Democrats Misleadingly Claim ‘Republicans’ Plan’ Would ‘End’ Social Security, Medicare......But!

Here is an incendiary video by a popular left leaning media figure that talks about how the Republicans are trying to take your Medicare and Social Security away from you. This thought (and video) has everyone riled up.


I did some checking and this is what I found"

Misleadingly Claim ‘Republicans’ Plan’ Would ‘End’ Social Security, Medicare​

Nonetheless and in reading the article there are a few things that do stand out that need to be talked about:

Here is Rick Scott's 11-point plan: https://rescueamerica.com/11-point-plan/

......and here is part of the 11-point Rick Scott's plan that this article (and Politics Girl) is referring to:

Under Point Six, which aims to shrink the size of the federal government, Scott writes, “All federal legislation sunsets in 5 years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again.”

My first thought is "If we have been unable to agree on legislation that is beneficial to all for the past 20 years, what makes us believe that we can agree to pass this legislation every 5 years?

So under their plan, all federal laws sunset in five years. And of course, if you think about it, the implications of that are shocking. I mean that would mean that every 5 years an end to Medicare and Social Security and to Medicaid, which provides health care coverage for 86 million Americans including our seniors in nursing homes would have to be discussed again and again?.

I certainly can see how the Democrats are using this plan of Rick Scott to attack and rile people to vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans in 2022. I can also see that the way they are putting forth this "as propaganda against the Republicans", does not meet the "fact check" parameters of being 100% truthful. Nonetheless, if adopted, it certainly puts the Republicans in the drivers seat, doesn't it? Wouldn't that give the Republicans and unfair advantage?

I welcome your comments on this.

No comments???? This is important to most everyone and all have opinions on it. Let's hear them!

I am amazed. Big 2022 election topic and not even a response from Mycroft! What did I do wrong?

Luckyone said:

I am amazed. Big 2022 election topic and not even a response from Mycroft! What did I do wrong?

Click to expand...

It’s not you. They’re too busy enjoying their Obamacare.

Well, it IS Rick Scott.
That man has NO business serving in elected office of any kind after his Medicare stunt.
Also, his idea is terminally stupid as it eliminates the entire concept of settled law altogether and Congress moves at the speed of The Vatican on a lot of issues unless it helps oligarchy.

Further, sunsetting all laws every five years represents something known as a "Five Year Plan" so it sounds like Rick may be something of a commie because communist countries love 5-Year Plans, they just don't ever have to worry about opposition slowing things up in their legislative bodies.

We DO.

Is Rick Scott a communist or an anarchist? Maybe he's both. He certainly isn't willing to tolerate the law as it stands when it clearly serves the will of the people or addresses issues which could damage society.

What happens when federal legislation on kiddie porn goes away in five years?

A couple points.

One, this is another of thousands of attempts by the hired army for plutocracy to attack the interests of the American people, by moving more money from the people to the rich - that's all it is.

Two, you can't just go around having Medicare and Social Security 'sunset' and end one year, and then the next election say 'oh let's bring them back! Just rehire entire massive agencies and have them immediately be in place'.

Imagine if we did that with corporations? Ever 5 years, every corporation dissolves unless voters say to continue it. Because companies like Intel and Apple can be dissolved and recreated a bit later easily, right?

This stuff is insanity supported by people made insane by anti-government propaganda who love anything that is anti-government. Even for the rich it's insanity, as it gives them more wealth it has effects on them they don't understand also.

America needs to get over the idea of 'two parties each with their own ideas what's best for the country', and recognize it's more like saying 'Ukraine and Putin, two groups who each have their own ideas what's best for Ukraine'. That the Republican Party is a type of enemy force attacking the country and has no place in American politics until it becomes a legitimate party, which seems impossible.

Regarding social security insurance which is a safe well managed document and pays back to those interested in filing for their right to have Social Security Insurance money be directly deposited in a bank
account.

The right wing concept is to have SSI cancelled and instead mandate that people open a 401k backed by
a tax deduction that flows into the 401K. Yes americans may be forced by the ALEC right wing thinkers to
own a 401K whether we want to or not. THE BIG issue is who provides a 401k and how much money these
profiteers will enjoy at the expense of we the people. It seems a lot like SSI except it is guaranteed profit for
a corporation that in essence will steal from the 401k.

