Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”

Why can't they just abolish the social security cap? I make more than the current cap. I'm happy to pay more. It doesn't hurt one bit. That's an easy change that could help shore up social security.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”

Why can't they just abolish the social security cap? I make more than the current cap. I'm happy to pay more. It doesn't hurt one bit. That's an easy change that could help shore up social security.

Social Security is not supposed to be a welfare program, but a pension program.

because they are stupid and when they add 2+2, they get 0

Anonymous wrote:Would Democrats agree to raise the age for Social Security eligibility from 62 to 63 and 70 to 72? That would shore it up as well.

How about testing it by the GOP offering is via legislation rather than Trump and Musk trashing it and everything else by fiat?

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”

They are trying to trash the economy to help Putin and install crypto as the international currency.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”

Why can't they just abolish the social security cap? I make more than the current cap. I'm happy to pay more. It doesn't hurt one bit. That's an easy change that could help shore up social security.

Because that would slightly convenience rich people.

Would Democrats agree to raise the age for Social Security eligibility from 62 to 63 and 70 to 72? That would shore it up as well.

They are planning to cut all social spending and entitlements.

Anonymous wrote:They want people to believe that we can’t afford a social safety net. Of course, they could raise revenue, like forgo the tax cut extension, help the IRS collect the $500-$700 billion/year that goes uncollected from the wealthy and remove the wage cap on payroll taxes. But, libertarians - and that’s who is pulling the chains here - hate government, taxes, and especially a social safety net. They think that everyone should be on their own and the market itself will sort everything out. Apparently, after there’s no safety net, old people will respond to incentives to work again and former taxpayers will inundate charities with money for the poor. 🙄

There was a great program on Bloomberg this weekend, with the author of Burning Down the House: How the Libertarian Philosophy was Corrupted by Delusion and Greed. https://www.amazon.com/Burning-Down-House-Libertarian-Philosophy/dp/1250280133

I've only know the self-centered, greedy side of Libertarianism and had never heard of its true roots. That while too much governmental regulation impedes liberty, people can't lose sight of the fact there's no liberty without personal responsibility. And that responsibility isn't just to us or our families. But also to the systems we create to support ourselves. The author's example was the covid shot. Today's libertarians rage against a state-imposed health mandate, not realizing that none of us are self-sufficient and truly independent. We depend on huge and small social systems alike to gain anything. So when a global health catastrophe arises, a governmental public health mandate makes sense. He argues for less regulation, but also that people should understand purposeful, beneficial regulation is a necessity. He had less-than-kind words to say about Rand Paul, for example. Who can't see that Obamacare would help maintain a healthier workforce from which more entrepreneurs will rise, and from which more workers will support those businesses. And we all thrive. Rand Paul doesn't have to see the human side. That we want to be healthy for ourselves and our loved ones, and we want them healthy too. But he should be able to see the business side of it.

Anonymous wrote:https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”

Why can't they just abolish the social security cap? I make more than the current cap. I'm happy to pay more. It doesn't hurt one bit. That's an easy change that could help shore up social security.

They believe that we will just grow our way out of it, and eventually Trump will take control of the Fed, and set interest rates at ZERO.

They want people to believe that we can’t afford a social safety net. Of course, they could raise revenue, like forgo the tax cut extension, help the IRS collect the $500-$700 billion/year that goes uncollected from the wealthy and remove the wage cap on payroll taxes. But, libertarians - and that’s who is pulling the chains here - hate government, taxes, and especially a social safety net. They think that everyone should be on their own and the market itself will sort everything out. Apparently, after there’s no safety net, old people will respond to incentives to work again and former taxpayers will inundate charities with money for the poor. 🙄

How else will billionaires get tax cuts?

OP here, that should say “cuts” not “cure”

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61255

It doesn’t seem like their intended cure to SS, Medicare and Medicaid are enough to put a dent in this projection:

“CBO estimates that if provisions of the 2017 tax act were extended and there were no other changes to fiscal policy, debt held by the public would reach 214 percent of GDP in 2054, 47 percentage points higher than in the long-term baseline projections. If interest rates also increased each year until they were higher by 1 percentage point (before accounting for macroeconomic effects), debt held by the public would grow even larger, exceeding 250 percent of GDP in 2054.”