Your thoughts on likelihood of rolling back SS, Medicaid, Medicare after first week

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a millennial I'd like to make ss optional so I can stop paying and cash out

"cash out"? It's a pay as you go system-- the most you can do is destroy the social safety net for seniors by ending social security but you are never getting your contributions back.

Don't be a tool and let the right wing propaganda tell you the money isn't there for social security-- it's only not there if they steal it for other things, like tax cuts for the wealthy.

but the money isn't actually anywhere. It's an IOU from the feds. Your payments into the system are spent by Congress immediately. Your payments aren't sitting anywhere compounding or earning interest.

All the money the government collects is then redistributed by the government. That's how taxation works.

People need to stop thinking about Social Security like some sort of savings account. It's welfare for the elderly (and a few other groups)

No. If that were the case, we'd means test it. Which we should be doing. I don't get why my mother and stepfather are driving around in a jag and collecting SS.

First, it absolutely is welfare for the elderly. You may think it's run worse than AFDC, but it's still welfare.

Second, means testing always costs more than it saves. Taxing SS as income would be fine. Especially if the current income tax system didn't favor the rich.

85% of SS is already taxable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There may be a lot of changes but they will include:

1. Nothing changes for people 50 and over on the date enacted.
2. Ages go up to 66/68/70 for all between 25 and 50.
3. Outside income will decrease benefits to 80. Cap on total benefits based on NW.
4. Payments go up.
5. Increase in ages for people now 25 or under to 70/72/75.

So…where is a 72 yo supposed to work? I know folks who have been laid off in their early 50s and they cannot get back into the job market? Who is going to hire the 69 yo? And what about the 70 yo who worked manual labor their WHOLE career? Some of their bodies are giving out.

Raising the age is in order to siphon off the benefits from workers who will die before they draw a dime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump's nominee for the OMB (Office of Management and Budget) is Russel Vought, a co-author of Project 2025. (This is curious since Trump had claimed he knew nothing about Project 2025, yet he apparently knows one of the architects of it well enough to nominate him.) Vought recently stated: “I think we need to go after the mandatory programs that Sen. Cornyn mentioned that are keeping people out of the workforce because they have become not just a social safety net, but they have become a benefit hammock."

That would include Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Theoretically, Congress would have to cooperate. And they well might. But if you believe the checks and balances are broken, then you should understand a rug pull is possible at any time.

Yeah, my 84 yo ILs, one with severe dementia, are out of the workforce because of a “benefit hammock.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sadly the benefits of social security aren't worth it for most of us. You get $1-4K a year but how much did you pay in over your lifetime to get 10-20 years of benefits. For medicare, you pay premiums all your life from your payroll taxes to when you actually take it. Not worth it.

If you become disabled or widowed early or have a child with a disability, you'll see the value.

Right? This may be the most ignorant post I’ve read on DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly Medicaid for illegal immigrants like in CA should never have happened. They also cover in home support services regardless of immigration status. This is a huge money pit and attracts even more illegal immigrants to the state. Might be good for companies but bad for regular taxpayers.

Do you have a cite for this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There may be a lot of changes but they will include:

1. Nothing changes for people 50 and over on the date enacted.
2. Ages go up to 66/68/70 for all between 25 and 50.
3. Outside income will decrease benefits to 80. Cap on total benefits based on NW.
4. Payments go up.
5. Increase in ages for people now 25 or under to 70/72/75.

Damn I am 48.
When you regret you aren’t a bit older lol

49 year old thinking the very same thing.

No one actually knows. Elon is now talking about essentially shutting down all agencies “to see what we really need.”

All we can really count on is chaos.

Yes, but the chaos is forcused at certain areas of society, especially the area of care. Republicans want women in the home, but no system to compensate them or to acknowledge their unpaid labor at any step along the way. The cruelty is the point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Zero chance. And social security won’t be taxed.

You think there is ZERO chance in the roll back of SS, Medicaid, and Medicare? What is your provenance of this confidence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a millennial I'd like to make ss optional so I can stop paying and cash out

"cash out"? It's a pay as you go system-- the most you can do is destroy the social safety net for seniors by ending social security but you are never getting your contributions back.

Don't be a tool and let the right wing propaganda tell you the money isn't there for social security-- it's only not there if they steal it for other things, like tax cuts for the wealthy.

but the money isn't actually anywhere. It's an IOU from the feds. Your payments into the system are spent by Congress immediately. Your payments aren't sitting anywhere compounding or earning interest.

you really think most Americans who live paycheck to paycheck would be able to put away those monies? If so, you are utterly clueless on how many in this country live day to day, week to week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a millennial I'd like to make ss optional so I can stop paying and cash out

"cash out"? It's a pay as you go system-- the most you can do is destroy the social safety net for seniors by ending social security but you are never getting your contributions back.

Don't be a tool and let the right wing propaganda tell you the money isn't there for social security-- it's only not there if they steal it for other things, like tax cuts for the wealthy.

but the money isn't actually anywhere. It's an IOU from the feds. Your payments into the system are spent by Congress immediately. Your payments aren't sitting anywhere compounding or earning interest.