It sounds like a recipe for utter chaos that would make a functioning society impossible.

We already have enough trouble getting basic government funding bills passed. Now, imagine every few years we are sitting on the precipice of tens of millions of Americans losing health insurance and any form of income. Does that sound healthy? Like something that would lead to a good deal of faith in government or the American economy as a whole?

Razoo said:

Regarding social security insurance which is a safe well managed document and pays back to those interested in filing for their right to have Social Security Insurance money be directly deposited in a bank
account.

The right wing concept is to have SSI cancelled and instead mandate that people open a 401k backed by
a tax deduction that flows into the 401K. Yes americans may be forced by the ALEC right wing thinkers to
own a 401K whether we want to or not. THE BIG issue is who provides a 401k and how much money these
profiteers will enjoy at the expense of we the people. It seems a lot like SSI except it is guaranteed profit for
a corporation that in essence will steal from the 401k.

Click to expand...

I think the pitch for 401(k)/stocks over Social Security is that stocks have a much higher returns. The problem is that people who are promoting a change are totally corrupt trying to screw the American people. If we had people actually trying to help the American people look at the issue, that could be looked at.

Have opponents actually lied to the public about Social Security? ​

Yes. Former President George W. Bush repeatedly claimed that those who put their money in private accounts would be “guaranteed a better return than they would receive from the current Social Security system. But every sale of stock on the stock market includes the disclaimer: “the return on this investment is not guaranteed and may be negative” for good reason. During the 20th century, there were several periods lasting more than ten years when the return on stocks was negative.

After the Dow Jones stock index went down by over 75% between 1929 and 1933, the Dow did not return to its 1929 level until 1953. In claiming that the rate of return on a stock investment is guaranteed to be greater than the return on any other asset, Bush was lying. If an investment-firm broker made this claim to his clients, he would be arrested and charged with stock fraud. Michael Milken went to jail for several years for making just this type of promise about financial investments.

In fact, under the former President Bush’s privatization proposal, a 20-year-old worker joining the labor force today would have seen her guaranteed Social Security benefits reduced by 46%. Bush’s own Social Security commission admitted that private accounts were unlikely to make up for this drop in guaranteed benefits. The brokerage firm Goldman Sachs estimated that even with private accounts, retirement income of younger workers would have been reduced by 42% compared to what they would have received if no changes were made to Social Security..

Former President Bush also misrepresented the truth when he claimed that Social Security trustees say the system will be “bankrupt” in 2042. Bankruptcy is defined as “the inability to pay ones debts” or, when applied to a business, “shutting down as a result of insolvency.” Nothing the trustees have said or published indicates that Social Security will fold as a result of insolvency.

Luckyone said:

Here is an incendiary video by a popular left leaning media figure that talks about how the Republicans are trying to take your Medicare and Social Security away from you. This thought (and video) has everyone riled up.


I did some checking and this is what I found"

Misleadingly Claim ‘Republicans’ Plan’ Would ‘End’ Social Security, Medicare​

Nonetheless and in reading the article there are a few things that do stand out that need to be talked about:

Here is Rick Scott's 11-point plan: https://rescueamerica.com/11-point-plan/

......and here is part of the 11-point Rick Scott's plan that this article (and Politics Girl) is referring to:

Under Point Six, which aims to shrink the size of the federal government, Scott writes, “All federal legislation sunsets in 5 years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again.”

My first thought is "If we have been unable to agree on legislation that is beneficial to all for the past 20 years, what makes us believe that we can agree to pass this legislation every 5 years?

So under their plan, all federal laws sunset in five years. And of course, if you think about it, the implications of that are shocking. I mean that would mean that every 5 years an end to Medicare and Social Security and to Medicaid, which provides health care coverage for 86 million Americans including our seniors in nursing homes would have to be discussed again and again?.

