Republicans in congress say big cuts coming to Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare.

[Anonymous]

If you understood how Social Security works, you’d be shocked. It’s not self-funded; it’s a pay-as-you-go system where younger workers' taxes pay for current retirees. This setup closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, relying on new contributors to sustain payouts, with no personal savings account for your future. The system disproportionately benefits baby boomers, who are retiring in record numbers and collecting far more than they paid in, while younger generations face higher taxes and the risk of reduced benefits. This imbalance is unfair and unsustainable. For the good of the country, it’s time for boomers to acknowledge the need for reform. Raising the retirement age, adjusting benefits for wealthier retirees, and expanding the tax base are necessary changes to ensure future generations aren’t left holding the bag. Let’s fix this now—before it’s too late.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're unsustainable.

I wish they'd cut SS and let me invest it. I'd make so much more ROI. SS makes my retirement worse.

I'm only a few years from retirement so I really don't want to lose what I've already put in to SS. Maybe I could've invested it better but its too late. For younger workers it makes sense.

So you should get it because you're closer to retirement and didn't invest enough otherwise but others, shouldn't? Hahahahaha. Classic Boomer mentality of rolling up the ladder behind you as well as poor planning. Sorry not sorry.

It's not poor planning to incorporate SS into your financial plan if it's been promised to you your whole life. Stop the "boomer" crap.

Oh so sorry that you didn't account for this contingency. Must suck. Too bad. That's what you voted for. Maybe you should've planned better and pulled yourself by your bootstraps. Maybe you can get one of those jobs from the illegals who'll be deported to replace the lost income!

Do you people not read?
The PP was responding to someone who said they wished they'd cut SS because they'd do a better job of investing it. That PP then responded it's too late for that to make a difference for them because they're so close to retirement and *maybe they could have invested the social security funds better but it's too late for them to find out because they're so close to retirement*. They didn't say they didn't plan for their own retirement or invest enough others. They said maybe they'd have done better with those SS funds, maybe not.
Damn, do you people just spout crap without actually reading what people say? You're so quick to pounce that you don't even understand the posts you're responding to.

"so I really don't want to lose what I've already put in to SS. Maybe I could've invested it better but its too late." That means they didn't save enough and were banking on SS. That seems to have been a poor assumption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're unsustainable.

I wish they'd cut SS and let me invest it. I'd make so much more ROI. SS makes my retirement worse.

I'm only a few years from retirement so I really don't want to lose what I've already put in to SS. Maybe I could've invested it better but its too late. For younger workers it makes sense.

So you should get it because you're closer to retirement and didn't invest enough otherwise but others, shouldn't? Hahahahaha. Classic Boomer mentality of rolling up the ladder behind you as well as poor planning. Sorry not sorry.

It's not poor planning to incorporate SS into your financial plan if it's been promised to you your whole life. Stop the "boomer" crap.

Oh so sorry that you didn't account for this contingency. Must suck. Too bad. That's what you voted for. Maybe you should've planned better and pulled yourself by your bootstraps. Maybe you can get one of those jobs from the illegals who'll be deported to replace the lost income!

Do you people not read?
The PP was responding to someone who said they wished they'd cut SS because they'd do a better job of investing it. That PP then responded it's too late for that to make a difference for them because they're so close to retirement and *maybe they could have invested the social security funds better but it's too late for them to find out because they're so close to retirement*. They didn't say they didn't plan for their own retirement or invest enough others. They said maybe they'd have done better with those SS funds, maybe not.
Damn, do you people just spout crap without actually reading what people say? You're so quick to pounce that you don't even understand the posts you're responding to.

"so I really don't want to lose what I've already put in to SS. Maybe I could've invested it better but its too late." That means they didn't save enough and were banking on SS. That seems to have been a poor assumption.

The vast majority of people middle aged and older are planning on getting SS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're unsustainable.

I wish they'd cut SS and let me invest it. I'd make so much more ROI. SS makes my retirement worse.

