Latest topics
» I see this board has been quiet
Tue Jun 07, 2016 1:24 pm by Knight1009

» Hello Ya'll. *Theirmommie*
Tue Nov 17, 2015 9:42 am by my_lucid_bubble72

» 20 % of Americans Struggle To Buy Food
Thu Jul 16, 2015 1:00 pm by pbrad009

» The Make Some One Day Challenge
Wed May 27, 2015 12:32 pm by Prof_NSA

» Clues to why they not hiring you
Sun Apr 05, 2015 5:25 pm by Sandra5yearsunemployed

» New Year Nothing Change
Tue Jan 20, 2015 5:48 pm by Prof_NSA

» UF2 Members Chat Thread: Part 3
Mon Jan 19, 2015 4:01 pm by member

» Passed?!?! H.R. 3979: Emergency Unemployment Compensation Extension Act of 2014
Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:24 pm by charliekerper

» Forbes: America's #1 Problem is Jobs, Not Debt
Sat Nov 15, 2014 10:50 pm by jmainframe

» Economy just getting worse
Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:16 pm by oncemore

» UFO 2.1 VIDEO JUKEBOX - Our Chords & Keys To Ascension
Mon Oct 06, 2014 6:33 am by 

» January Jobs Report: U.S. Economy Adds 157,000 Jobs; Unemployment Rate Up To 7.9 Percent
Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:23 am by DesperateInRI

» Hey Guys!!!!
Mon Sep 29, 2014 9:17 am by pbrad009

» Up all NIGHT WORRIED!
Thu Sep 25, 2014 11:56 pm by pbrad009

» things are going to get worst
Sun Sep 21, 2014 7:51 pm by 

Social Networks
December 2016
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Calendar Calendar


Attacking Social Security

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:55 am

The currently fashionable idea of raising the retirement age even more than it will rise under existing law — it has already gone from 65 to 66, it’s scheduled to rise to 67, but now some are proposing that it go to 70 — is usually justified with assertions that life expectancy has risen, so people can easily work later into life. But that’s only true for affluent, white-collar workers — the people who need Social Security least.

I’m not just talking about the fact that it’s a lot easier to imagine working until you’re 70 if you have a comfortable office job than if you’re engaged in manual labor. America is becoming an increasingly unequal society — and the growing disparities extend to matters of life and death. Life expectancy at age 65 has risen a lot at the top of the income distribution, but much less for lower-income workers. And remember, the retirement age is already scheduled to rise under current law.

So let’s beat back this unnecessary, unfair and — let’s not mince words — cruel attack on working Americans. Big cuts in Social Security should not be on the table.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/opinion/16krugman.html

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by TR11005 on Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:05 am

Actually in this Great Recession, it should have been reduced to 60 instead of being 62. I had to wait a whole year without income after running out of Unemployment. Then I was forced to take early SS. Forced meaning I had no other option.

It is true on the type of jobs you had and your health. Too old to work and too young to collect. This would only make it rougher on the poor class of workers who already have limited funds.

I think with computer software you can adjust any age. Especially, if you are already unemployed older worker over 55 and have very poor chance of being hired in this economy. You can always go back to work. They adjust your SS at 66.

TR11005
Member

Posts : 541
Join date : 2011-02-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by exhaustedandtired/1208 on Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:30 am

DesperateInRI wrote:
The currently fashionable idea of raising the retirement age even more than it will rise under existing law — it has already gone from 65 to 66, it’s scheduled to rise to 67, but now some are proposing that it go to 70 — is usually justified with assertions that life expectancy has risen, so people can easily work later into life. But that’s only true for affluent, white-collar workers — the people who need Social Security least.

I’m not just talking about the fact that it’s a lot easier to imagine working until you’re 70 if you have a comfortable office job than if you’re engaged in manual labor. America is becoming an increasingly unequal society — and the growing disparities extend to matters of life and death. Life expectancy at age 65 has risen a lot at the top of the income distribution, but much less for lower-income workers. And remember, the retirement age is already scheduled to rise under current law.

So let’s beat back this unnecessary, unfair and — let’s not mince words — cruel attack on working Americans. Big cuts in Social Security should not be on the table.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/opinion/16krugman.html




LOOK OUT!!! Saw a article and a scientist was saying that humans may one day live to be 1000. Bet he was hired by SS legislators.

exhaustedandtired/1208
Member

Posts : 863
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 69

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by exhaustedandtired/1208 on Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:32 am

DesperateInRI wrote:
The currently fashionable idea of raising the retirement age even more than it will rise under existing law — it has already gone from 65 to 66, it’s scheduled to rise to 67, but now some are proposing that it go to 70 — is usually justified with assertions that life expectancy has risen, so people can easily work later into life. But that’s only true for affluent, white-collar workers — the people who need Social Security least.

I’m not just talking about the fact that it’s a lot easier to imagine working until you’re 70 if you have a comfortable office job than if you’re engaged in manual labor. America is becoming an increasingly unequal society — and the growing disparities extend to matters of life and death. Life expectancy at age 65 has risen a lot at the top of the income distribution, but much less for lower-income workers. And remember, the retirement age is already scheduled to rise under current law.