I certainly can see how the Democrats are using this plan of Rick Scott to attack and rile people to vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans in 2022. I can also see that the way they are putting forth this "as propaganda against the Republicans", does not meet the "fact check" parameters of being 100% truthful. Nonetheless, if adopted, it certainly puts the Republicans in the drivers seat, doesn't it? Wouldn't that give the Republicans and unfair advantage?

I welcome your comments on this.

Click to expand...

Sounds completely stupid, like you said, can't agree on anything. And if you managed to get a good law in place, like say ACA, then it would be gone in 5 years and that could have serious financial and other considerations. the bar should be you have to vote to over turn a law. Imagine politician campaigning on "we won't renew this law", particularly if passed by the other party. Although, if the bill is popular, maybe the opposition party won't oppose or they would face ramification.

The solution to our politics is easy, campaign finance reform so the wealthy can't buy our politicians, and then politicians would work for the people. I guess not really easy, since the crooks running it are making too much money with the current system.

Craig234 said:

I think the pitch for 401(k)/stocks over Social Security is that stocks have a much higher returns. The problem is that people who are promoting a change are totally corrupt trying to screw the American people. If we had people actually trying to help the American people look at the issue, that could be looked at.

Click to expand...

If people want a 401k they can surely open one on their own without a mandate designed by the conservative right wing. AND there is no way one can promise stocks will always pay more and there is no way people will know exactly how much they can expect each month. Not everyone is talented enough
at managing wall street investments. What could be guaranteed is a giant windfall for the wealthiest investors once the MANDATED tax deduction hit Wall Street each month.

v

How much your Social Security check will be if you make $30,000 per year. The average retired worker gets about $18,000 per year from Social Security in 2020. The benefits replace only around 40% of the average earner's preretirement income, which means you will need to start planning ahead to fully fund your future.Oct 14, 2020

Social Security benefits 2021: How much will I receive based on salary​

https://www.cnbc.com › 2020/10/14 › social-security-ben.

A person must be damn careful where he or she puts retirement money. In the 1980's millions lost their retirement assistance when the savings and loan industry went up in smoke. None of it was insured yet
it seemed like a safe bet after many many many years of working. Yes this loss was directly related to the
Reagan/Bush home loan scandal.

Thus millions of golden agers were forced back into the workforce to supplement their retirement years and
these same people were thanking their lucky stars for Social Security Insurance checks each month and medicare insurance. Make no mistake about it.

Like my grandfather told me when I asked for his guidance to invest in Wall Street. His words of wisdom went like this......"Until you can afford to lose money you cannot afford to mess with Wall Street". In my mind how can I ever afford to lose money.........????? Never can I afford to lose money.

After the Dow Jones stock index went down by over 75% between 1929 and 1933, the Dow did not return to its 1929 level until 1953.......it will take a lot of cash on hand in order to withstand any crash of this magnitude.

Social Security Q&A | Dollars & Sense

There's no such thing as a bullet-proof 401(k) plan​

https://www.retirementplanblog.com › 401(k) Plans
Mar 24, 2008 — There's no such thing as a bullet-proof 401(k) plan ... Police wear bulletproofvests made of KEVLAR® which we know from watching cop shows.

Luckyone said:

Here is an incendiary video by a popular left leaning media figure that talks about how the Republicans are trying to take your Medicare and Social Security away from you. This thought (and video) has everyone riled up.


I did some checking and this is what I found"

Misleadingly Claim ‘Republicans’ Plan’ Would ‘End’ Social Security, Medicare​

Nonetheless and in reading the article there are a few things that do stand out that need to be talked about:

Here is Rick Scott's 11-point plan: https://rescueamerica.com/11-point-plan/

......and here is part of the 11-point Rick Scott's plan that this article (and Politics Girl) is referring to:

Under Point Six, which aims to shrink the size of the federal government, Scott writes, “All federal legislation sunsets in 5 years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again.”

My first thought is "If we have been unable to agree on legislation that is beneficial to all for the past 20 years, what makes us believe that we can agree to pass this legislation every 5 years?

So under their plan, all federal laws sunset in five years. And of course, if you think about it, the implications of that are shocking. I mean that would mean that every 5 years an end to Medicare and Social Security and to Medicaid, which provides health care coverage for 86 million Americans including our seniors in nursing homes would have to be discussed again and again?.