I'm only a few years from retirement so I really don't want to lose what I've already put in to SS. Maybe I could've invested it better but its too late. For younger workers it makes sense.

So you should get it because you're closer to retirement and didn't invest enough otherwise but others, shouldn't? Hahahahaha. Classic Boomer mentality of rolling up the ladder behind you as well as poor planning. Sorry not sorry.

It's not poor planning to incorporate SS into your financial plan if it's been promised to you your whole life. Stop the "boomer" crap.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Rep. Rich McCormick (R-Ga.) said Tuesday that lawmakers will ultimately face tough choices on spending in next year’s unified GOP government, suggesting cuts may be coming to social welfare programs

We’re going to have to have some hard decisions. We got to bring the Democrats in to talk about Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare. There’s hundreds of billions of dollars to be saved, and we know how to do it, we just have to have the stomach to actually take those challenges on,” McCormick told Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5019422-republican-social-security-medicaid-medicare-welfare-cuts-trump/

This will be fun to watch because at the same time congressional republicans are cutting these benefits they will be giving tax breaks the rich. You know they will also go after the VA and veterans’ disability.

Why do the “hard decisions” always involve cutting benefits? Why not just raise taxes a little bit?

Because it is the GOP who is still frosty about the FDR agenda implementation from the 1930's and would prefer to have no government social safety nets and wants to return to the days of our seniors eating cat food to survive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cut SS for everyone born after 1985. Cut each of those Americans a check for $10k to give them back part of what they’ve paid in. Then let them go invest their money instead of taking if 6.2% tax from our checks.

-Gen Z trump voter

Those born after 1985 are paying for those on SS now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If social security is truly self funded why have everyone get paid out whatever they put in and then stop it all together. Then moving forward make it optional.

Most people are not smart enough to plan for retirement. That’s why we need mandatory social security.
Do we have to repeat the lessons of the Great Depression again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you understood how Social Security works, you’d be shocked. It’s not self-funded; it’s a pay-as-you-go system where younger workers' taxes pay for current retirees. This setup closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, relying on new contributors to sustain payouts, with no personal savings account for your future. The system disproportionately benefits baby boomers, who are retiring in record numbers and collecting far more than they paid in, while younger generations face higher taxes and the risk of reduced benefits. This imbalance is unfair and unsustainable. For the good of the country, it’s time for boomers to acknowledge the need for reform. Raising the retirement age, adjusting benefits for wealthier retirees, and expanding the tax base are necessary changes to ensure future generations aren’t left holding the bag. Let’s fix this now—before it’s too late.

It's only a Ponzi scheme if you think the US will enter long-term demographic decline (shrinkage) in the future. Otherwise it's perfectly sound system. Yes it's pay-go, but that's by design. The issue arose due to a big demographic bulge due to the baby boom, which will be echoed by millennials three decades later. Evening out that demographic overfunding/underfunding cycle is what's required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you understood how Social Security works, you’d be shocked. It’s not self-funded; it’s a pay-as-you-go system where younger workers' taxes pay for current retirees. This setup closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, relying on new contributors to sustain payouts, with no personal savings account for your future. The system disproportionately benefits baby boomers, who are retiring in record numbers and collecting far more than they paid in, while younger generations face higher taxes and the risk of reduced benefits. This imbalance is unfair and unsustainable. For the good of the country, it’s time for boomers to acknowledge the need for reform. Raising the retirement age, adjusting benefits for wealthier retirees, and expanding the tax base are necessary changes to ensure future generations aren’t left holding the bag. Let’s fix this now—before it’s too late.

There is a reason the democrats are generally for expanding the base of workers to pay into the system at this critical time. It's the GOP that keeps crashing the ecnomy and kicking people out of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If social security is truly self funded why have everyone get paid out whatever they put in and then stop it all together. Then moving forward make it optional.

Most people are not smart enough to plan for retirement. That’s why we need mandatory social security.
Do we have to repeat the lessons of the Great Depression again?

