Democrats organize to fight back

[Warren Dew]

Eric, you're right about Rag's formatting.

(11-20-2016, 12:47 AM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(11-19-2016, 08:26 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(11-19-2016, 04:58 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

I agree with the spirit of this, but not with the numbers.  Even if Congress pays back the money, social security will be far from solvent.  Social securiity has always been a ponzi scheme.

If what was stolen is paid back, and the theft is stopped, social security would be more than solvent. If we start the 21st century in the 2020s, and sanity returns from the grip of you laissez faire trickle-downers, then we can raise or pop the cap on minumum taxable income for social security as needed. The notion that SS is a ponzi scheme is the most disgraceful utterance from the Republican sloganbook, at least until the Trumpzilla came along. The baby boom may be a strain on it, but afterward it will be fine, as if no baby boom ever happened.

Simply not true.  Social security is already being paid back as its investment in government bonds mature.  The trust fund is still set to go bankrupt in 2033.  The disability fund is set to go bankrupt in 2018, though that might be fixed by kicking out questionable cases of "disability".

And if you have to increase taxes to extend the ponzi scheme a few more years, that certainly puts the lie to the idea that we already paid into it.

Quote:

Quote:Social security will not last in its present form to gen X.  I think most X would prefer to recognize that fact and phase it out in favor of something else.  In fact, I suspect most would be willing to subsidize boomers in order to get the phaseout - maybe putting half their money into the trust fund to pay off the boomers - if the other half were put into individual accounts where the ownership was clearly theirs, rather than the present system where they have to trust the government.

Individualism and self-reliance fails. Many people don't do their part. Most people don't save for retirement. Social Security makes sure that today's workers cover seniors, and that they are covered by tomorrow's workers.

I don't disagree with any of that.  It's easily fixed by requiring that the individual accounts be invested in stable investments rather than gambles.  I'd suggest requiring half to be invested in federal government securiities, and allowing the other half to be invested  into index funds.  Just make them defined contribution accounts, like 401k accounts are, rather than the defined benefit model that is more susceptible to manipulation and bankruptcy.

Quote:If you don't trust the government, then vote for people who are trustworthy, not for con-men like Donald Trump and greedy pigs like Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell. The people who made us distrust the government, were the people we voted for. We are the problem, because we are the government. And we get the government we deserve.

Power corrupts, and no matter who you vote for, once they are in office, they have that corrupting power.  The only way to limit corruption in government is to reduce the size and power of government itself.