I certainly can see how the Democrats are using this plan of Rick Scott to attack and rile people to vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans in 2022. I can also see that the way they are putting forth this "as propaganda against the Republicans", does not meet the "fact check" parameters of being 100% truthful. Nonetheless, if adopted, it certainly puts the Republicans in the drivers seat, doesn't it? Wouldn't that give the Republicans and unfair advantage?

I welcome your comments on this.

Click to expand...

Scott's points are enjoyed some spirited debate on right leaning discussions. Some are pie-in-the-sky, some make sense, and some are goofy. The one you cite prbably fits into the last category. Granted our ship of state is riding low in the water from the weight of thousands of pages of regulations but just throwing them out and starting over is a non-starter IMHO.

Razoo said:

If people want a 401k they can surely open one on their own without a mandate designed by the conservative right wing. AND there is no way one can promise stocks will always pay more and there is no way people will know exactly how much they can expect each month. Not everyone is talented enough
at managing wall street investments. What could be guaranteed is a giant windfall for the wealthiest investors once the MANDATED tax deduction hit Wall Street each month.

Click to expand...

The market has ALWAYS increased over a relatively short period; it's a compelling case for the reliability and huge increase in returns. It's so compelling it not only raises moral issues for Democrats to consider, but risks letting Republicans get away with pushing a scheme.

If they design it, it'll be for the benefit of the interests they serve, mainly the financial companies. Democrats could just ignore the issue and hope to win politically, but they should evaluate the issue instead. If people who look at the issue for the good of citizens decide to stick with the current system, fine.

Luckyone said:

Here is an incendiary video by a popular left leaning media figure that talks about how the Republicans are trying to take your Medicare and Social Security away from you. This thought (and video) has everyone riled up.


I did some checking and this is what I found"

Misleadingly Claim ‘Republicans’ Plan’ Would ‘End’ Social Security, Medicare​

Nonetheless and in reading the article there are a few things that do stand out that need to be talked about:

Here is Rick Scott's 11-point plan: https://rescueamerica.com/11-point-plan/

......and here is part of the 11-point Rick Scott's plan that this article (and Politics Girl) is referring to:

Under Point Six, which aims to shrink the size of the federal government, Scott writes, “All federal legislation sunsets in 5 years. If a law is worth keeping, Congress can pass it again.”

My first thought is "If we have been unable to agree on legislation that is beneficial to all for the past 20 years, what makes us believe that we can agree to pass this legislation every 5 years?

So under their plan, all federal laws sunset in five years. And of course, if you think about it, the implications of that are shocking. I mean that would mean that every 5 years an end to Medicare and Social Security and to Medicaid, which provides health care coverage for 86 million Americans including our seniors in nursing homes would have to be discussed again and again?.

I certainly can see how the Democrats are using this plan of Rick Scott to attack and rile people to vote for the Democrats and against the Republicans in 2022. I can also see that the way they are putting forth this "as propaganda against the Republicans", does not meet the "fact check" parameters of being 100% truthful. Nonetheless, if adopted, it certainly puts the Republicans in the drivers seat, doesn't it? Wouldn't that give the Republicans and unfair advantage?

I welcome your comments on this.

Click to expand...

blanket rules/laws/decisions are usually flawed.
Reality isn't so simple.

Some things need to be made permanent, others do not.

The bottom line here is that in general, the extreme of the Democratic Party would like us to move radically in the direction of the kind of social services that the rest of the developed world has, but don’t hold the power to accomplish that. The moderates in both parties who hold the balance of power do not, but merely wish to tweak the government slightly to the left or right. The more conservative forces in the party have tended to accept, but to distrust things like Social Security and Medicare, with one of them saying that he opposed the ACA, cause if successful it would be another example showing the government can do positive things. And the extreme of the GOP see the only functions of government as putting people in jail at home and blowing them up overseas.

The Mark said:

blanket rules/laws/decisions are usually flawed.
Reality isn't so simple.

Some things need to be made permanent, others do not.

Click to expand...

Wow, what a nothing statement.

Luckyone said:

Wow, what a nothing statement.

Click to expand...

You might say that it was....

A blanket statement.