporters would have checked on his plans. They're sketched out in writing on the internet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:31 AM
 
78,013 posts, read 60,221,209 times
Reputation: 49404
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
Never forget that Bush and Friends went all over the country touting "privatizing" Social Security after he was reelected in 2004. That was the closest I've ever seen that program come to being irreparably harmed in my lifetime. SS would have gone up in smoke in 2008 had the neoconservatives gotten their way.

This program will always be under assault by Republican lawmakers, who look at it as a revenue stream they want to tap into for their own personal gain. I only hope there are a small minority of thinking Republicans out there who will join Democrats in keeping the wolves at bay.

If the neocons had been successful it would have probably survived for another 3-4 years.
I *privatized* most of my retirement in the stock market via 401k a long time ago. Sure there are up years and down years but the long term returns have easily outpaced gov. bonds etc. (I made 40k last week. Glad I don't have it sitting in govt. bonds making 2% year after year.)

SS would not have "gone up in smoke in 2008" because it would have been a gradual phase in which you seem to be unaware of.

Um, isn't the definition of conservative someone that wants to keep things the same?

I recommend reading up more on the topic from UNBIASED sources, there's a problem whether you want to face it or not and eventually we're going to need some combination of higher returns, age changes, benefit changes, tax increases, govt. debt to solve this.

One way they have been doing it is by using low cost of living increases by using a measure that generally understates inflation.

Quick question, three times since the 1975 law went into place there has been no increase for cost of living. All in the last 8 years. I really don't think you want to try to make this partisan.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:35 AM
 
10,226 posts, read 7,538,680 times
Reputation: 23155
Quote:
Originally Posted by LauraC View Post
How many times did Trump have to say, he's not touching either one.

"Preserve Medicare for future generations. No changes to promised Social Security benefits." Sept 16, 2016

“They want to cut your social security, I'm not cutting your social security,” Trump said in Racine, Wisconsin, on April 2.

“We're gonna save your Social Security without making any cuts. Mark my words,” explained Trump. Donald Trump rallies in Valdosta Feb 29, 2016

"Don't cut Medicare; grow the economy to keep benefits." (Jun 2015)

"I will save Social Security with more jobs, less waste." (Feb 2016)

"I'll give up my Social Security; leave it to each person." (Sep 2015)

"Social Security isn't an "entitlement"; it's honoring a deal"


Donald Trump on the Issues
Guess he changed his mind. His written position on Social Security is to privatize SS partially. If that is done, it'll reduce benefits a LOT, remove the pool aspect, and thus it will wither and die.

This is discussed in the retirement forum. Threads with the title Social Security or Medicare.

Technically, it still is honoring a deal to partially privatize it, since it will "exist." I guess that's how he looks at it. Who knows.

Cutting down of fraud is a sideshow. The amount of fraud in SS is estimated to be less than 3%...it wouldn't affect SS solvency or insolvency. So is giving up his SS.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:39 AM
 
10,226 posts, read 7,538,680 times
Reputation: 23155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freak80 View Post
What will happen to SS and Medicare? Probably nothing, despite the desires of the far-right.
Well, they control both houses of Congress, and no President to veto. And Trump with a written plan to partially privatize SS.

If Trump wants to reform Obamacare, he may have to go along with "reforming" SS & Medicare, as a package. That's the argument Ryan is making....that repealing of changing Obamacare requires changing SS & Medicare (he's trying to blame Obamacare, which is not true; Obamacare made Medicare MORE solvent, not less).

But Trump already wants to partially privatize SS, so he's on board with that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:41 AM
 
78,013 posts, read 60,221,209 times
Reputation: 49404
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen View Post
You haven't read his written positions, have you?

He never said he wouldn't "touch" them. He used, once again, soundbites that are vague, giving people a false impression.

He said Social Security is a deal that he thinks should be kept. So...what does that mean? Apparently, it means that partial privatization and the de-pooling of Social Security is what that means, because that is Trump's position (in writing). Do a google search, or read up in the retirement forum for threads on Social Security and Medicare.

If part of SS is privatized, and the pool removed, the benefits will be significantly decreased, and it will "wither on the vine," as the saying goes.

The SS plan is written up, has been presented to Congress before, and is ready to go as a priority, according to Ryan. So is his Medicare plan, which is a voucher system. His plan is to partially privatize it, more and more, until it's gone.

SS for sure is planned to be partly privatized, causing it to die, since that is Trump's plan. It's unclear what he thinks of the medicare plan. I suspect he'll be bamboozled into that, since he's inexperienced in government, and Ryan is tying it to the repeal/"reform" of Obamacare.

This is a plan. Not an idea that is floating out there.

I would have thought Trump supporters would have checked on his plans. They're sketched out in writing on the internet.
Here is a good article you might enjoy reading.

Barack Obama Once Proposed Cutting Social Security. Here
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: OH->FL->NJ
16,960 posts, read 12,534,154 times
Reputation: 8881
I see LOTS more poor seniors and 65 to 67 year olds with no health insurance under a lot of the posts above.

The medical industry owns Washington. They all verbally beat up the pres of the Epipen corp (Mylan) then promptly did NOTHING. Daraprim is still 750 a pill. Tons of similar situations.

US consumers carry the cost of world drug research and then some.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2016, 10:51 AM
 
78,013 posts, read 60,221,209 times
Reputation: 49404
I'm going to wait until there is an actual proposal put forth in congress and it starts to go through approval processes before I get too worked up.

What we have the last week or so is a flurry of partisan speculation over what *might* happen and of course it's all bad stuff like nuclear wars, cutting social security etc.

I cited how Obama was proposing SS cuts in 2010 and it didn't go anywhere.
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:22 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