Jump to content

TRUMP and the GQP is coming for your Social Security, Medicare and VA Healthcare


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


Why not?  Teacher’s pension?

Because it will be long gone by the time I become of age.  On the teachers pension, one funny thing that a lot of people probably don't know about STERS.  Teachers (CA at least not sure about other states) don't pay social security, but CALPERS employees do.  Now because I do have CALPERS, even though I paid 100% into social security, if I do get it, it will be reduced by 33%.  Strange right?  I don't even plan on that pension being there either.  I am building a separate retirement from the Government in order to ensure I can retire some day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Demongyz said:

Because it will be long gone by the time I become of age.  On the teachers pension, one funny thing that a lot of people probably don't know about STERS.  Teachers (CA at least not sure about other states) don't pay social security, but CALPERS employees do.  Now because I do have CALPERS, even though I paid 100% into social security, if I do get it, it will be reduced by 33%.  Strange right?  I don't even plan on that pension being there either.  I am building a separate retirement from the Government in order to ensure I can retire some day.


I don’t know your age but SS in some fashion will always be there.  They may means test it which I hope they don’t.  What they need to do and do now is raise the FRA and get rid of the ability to draw at 62. Not only do you get a 25-30% cut in your benefit for life if you pull at 62 why are you not working?   Waiting until 70 is usually, not always but usually, the best option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


I don’t know your age but SS in some fashion will always be there.  They may means test it which I hope they don’t.  What they need to do and do now is raise the FRA and get rid of the ability to draw at 62. Not only do you get a 25-30% cut in your benefit for life if you pull at 62 why are you not working?   Waiting until 70 is usually, not always but usually, the best option. 

You know more about these topics than me Chef, but I’ve never understood where the constituency is for capping your contribution after you reach a certain level of income. I used to always say ‘hey, my take home paycheck went up’ every year when I eclipsed that cap. I honestly can’t imagine anyone getting upset. It’s a perk nobody requested. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

You know more about these topics than me Chef, but I’ve never understood where the constituency is for capping your contribution after you reach a certain level of income. I used to always say ‘hey, my take home paycheck went up’ every year when I eclipsed that cap. I honestly can’t imagine anyone getting upset. It’s a perk nobody requested. 


It’s a complex calculation that goes into determining your Social Security.  Originally it was designed so high wage earners didn’t participate at all.  They didn’t contribute and they didn’t benefit. Imagine that!  Letting them take care of themselves. It’s morphed over the years to what we have today.  Now would removing the cap alleviate a lot of the financial pressure on SS?  Absolutely but with caps on benefit having caps on the contribution makes sense….to me anyway. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:


It’s a complex calculation that goes into determining your Social Security.  Originally it was designed so high wage earners didn’t participate at all.  They didn’t contribute and they didn’t benefit. Imagine that!  Letting them take care of themselves. It’s morphed over the years to what we have today.  Now would removing the cap alleviate a lot of the financial pressure on SS?  Absolutely but with caps on benefit having caps on the contribution makes sense….to me anyway. 

I’m old enough to remember when a semi-coherent Joe Biden proposed gradually raising the retirement age during one of his many presidential runs. I thought it was a great idea then, and still do. There’s zero chance he brings that up now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’m old enough to remember when a semi-coherent Joe Biden proposed gradually raising the retirement age during one of his many presidential runs. I thought it was a great idea then, and still do. There’s zero chance he brings that up now. 


Well they have gradually raised the FRA to 67. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2022 at 2:54 PM, SoCal Deek said:

Time to go Higher?


How about reducing FRA back to 65, eliminate the 62 option increase the last option to 72 and reduce the 8% increase from FRA to oldest option.  Major spitballing here of course but there are tons of options.  It needs to (and will) stay in place but needs major overhauling. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS probably has 40+ years to go till it can collect SS. SS is going up this year because of Bidenflation. Justgot my medicare info for 2023 from Highmark and they are covering even more in the part D supplemental. Won't have to pay my extra dental coverage after Jan 1.

Edited by Wacka
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It’s Time to Stop Fearmongering About Social Security’s Demise

By The Heartland Institute 

 

According to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Republicans are “plotting to threaten a catastrophic economic meltdown in order to force wildly unpopular cuts to Social Security and Medicare.”

 

Plotting? Oh my!

 

As of this morning, there are no less than four articles claiming that the GOP will “gut,” “eliminate,” or destroy Social Security, all tied to random statements made by leaders of the Republican Party. These articles exist to generate fear, and serve only to waste precious time needed for the serious discussion about the gap between what Social Security has promised and what it expects to pay.

 

What eludes Pelosi and the rest of those selling fear is: Social Security is threatening to cut itself. In just 12 years, Social Security will deliver life-changing benefit reductions to seniors across the nation. That isn’t a worst-case scenario. Those results are what we should expect in a relatively robust economy.

 

While that may sound worrisome, it gets worse. The only fact on which all experts agree is that the longer we wait, the harder it gets. The obvious corollary is the more time we waste on a frivolous political sideshow, the more pain we will experience in our old age.

 

Unfortunately, voters chose more pain at every turn.

 

While fear dominates the news about Social Security, there is nothing to suggest that the GOP plans to “eliminate” Social Security, or even change Social Security in the near future.

 

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) does not have a plan to sunset Social Security or Medicare in five years. He has a plan that Congress will do its job. The fact is that his plan might not work out. Congress might forget about these programs, or voters might turn against them and elect representatives that would end these programs. These are unlikely possibilities, not a plan.

