Social Security. Get Rid Of It.

[ric27]

This is in regards to the retirement part of SS.

So, I've always said that I've supported Social Security, but recently, after considering it for a while, I've come to the conclusion that we shouldn't have it. It is, essentially, the government forcing people to save their money, and then gives it back to people when they are older. So, the assumption is that people are to dumb to save their money on their own. Even though that is the case for many, that doesn't give the government the right, or give it a good reason, to act in that way. If you didn't save your money when you could have all those years, thats on you, not the federal government, or the rest of the tax payers. I'm fine with a strong social safety net, but unemployment insurance, food stamps etc, are different than a program that takes X among of dollars and gives you X amount of dollars back (possibly a slight increase) later on in life.

So liberals and progressives, convince me otherwise, if you can. Why should we keep SS as a government program?

SS is more complex than just cutting it....

Are you going to refund the money to all of the people that have paid into it over the last 20/25/30 years? With interest? Or you just going to tell them too ****ing bad...deal with it? And if that's the way you want to go, how exactly do you defend that decision in court?

Because, I see mega ****loads of legal action

There's a reason no one wants to touch it

 

[MaggieD]

This is in regards to the retirement part of SS.

So, I've always said that I've supported Social Security, but recently, after considering it for a while, I've come to the conclusion that we shouldn't have it. It is, essentially, the government forcing people to save their money, and then gives it back to people when they are older. So, the assumption is that people are to dumb to save their money on their own. Even though that is the case for many, that doesn't give the government the right, or give it a good reason, to act in that way. If you didn't save your money when you could have all those years, thats on you, not the federal government, or the rest of the tax payers. I'm fine with a strong social safety net, but unemployment insurance, food stamps etc, are different than a program that takes X among of dollars and gives you X amount of dollars back (possibly a slight increase) later on in life.

So liberals and progressives, convince me otherwise, if you can. Why should we keep SS as a government program?

Maybe people above a certain income should be able to opt out of Social Security. But for those with lower incomes, they need a safety net when they get old. We aren't going to let them starve, so better we make them save.

 

[Crossroads]

Maybe people above a certain income should be able to opt out of Social Security. But for those with lower incomes, they need a safety net when they get old. We aren't going to let them starve, so better we make them save.

"make them save"? under that logic, we could make them do a fair number of other things that would benefit them, by force....you see where I'm going with this argument?

 

[Crossroads]

No... there is NOT a finite amount of money. The GDP grows and shrinks all the time.

I just showed you the way to become wealthy. I used real numbers, real facts, and real ways to achieve it. And STILL, you go on to tell me how impossible it is. How only a very small percentage can actually do what I proposed. Really? Does the math I showed you suddenly not work? The real secret to becomming wealthy is that it is not a secret. And it does not happen quickly. It takes decades of hard work, effort, and a willingness to see it through.

I can tell you from my own personal experience that it DOES work. I have been following this plan since I was 29.... My net worth was a few thousand back then... it is considerably higher now, and I am still under 40. Do what you want with your money. But you will also live with the conequences of those decisions for a lifetime...

I like how I try to be really nice and calm about it, and you get your jimmies all rustled up...if you took a tally of all the wealth in this country, accounting for normal rises and falls in GDP, there is literally no way that 300 MILLION PEOPLE could all be making at least a million dollars or more, its impossible. 300 million times 1 million, is so far beyond the amount of wealth that exists in this country, far beyond anything the GDP could hope to effect enough. Get a calculator, do the simple, basic equation first, before you waste your time with a hypothetical that is at face value, impossible.

This is what I can't stand about hard right libertarians or conservatives, the ones who can't admit that in a capitalistic system, a certain number of people are always going to get the short end of the stick, even if they try and act responsibly.

 

[obvious Child]

Is it not also a risk to live most of your life without saving enough to retire on?

Your sentence structure here needs work. Most of your life isn't in retirement, but it is a huge risk not to save enough to retire on. That said, there are plenty of incidents were responsible people got a bad hand and get wiped out by events out of their control.

Jay would leave these people to die in the streets homeless. I find that immoral. Besides, I have seen my fellow American. We are a pretty irresponsible lot.

 

[cpwill]

That 4 Trillion was paid into the fund by American workers specifically for there own Social Security.

Yup, and then instead we spent it on Congresscritters' pet projects.

 

[cpwill]

"make them save"? under that logic, we could make them do a fair number of other things that would benefit them, by force....you see where I'm going with this argument?

Yes, and I understand it. But this is where we are - and change back in the direction of individual responsibility is something that would have to be phased in at best.

Jay would leave these people to die in the streets homeless. I find that immoral. Besides, I have seen my fellow American. We are a pretty irresponsible lot.

to be fair, not having a national old age pension program does not preclude the possibility of a state measure.

 

[johnny_rebson]

Your sentence structure here needs work. Most of your life isn't in retirement, but it is a huge risk not to save enough to retire on. That said, there are plenty of incidents were responsible people got a bad hand and get wiped out by events out of their control.

Jay would leave these people to die in the streets homeless. I find that immoral. Besides, I have seen my fellow American. We are a pretty irresponsible lot.

Ryan is right, we need to end entitlement programs like Medicare, welfare, and Social Security.

Romney made a wise choice when he selected Ryan for the VP slot.

 

[Chelsea]

Ryan is right, we need to end entitlement programs like Medicare, welfare, and Social Security.

Romney made a wise choice when he selected Ryan for the VP slot.

DSo what would you propose we do with the uninsured flooding the hospitals, the single women and children living on the streets, and the elderly likewise?

 

[obvious Child]

to be fair, not having a national old age pension program does not preclude the possibility of a state measure.

That's possible, but they'd need to come up with something that's a bit safer then a simple equity investment account. Possibly a system requiring a payment into money market accounts would work, but Jay has made it clear he's against any government forced savings at the same time arguing a charity system that can't even take care of homeless kids can handle millions of high medical cost seniors.

 

[obvious Child]

Ryan is right, we need to end entitlement programs like Medicare, welfare, and Social Security.

Romney made a wise choice when he selected Ryan for the VP slot.

Sure, if you have no real grasp of economics.

I take it you have no real understanding of how healthcare works in China? Hint, this is quite relevant as to why Ryan is a bad choice. Let's see if you can figure it out.

 

[cpwill]

Ryan is right, we need to end entitlement programs like Medicare, welfare, and Social Security.

Romney made a wise choice when he selected Ryan for the VP slot.

I nominate you for the least effective liberal sock-puppet ever. Ryan has never called for the ending of any of those programs, and only the more foamy of the left-leaning ranks thinks that he has.