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.
The Republicans have been saying Social Security will run out of money FOR DECADES. I don’t believe them.
They just want to hand over the money to Wall Street.
I don’t trust Wall Street. It’s all an insiders racket
Numbers might not be your strong point then. Have you seen the long term returns for stocks?
I get it that you can't divert all social security money into the stock market - but people ought to have some freedom to put some of their SS money into stocks. Look at stock market returns and then compare it to the returns your government has gotten you with SS - it's been a loser.
If they wanted to really do something besides pissing away $200 billion for the Ukraine war, they could have fixed SS by now, protected the low earning people's money, but allow wealthier people to have more say-so in how their money gets invested. Remember, it is their money - not Uncle Sam's.
Numbers might not be your strong point then. Have you seen the long term returns for stocks?
I get it that you can't divert all social security money into the stock market - but people ought to have some freedom to put some of their SS money into stocks. Look at stock market returns and then compare it to the returns your government has gotten you with SS - it's been a loser.
If they wanted to really do something besides pissing away $200 billion for the Ukraine war, they could have fixed SS by now, protected the low earning people's money, but allow wealthier people to have more say-so in how their money gets invested. Remember, it is their money - not Uncle Sam's.
Excellent point.
WHY are hard-working, contributing Americans ALWAYS last when it comes to Fed Gov spending???
You have to have a JOB and be working to be paying SS taxes.
It's already severely lopsided. That's what makes SS a progressive program. Those who pay in the least get the most return in benefits. Those who pay in the most get the least return.
WHY are there suggestions to make this lopsidedness even worse?
WHY are hard-working, contributing Americans ALWAYS last when it comes to Fed Gov spending???
You have to have a JOB and be working to be paying SS taxes.
Compared to health care - which is virtually impossible to fix - SS fix is relatively easy. Increase some revenue, decrease some guaranteed benefits for the wealthy, but in return allow them to take more risk in exchange for potential higher returns. But like with everything else, it's easier for these creeps (and I use this word generously) to do nothing, point the finger at the other party, and kick the can down the road.
It's already severely lopsided. That's what makes SS a progressive program. Those who pay in the least get the most return in benefits. Those who pay in the most get the least return.
WHY are there suggestions to make this lopsidedness even worse?
Because they can't squeeze blood out of a rock. The bottom 50% don't have it, so they must be Robin Hood & steal it from the top 50%.
Call me heartless, but I'm sick of redistribution...I've paid more than my fair share in my 40+ working years.
Cutting entitlements is polictical suicide. Whomever does it will not be re-elected....so it will need to collapse.
You, as let's say... a $1 million/year earner, would be willing to pay an extra 12.4% tax on all your earnings above $160,000 (an extra $104,160 in SS tax/year) for NOTHING in return? NO increase in SS benefits?
I don't believe that.
Where's the 12.4% come from? Isn't is still 7.65%? So would I be willing to pay $64,260 more? Yes, I would. Is it increased to 12.4% for everybody? Then yes, I'd gladly pay the $104,160. I'd very much like to think that if I was earning a million bucks a year that I wouldn't need $50k of SS money at retirement. And again... if It bothered me that much, I'd take my money and go somewhere else.
If we want to get off track a bit, this lifelong Republican voter also thinks it's obscene for Exxon-Mobil to report an $18B dollar profit for the 2nd quarter of this year when fuel prices are where they are.
Because they can't squeeze blood out of a rock. The bottom 50% don't have it, so they must be Robin Hood & steal it from the top 50%.
Call me heartless, but I'm sick of redistribution...I've paid more than my fair share in my 40+ working years.
Cutting entitlements is polictical suicide. Whomever does it will not be re-elected....so it will need to collapse.
While I get your point, the reference to Robin Hood is inaccurate.
That reference is frequently used to mean "steal from the rich and give to the poor," but what Robin Hood actually did was to steal money from the government (Sheriff of Nottingham, the royals, etc.) and returned that tax money TO the taxpayers (the villagers, serfs).
I'd like to see MORE of what Robin Hood was really all about! LESS taxation!
They don't loan out "imaginary" money. It's real. But it's money the bank is holding for someone else.
For example...
Bank A's clients have (in aggregate) $10 billion held in CD (Certificates of Deposit) products offered by the bank. The bank can then loan out 90% of that $10 billion to others for mortgages, car loans, personal loans, etc., thereby making MORE in interest on the loans than they're paying on the CDs.
The problems start when depositors want their money back and too many of the bank's loans have defaulted.
No longer. Banks can loan out whatever they feel is a good enough risk, and then get the necessary funds later. They create the new money in real time. Loans create deposits. This modern money at work.
The SS tax is 12.4%, 6.2% paid by the employee and 6.2% paid by the employer (which means the employers pays LESS to accommodate the cost of that tax). If you're self-employed, an independent contractor, etc., you pay BOTH sides of the tax.
Quote:
If we want to get off track a bit, this lifelong Republican voter also thinks it's obscene for Exxon-Mobil to report an $18B dollar profit for the 2nd quarter of this year when fuel prices are where they are.
Put into perspective, they had a 9.75% profit margin.
Let's compare that to the profit margin some other corporations (for items used every day) earned for Q2...
JP Morgan Chase: 37.51%
Microsoft: 35.74%
Bank of America: 29.40%
Alphabet (Google, Android): 24.62%
Apple: 24.31%
But Exxon's 9.75% is bad?
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.