 

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) has said that he would like Congress to have more oversight over these programs. The fact is that Congress has the power now to control the costs of “non-discretionary budget items.” Congress chooses every year not to exercise that power, and there is no reason to believe that changing budget rules will make Congress more concerned about deficits within the budget or the prospects of a program on which millions rely.

Johnson’s idea is terrible, but for very different and unexamined reasons. The average retirement coverage of Social Security lasts around 19 years. No sensible retiree wants to depend upon the annual application of duct tape and bailing wire by politicians with a two-year time horizon to their lifeline.

 

Instead of a reasoned discussion about the merits of his idea, voters are inundated with fear about nonexistent GOP plans to put Social Security on the “chopping block.”

 

{snip}

 

 

In total, the Democrats may benefit politically from this calculus of fear, but the people who have to live with the consequences will not.

 

The disengaged dialogue about the program’s future is little more than an invitation to a programmatic drift to crisis, where no one wins.

 

https://redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2022/10/26/its-time-to-stop-fearmongering-about-social-securitys-demise-n649294

 

 

 

.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/25/2022 at 12:21 AM, BillStime said:

🎯

 

 

 

This is the post of the year.  Medicare if going down for two reasons.  First off retirees were pissed this year when they got a "raise" in their SS check however it was wiped out be the increase in Medicare premiums.  Secondly they are going down due to the rate of inflation in 2022.  Social Security checks are going up for the same reason....inflation. So this Tweet is thanking President Biden for the high rate of inflation.  Brilliant I tell ya!!  Brilliant.  :w00t: :wallbash:

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2022 at 12:40 PM, B-Man said:

 

It’s Time to Stop Fearmongering About Social Security’s Demise

By The Heartland Institute 

 

According to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, Republicans are “plotting to threaten a catastrophic economic meltdown in order to force wildly unpopular cuts to Social Security and Medicare.”

 

Plotting? Oh my!

 

As of this morning, there are no less than four articles claiming that the GOP will “gut,” “eliminate,” or destroy Social Security, all tied to random statements made by leaders of the Republican Party. These articles exist to generate fear, and serve only to waste precious time needed for the serious discussion about the gap between what Social Security has promised and what it expects to pay.

 

What eludes Pelosi and the rest of those selling fear is: Social Security is threatening to cut itself. In just 12 years, Social Security will deliver life-changing benefit reductions to seniors across the nation. That isn’t a worst-case scenario. Those results are what we should expect in a relatively robust economy.

 

While that may sound worrisome, it gets worse. The only fact on which all experts agree is that the longer we wait, the harder it gets. The obvious corollary is the more time we waste on a frivolous political sideshow, the more pain we will experience in our old age.

 

Unfortunately, voters chose more pain at every turn.

 

While fear dominates the news about Social Security, there is nothing to suggest that the GOP plans to “eliminate” Social Security, or even change Social Security in the near future.

 

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) does not have a plan to sunset Social Security or Medicare in five years. He has a plan that Congress will do its job. The fact is that his plan might not work out. Congress might forget about these programs, or voters might turn against them and elect representatives that would end these programs. These are unlikely possibilities, not a plan.

 

Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) has said that he would like Congress to have more oversight over these programs. The fact is that Congress has the power now to control the costs of “non-discretionary budget items.” Congress chooses every year not to exercise that power, and there is no reason to believe that changing budget rules will make Congress more concerned about deficits within the budget or the prospects of a program on which millions rely.

Johnson’s idea is terrible, but for very different and unexamined reasons. The average retirement coverage of Social Security lasts around 19 years. No sensible retiree wants to depend upon the annual application of duct tape and bailing wire by politicians with a two-year time horizon to their lifeline.

 

Instead of a reasoned discussion about the merits of his idea, voters are inundated with fear about nonexistent GOP plans to put Social Security on the “chopping block.”

 

{snip}

 

 

In total, the Democrats may benefit politically from this calculus of fear, but the people who have to live with the consequences will not.

 

The disengaged dialogue about the program’s future is little more than an invitation to a programmatic drift to crisis, where no one wins.

 

https://redstate.com/heartlandinstitute/2022/10/26/its-time-to-stop-fearmongering-about-social-securitys-demise-n649294

 

 

 

.

 

Well, it is silly season after all.

 

Talk of ending Social Security has been around around election time for as long as I can remember.  In 1980 I started a summer job for the city parks Department.  When filling out paperwork the supervisor said you young guys might not want to sign up for SS cuz it will be gone by the time we retire. Guess what I get in mail every month now? A Social security check.  

 

Who can forget Al Gore's lock box?

 

Social Security is still the 3rd rail of politics. If some Republican did introduce ending SS or Medicare it would never pass cuz some Rs wouldn't vote for it either.

 

It does need to be fixed however. There are many ways to do it.  

 

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Doc said:

When all you can do is stoke fear that the other side being more incompetent than you've proven to be...


Oh please - go burn your books - go delete your history -  go after school boards - go erase LGTBQ - go harass doctors at children's hospitals - go monitor taped 10 year olds.

 

Idiots 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, BillStime said:


Is there a caravan on the way?

 

Voter fraud BS kill anyone else?

 

Are drag queens scaring you?

 

Who is desperate AF?

 

 

 

 


Who is desperate?  Sounds like you and Joe seeing you’re both spreading lies about the elimination of SS and Medicare. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...