+1 people who don't have employer sponsored health insurance opt to not get ACA because they think nothing bad will happen to them, then they get seriously ill and run to ACA to save them, or use gofundme. Lots of people don't even save enough for retirement now, and it's not because of the social security tax. People just don't plan for retirement because they are too busy thinking about now, not later.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:All those Trump supporters who are expecting medicare and social security in the future.. gosh. It's almost like they weren't listening to what Trump and Rs were saying about all of this and only heard "build a wall", and voted R.

Yup. Us limousine liberals over here who voted against our own financial interests and for the good of the nation can laugh all the way to the bank. You brought it on yourselves, dummies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If social security is truly self funded why have everyone get paid out whatever they put in and then stop it all together. Then moving forward make it optional.

Most people are not smart enough to plan for retirement. That’s why we need mandatory social security.
Do we have to repeat the lessons of the Great Depression again?

Yes, yes, we do. We also eliminated defined benefit plans in favor of 401ks. Too bad people didn't learn from history. Pull yourself by your bootstraps folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you understood how Social Security works, you’d be shocked. It’s not self-funded; it’s a pay-as-you-go system where younger workers' taxes pay for current retirees. This setup closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, relying on new contributors to sustain payouts, with no personal savings account for your future. The system disproportionately benefits baby boomers, who are retiring in record numbers and collecting far more than they paid in, while younger generations face higher taxes and the risk of reduced benefits. This imbalance is unfair and unsustainable. For the good of the country, it’s time for boomers to acknowledge the need for reform. Raising the retirement age, adjusting benefits for wealthier retirees, and expanding the tax base are necessary changes to ensure future generations aren’t left holding the bag. Let’s fix this now—before it’s too late.

There is a reason the democrats are generally for expanding the base of workers to pay into the system at this critical time. It's the GOP that keeps crashing the ecnomy and kicking people out of work.

Also, it's not a ponzi scheme. It's called a public retirement benefit. It's completely sustainable if we actually plan for it, and if the fiscal responsibility the Democrats institute when they are in power is continued by the Republicans. But we all know that's not likely to happen because the R's love to spend and hate to save.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you understood how Social Security works, you’d be shocked. It’s not self-funded; it’s a pay-as-you-go system where younger workers' taxes pay for current retirees. This setup closely resembles a Ponzi scheme, relying on new contributors to sustain payouts, with no personal savings account for your future. The system disproportionately benefits baby boomers, who are retiring in record numbers and collecting far more than they paid in, while younger generations face higher taxes and the risk of reduced benefits. This imbalance is unfair and unsustainable. For the good of the country, it’s time for boomers to acknowledge the need for reform. Raising the retirement age, adjusting benefits for wealthier retirees, and expanding the tax base are necessary changes to ensure future generations aren’t left holding the bag. Let’s fix this now—before it’s too late.

There is a reason the democrats are generally for expanding the base of workers to pay into the system at this critical time. It's the GOP that keeps crashing the ecnomy and kicking people out of work.

Also, it's not a ponzi scheme. It's called a public retirement benefit. It's completely sustainable if we actually plan for it, and if the fiscal responsibility the Democrats institute when they are in power is continued by the Republicans. But we all know that's not likely to happen because the R's love to spend and hate to save.

We also could simply raise the cap on taxes paid to support Social Security and it would be completely sustainable. That would be fiscally responsible but involves (gasp) tax increases on those with incomes above the cap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All those Trump supporters who are expecting medicare and social security in the future.. gosh. It's almost like they weren't listening to what Trump and Rs were saying about all of this and only heard "build a wall", and voted R.

Yup. Us limousine liberals over here who voted against our own financial interests and for the good of the nation can laugh all the way to the bank. You brought it on yourselves, dummies.

+1. I would've been fine with raising the cap on social security taxes, expanding Medicare eligibility, and further supporting the social safety net. Well, I guess I'll take my tax cut and ignore the benefits that I wasn't counting on anyways. Thanks MAGAs!