RINO Rebellion

[Seahawks08]

The current caretakers seem to think that Social Security will somehow be fine on its own. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

I'm more inclined to believe that most policymakers understand that SS needs to be reformed, but see it has a major partisan issue that could make them lose their jobs. As the time nears when SS runs out, there will be more activity.

[BDKJMU]

The current caretakers seem to think that Social Security will somehow be fine on its own. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

I'm more inclined to believe that most policymakers understand that SS needs to be reformed, but see it has a major partisan issue that could make them lose their jobs. As the time nears when SS runs out, there will be more activity.

Which will be too late.

[Seahawks08]

Which will be too late.

Maybe. But SS isn't going to run out until around 2030, so reforming it today would be great, but we have some time. I suspect the issue to start gaining steam in the 2016 election, but even then it may be too early for anyone willing to take action.

[houndawg]

Partial credit. It is technically correct to say that he did try to "address" the issue but it had nothing to do with fixing anything and everything to do with siphoning off massive fees for doing nothing and making sure the correct snouts got into the trough.

Even bringing the subject up (as superficial as that may be) is more than we have seen since Bush left office. The current caretakers seem to think that Social Security will somehow be fine on its own. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

This is true, but personally I would rather have them not thinking about it at all (Obama), rather than thinking about how to steal it (Bush).

[BDKJMU]

Which will be too late.

Maybe. But SS isn't going to run out until around 2030, so reforming it today would be great, but we have some time. I suspect the issue to start gaining steam in the 2016 election, but even then it may be too early for anyone willing to take action.

Well, there isn't time to sit around for years to take action if you don't want benefit cuts, because any reforms that take effect won't be allowed to negatively effect anyone in their 60s, 50s, and if raising the retirment age like the 1983 reforms, anyone over the age of 45. Any reforms that take place from raising the retirement age, if like the 1983 reform, will likely take 4+ decades to fully implement, and the savings from beginning to raise the full retirement age won't even begun to be realized for over 2 decades.

The 1983 Social Security Reform Act didn't effect anyone over the age of 45 born prior to 1938.
Anyone born prior to 1938 full retirement age was 65.
It began to phase the fully retirement age from 65 to 67 beginning in 2000.
Those born in 1938-1959 full retirement age ranged from 65, 2 month to 66, 10 months. The 1st of these folks reached their full retirement age in 2005, and the last of them will hit full retirement age by 2026.
Anyone born 1960 or later the full retirement age is 67. Those born in 1960 will be 67 in 2027.

2027 is a full 44 yrs after the 1983 Social Security reforms.
http://www.ssa.gov/pubs/ageincrease.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BDKJMU]

But you're right in that reforms will kept being put off. That means there will be benefit cuts.

Back when it was stated the avg life expectancy was something like 63. Had around 15 workers per retiree. 2% payroll taxes (1% employer and 1% employee).

Life expectancy has gone up about 15 years from 63 to 78, but the full retirement age has only been increased by 2 years. Now down to around 3 workers per retiree, headed towards 2. Taxes have been raised 15 times from 2% to 12.4% (6.2% employer, 6.2% employee, 12.4% self employed).

For most years the trust fund took in more than it paid out, building up a huge surplus. But the last 3 years the trust fund has paid out out more than it takes in, and that will continue in ever increasing amounts. As soon as that trust fund hits zero, it's not allowed to run a defict. By law, benefits automatically face a big cut.

Anyone in their 20s, 30s, even 40s who his relying on it to be a major source of retirement income is an idiot. Personally, I don't care if the pols keep punting on it. I hope it fully collapses. Its nothing more than a giant ponzi scheme.

[BDKJMU]

5.4 Million Join Disability Rolls Under Obama"
http://news.investors.com/business/0420 ... htm?p=full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Social Security's disability trust fund could fail to cover all benefits early as 2016
.........In his first term, Obama took steps to make it easier for people to apply for disability payments, but nothing was changed to help the program pay even bigger bills as it accommodated more beneficiaries......."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01 ... -early-as/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course the Social Security Disability rolls will continue to skyrocket, the disability fund will go broke, and the short fall will be covered by the retirement fund, making that go broke even earlier than 2034.

Maybe in addition to Obama being the food stamp president with the record # of people on food stamps under his watch, he can also be called the disability president with the record # and skyrocketing # of those on social security disability under his watch.

[houndawg]

5.4 Million Join Disability Rolls Under Obama"
http://news.investors.com/business/0420 ... htm?p=full" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"Social Security's disability trust fund could fail to cover all benefits early as 2016
.........In his first term, Obama took steps to make it easier for people to apply for disability payments, but nothing was changed to help the program pay even bigger bills as it accommodated more beneficiaries......."
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01 ... -early-as/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Of course the Social Security Disability rolls will continue to skyrocket, the disability fund will go broke, and the short fall will be covered by the retirement fund, making that go broke even earlier than 2034.

Maybe in addition to Obama being the food stamp president with the record # of people on food stamps under his watch, he can also be called the disability president with the record # and skyrocketing # of those on social security disability under his watch.

They say it helps if you cry.

[UNI88]

Partial credit. It is technically correct to say that he did try to "address" the issue but it had nothing to do with fixing anything and everything to do with siphoning off massive fees for doing nothing and making sure the correct snouts got into the trough.

Even bringing the subject up (as superficial as that may be) is more than we have seen since Bush left office. The current caretakers seem to think that Social Security will somehow be fine on its own. That's the only explanation I can come up with.

And hard core Conks like to say the Donks don't have faith. They might not believe in God but they have to believe in some higher power if they think there will be some magical fix for SS.

[Ibanez]

People, GWB was NOT a conservative.

He was a Republican that cut taxes, blew a surplus, engaged us in two wars (which were to be paid with oil money), etc....

[UNI88]

People, GWB was NOT a conservative.

He was a Republican that cut taxes, blew a surplus, engaged us in two wars (which were to be paid with oil money), etc....

Dubya was very clear that he was a "compassionate conservative." In reality there is no one type of conservative and Dubya was a neo-conservative.