So let’s beat back this unnecessary, unfair and — let’s not mince words — cruel attack on working Americans. Big cuts in Social Security should not be on the table.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/opinion/16krugman.html


One day soon after age 55 you are unemployable then one would have to wait til age 70 to get SS. RIGHT! Everything the legislature touches they screw up but then blame it on the voters!

exhaustedandtired/1208
Member

Posts : 863
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 69

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by TR11005 on Sun Jul 10, 2011 11:47 am

I believe they leaving 62 as it is. It should be lowered in this economy, I am proof if it and many others!

TR11005
Member

Posts : 541
Join date : 2011-02-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:26 pm

Tr11005, that's a dangerous road to take. All 99ers eligible for ss? It wouldn't remain solvent for 10 years. You can't use an age cut off on that either, it would be totally unfair. They need to get a Jobs Bill and extend benefits until we work out of this. Seperate issues. We have seen the way they treat extensions, do you really imagine that they would all just agree to ss for all 99ers who have no benefits????? They hate paying it out to those who are eligible through age and retirement or disability as it is.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Redpossum on Sun Jul 10, 2011 12:43 pm

I'm not sure what people are talking about, but the SS administration has been telling me for a decade now that I have to work until I was 70 to collect full benefits.

The flier I get once a year or so lists 3 options- 62, 65, and 70.

So this talk about maybe raising the age to 70 strikes me as total *moderated*. It already happened.

Forum Rules
1. Please, no swearing on the forums. While this kind of language may be easy to use, we ask that everyone refrain from using it. This includes trying to by pass the forums censored words by adding a * or a # in the text.

2. Do not use any type of abusive or offensive language/behavior.
http://www.unemployed-friends2.org/t1593-forum-rules-faq-and-code-of-conduct-for-all-members#16125

Redpossum
Member

Posts : 119
Join date : 2011-03-15
Age : 57

http://possumhole.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 10, 2011 1:35 pm

As of right now, the age for maximum benefits varies by birth year. The oldest full retirement age is 67 for those born after 1960.

From the Social Security Administration's website:

http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/retirechart.htm

At age 70, you are no longer subject to FICA taxes.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Judi58 on Sun Jul 10, 2011 2:24 pm

let me ask... so they take away SSI I am 53 they let everyone over 55 stay in the program..(as I have heard the Rep are trying to pass) what happens to my SSI that I have put in over the last 32 years? Do I get a check or is it just gone and see ya later....

The whole thing stinks to me.. How about anyone born after 2012... But all of us who have been adding to this pot thinking it would be there for us are just screwed out of OUR money.. seems almost like robbery... just my .02 worth

Judi58
Member

Posts : 148
Join date : 2011-03-08

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 10, 2011 2:27 pm

Judi58 wrote:let me ask... so they take away SSI I am 53 they let everyone over 55 stay in the program..(as I have heard the Rep are trying to pass) what happens to my SSI that I have put in over the last 32 years? Do I get a check or is it just gone and see ya later....

The whole thing stinks to me.. How about anyone born after 2012... But all of us who have been adding to this pot thinking it would be there for us are just screwed out of OUR money.. seems almost like robbery... just my .02 worth
I believe it was Medicare that they proposed changing to a voucher system and distributed to the states for everyone born after 1956. That was in Ryan's budget, "The Path to Prosperity", but it will never pass the Senate.

What the GOP is proposing now is raising the existing retirement ages.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Sun Jul 10, 2011 7:54 pm

Judi, anyone on the program through disability or otherwise remains on SS, however, there are additional income restrictions. Desp posted above about the varying years. My income statement is 62 partial, 66 full and 70 is no FICA taxes plus an adder. I was born in 1954 so I am good to go at 66. If I could work until 70 it's an additional 400 for me. Using the calculator right now though, it reflects that we have not worked for 3 years, remember, if we go back to work, these numbers will change as we will be contributing again. This is another area that we are being hurt by this joblessness.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by exhaustedandtired/1208 on Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:22 am

well one thing is for sure, pres. says he is willing to support repubs. if it leads to resolve! NOT GOOD! Also avoided questions about SS cuts and deferred his answer... Nice guy and nice republican!

exhaustedandtired/1208
Member

Posts : 863
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 69

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:32 am

Actually 1208 that isn't correct, the changes he is look to make are on the costing side of the Social Security program and Medicare program not on the benefit side. And if it works and saves money, it's still a cost cutting measure.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by exhaustedandtired/1208 on Tue Jul 12, 2011 4:02 pm

MaryKay wrote:Actually 1208 that isn't correct, the changes he is look to make are on the costing side of the Social Security program and Medicare program not on the benefit side. And if it works and saves money, it's still a cost cutting measure.
your opinion is encouraging but I don't think anywhere he has detailed where his cuts are coming from/ He also hinted he might take away from annual cost of living increases!

exhaustedandtired/1208
Member

Posts : 863
Join date : 2011-02-17
Age : 69

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Tue Jul 12, 2011 5:13 pm

Always remember, the Republican way of winning elections is to tell you what's wrong, why it's wrong and it's taxes, social security and medicare. This has gone on for decades. They also want to tell you who is to blame and that's Democrats and anyone who collects unemployment, social security, medicare, medicaid and any social service help available. We are to blame. They are very good at it and they want you to believe it. They also want you to get angry at your own party for cuts they may have to make.