All the money the government collects is then redistributed by the government. That's how taxation works.

People need to stop thinking about Social Security like some sort of savings account. It's welfare for the elderly (and a few other groups)

It’s not welfare, just frigging stop it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideas they are considering are linked in this article (there's a PDF list): https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/01/20/house-budget-committee-circulates-new-detailed-list-of-budget-reconciliation-options-including-draconian-medicaid-cuts-within-house-republican-caucus/

There needs to be Social Security reform of some kind and the potential changes get more and more painful the longer you wait. That's not a Trump-specific issue at all. The money is not being stolen. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/

Raise the cap and that will make it solvent. Stop forcing people in demanding manual labor jobs to work longer and longer, if they are able to manage to find a job at their age.

I don't think that alone will make it solvent. If they stop paying a couple 1.5 times the amount on a claim in which only 1 time was paid into the system, in addition to raising the cap, you might make it solvent. There is no reason a spouse who did not pay into the fund should receive half the spouse's social security while the spouse is also receiving their full social security pay out.

So basically women, as they are the majority here, should receive no compensation for their decades of uncompensated later in this country. And folks wonder why the birth rate is on the decline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The plans discussed are to stop reimbursing Medicaid expenses for states, so there will still be Medicaid but it will look different. Each state may do it differently to stay within budget. Work requirements, other hoops to jump through. They claim they don’t touch Medicare or SS. I suspect they will try to clean up SSD, kicking people more off as they started to in the past few years.

This is not an option being discussed. The options on the table are (1) restrict eligibility (or push states to do so through less generous reimbursement for certain groups), (2) cap the amount of federal $ provided to each state for Medicaid (aka block grants), and/or (3) add hoops that make it harder for people to enroll, like work requirements

Block grants will effectively kill Medicaid LTC for the elderly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a millennial I'd like to make ss optional so I can stop paying and cash out

"cash out"? It's a pay as you go system-- the most you can do is destroy the social safety net for seniors by ending social security but you are never getting your contributions back.

Don't be a tool and let the right wing propaganda tell you the money isn't there for social security-- it's only not there if they steal it for other things, like tax cuts for the wealthy.

but the money isn't actually anywhere. It's an IOU from the feds. Your payments into the system are spent by Congress immediately. Your payments aren't sitting anywhere compounding or earning interest.

All the money the government collects is then redistributed by the government. That's how taxation works.

People need to stop thinking about Social Security like some sort of savings account. It's welfare for the elderly (and a few other groups)

It’s not welfare, just frigging stop it.

Your desire to continue to look down on welfare recipients (but not yourself or your elderly relatives) is keeping you from understanding a very basic aspect of how Social Security works.

[Anonymous]

They will threaten to stop Medicare, Medicaid and SS payments if Congress doesn't raise the debt ceiling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideas they are considering are linked in this article (there's a PDF list): https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/01/20/house-budget-committee-circulates-new-detailed-list-of-budget-reconciliation-options-including-draconian-medicaid-cuts-within-house-republican-caucus/

There needs to be Social Security reform of some kind and the potential changes get more and more painful the longer you wait. That's not a Trump-specific issue at all. The money is not being stolen. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/

Raise the cap and that will make it solvent. Stop forcing people in demanding manual labor jobs to work longer and longer, if they are able to manage to find a job at their age.

I don't think that alone will make it solvent. If they stop paying a couple 1.5 times the amount on a claim in which only 1 time was paid into the system, in addition to raising the cap, you might make it solvent. There is no reason a spouse who did not pay into the fund should receive half the spouse's social security while the spouse is also receiving their full social security pay out.

So basically women, as they are the majority here, should receive no compensation for their decades of uncompensated later in this country. And folks wonder why the birth rate is on the decline.

They won't do this to their Christian conservative base that wants women to stay home and have a lot of babies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ideas they are considering are linked in this article (there's a PDF list): https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2025/01/20/house-budget-committee-circulates-new-detailed-list-of-budget-reconciliation-options-including-draconian-medicaid-cuts-within-house-republican-caucus/

There needs to be Social Security reform of some kind and the potential changes get more and more painful the longer you wait. That's not a Trump-specific issue at all. The money is not being stolen. https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/solvency/

Raise the cap and that will make it solvent. Stop forcing people in demanding manual labor jobs to work longer and longer, if they are able to manage to find a job at their age.

I don't think that alone will make it solvent. If they stop paying a couple 1.5 times the amount on a claim in which only 1 time was paid into the system, in addition to raising the cap, you might make it solvent. There is no reason a spouse who did not pay into the fund should receive half the spouse's social security while the spouse is also receiving their full social security pay out.

So basically women, as they are the majority here, should receive no compensation for their decades of uncompensated later in this country. And folks wonder why the birth rate is on the decline.

They won't do this to their Christian conservative base that wants women to stay home and have a lot of babies.

??