Debt Ceiling needs to be increased, period end of story. Nothing should be attached. It needs to be increased. Social Security, Taxes, Medicare/Medicaid, Jobs, Infrastructure are very important, they need to vote on these things alone, as individual bills and not in a hurry and a rush to steady the almighty stock market. It needs to be done correctly own it's own merit. Increases are needed, cuts are needed and there are many areas that are overfunded and many that are underfunded. They want us to believe that this debate will actually bring jobs, infrastructure and benefits to all, it won't, it will do what it should do, raise the debt ceiling. Nothing more. That's how it will end up. Making snap decisions in a panic to prove something to your base is again a bad way to play with the lives of the American people.

If I were a betting woman, I would be you that we will raise the ceiling and see not one tax increase and not one domestic program cut. They have let it go to long.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Springflowers on Tue Jul 12, 2011 8:45 pm



Springflowers
Member

Posts : 215
Join date : 2011-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by gettheminNOVEMBER on Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:08 pm

Moderated!

Come on spring flowers I know you are angry but insulting Obamas wife is too far.

Trust me I have run my mouth plenty of times myself.

gettheminNOVEMBER
Member

Posts : 2626
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 42

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Springflowers on Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:20 pm

Yeah I probably sinned with that one.

But she does have the whole Marie Aintoinette thing going.

Ever read about some of those expensive vacations she takes?

Springflowers
Member

Posts : 215
Join date : 2011-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by gettheminNOVEMBER on Tue Jul 12, 2011 9:34 pm

Springflowers wrote:Yeah I probably sinned with that one.

But she does have the whole Marie Aintoinette thing going.

Ever read about some of those expensive vacations she takes?

I believe before Obama was prez. She made more money. No I have not, do you have any links?

gettheminNOVEMBER
Member

Posts : 2626
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 42

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Tue Jul 12, 2011 10:47 pm

Springflowers wrote:Yeah I probably sinned with that one.

But she does have the whole Marie Aintoinette thing going.

Ever read about some of those expensive vacations she takes?

All the First Ladies travel for diplomatic relations matters. Michelle Obama is no different than any other who has held that role.

While you are looking for links to Mrs. Obama's "vacations", check out where other First Ladies have traveled, and the amount of money they spent for special china, silverware, rugs, etc. for the Whitehouse also.

What does this have to do with Social Security?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by TR11005 on Tue Jul 12, 2011 11:44 pm

Makes about as much sense as tying the SS with the Federal Deficit.

TR11005
Member

Posts : 541
Join date : 2011-02-17

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Redpossum on Wed Jul 13, 2011 12:37 am

TR has a point there. Social Security is still running a surplus. It is not contributing to the deficit in any way.

So how did a deficit discussion turn into "let's cut social security" ?

Redpossum
Member

Posts : 119
Join date : 2011-03-15
Age : 57

http://possumhole.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by lendmeflight2 on Wed Jul 13, 2011 3:07 am

Yeah, SS has never contributed one penny to the deficit. Scrapping it to solve the deficit would be like me running into debt trouble and taking money out of your savings account to fix it.

Isn't this the very example people use to try and tell me that socialism doesn't work?

lendmeflight2
Member

Posts : 1219
Join date : 2011-02-21

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Springflowers on Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:10 am

gettheminNOVEMBER wrote:
Springflowers wrote:Yeah I probably sinned with that one.

But she does have the whole Marie Aintoinette thing going.

Ever read about some of those expensive vacations she takes?

I believe before Obama was prez. She made more money. No I have not, do you have any links?

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/06/michelle-obamas-lavish-spain-vacation-sparking-criticism/

Theres been a few more since then like an African Safari etc.

Springflowers
Member

Posts : 215
Join date : 2011-04-14

Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Guest on Wed Jul 13, 2011 10:53 am

Springflowers wrote:
gettheminNOVEMBER wrote:
Springflowers wrote:Yeah I probably sinned with that one.

But she does have the whole Marie Aintoinette thing going.

Ever read about some of those expensive vacations she takes?

I believe before Obama was prez. She made more money. No I have not, do you have any links?

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/08/06/michelle-obamas-lavish-spain-vacation-sparking-criticism/

Theres been a few more since then like an African Safari etc.
And Nancy Reagan, Hilary Clinton, Betty Ford, Laura Bush never went anywhere or spent any money on redecorating the White House, right?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Attacking Social Security

Post by Sponsored content Today at 4:37 am


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum