Debate: Read what Hillary said about Social Security v e r y carefully.

[antigop]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-first-democratic-debate-full-rush-transcript/

CLINTON: I want to enhance the benefits for the poorest recipients of Social Security. We have a lot of women on Social Security, particularly widowed and single women who didn't make a lot of money during their careers, and they are impoverished, and they need more help from the Social Security system.

And I will focus -- I will focus on helping those people who need it the most. And of course I'm going to defend Social Security. I'm going to look for ways to try to make sure it's solvent into the future.

[JRLeft]

1. Bernie's approach is more sensible and simple.

[kelliekat44]

56. And that would be....? nt

[JRLeft]

58. Eliminate the cap.

[Todays_Illusion]

66. Bernie didn't call to eliminate the cap he called to raise it. nt

[JRLeft]

69. He's mentioned it plenty of times on the Thom Hartmann show.

[Todays_Illusion]

77. Now you are moving the topic and provide no support, like a direct quote. You claimed it was

a statement he made in the debate.

[Vinca]

81. The bill he introduced starts with raising it and suggests eliminating it in the future.

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-calls-on-congress-to-strengthen-and-expand-social-security

[portlander23]

2. Some of Hillary Clinton's statements on Social Security.

Some of Hillary Clinton's statements on Social Security.

On increasing the payroll taxes (Social Security taxes) on people over $102,000 and under $250,000?

"CLINTON: I don’t want to raise taxes on anybody. I’m certainly against one of Senator Obama’s ideas, which is to lift the cap on the payroll tax, because that would impose additional taxes on people who are educators, police officers, firefighters and the like."
http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Hillary_Clinton_Social_Security.htm

The article points out that Factcheck has shown that very few teachers, etc. earned over $102,000 per year in 2008.

CLINTON: I am totally committed to making sure Social Security is solvent. You’ve got to begin to reign in the budget, pay as you go, to try to replenish our Social Security Trust Fund. And with all due respect, the last time we had a crisis in Social Security wa 1983. Pres. Reagan and Speaker Tip O’Neill came up with a commission. That was the best and smartest way, because you’ve got to get Republicans and Democrats together. That’s what I will do. And I will say, #1, don’t cut benefits on current beneficiaries they’re already having a hard enough time. And #2, do not impose additional tax burdens on middle-class families.

http://www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Hillary_Clinton_Social_Security.htm

Catfood Commission anyone? That was bipartisan. That was Hillary's response in 2008. It did not work.

[antigop]

3. " I'm going to look for ways to try to make sure it's solvent into the future." nt

[99th_Monkey]

95. Like nobody knows yet, how to keep SS "solvent into the future"

Hillary either supports "lifting or eliminating the cap" or she doesn't; but we're left
in the dark, just based on these quotes.

[antigop]

96. that's why these questions need to be asked at the debates. We need a strong debate on

Social Security and Medicare.

[99th_Monkey]

97. Yep. I'm with you on that. -nt-

[truedelphi]

101. Totally agreeing with you and 99th Monkey. n/t

[global1]

11. Aren't Educators, Police Officers & Firefighters And The Like.....

all in on the payroll tax now? Their payroll taxes won't go up - only those that are making the bucks beyond the current cap would be tapped. I don't know of many educators, police officers & firefighters and the like that are making such big bucks that would be touched by lifting the cap.

Again her answers sound good -and they play well with people that don't understand what lifting the cap means - but it doesn't make sense.

[JDPriestly]

27. I believe that in California, if you are expected to be eligible for a teacher's pension,

you won't receive Social Security based on your teacher's income. I'm not absolutely sure, but I think that is the case.

The cap is at $113,000 or thereabouts.

I don't think teachers make that much in general. Some college administrators and top professors do, but not ordinary teachers in K-12. Some administrators K-12 might make that much.

[Fawke Em]

39. Just for clarity:

The cap is $118,500.

If not lifted, entirely, I think it should be raised to at least $1 million.

[tk2kewl]

55. public school teachers in wealthy suburbs definitely make six figures

but that's a crappy reason for not lifting the cap

[YvonneCa]

60. California teachers used to qualify for both...

...Social Security and State Teachers Retirement/ CalSTRS).In the mid 80s that was changed by Reagan. Now California teachers have a greatly reduced SS benefit (by about 60%).

[Recursion]

85. Plenty of cops, firefighters, and teachers make more than $117K

You'd have to be fairly senior and in a large city, but $150K isn't at all unreasonable for any of those jobs.

[whathehell]

31. "I don't want to raise taxes on anyone"... Riiiight

Sounds like she is happy to allow the billionaires to keep underpaying their taxes.
Bernie wants to raise their taxes so they pay their fair share

[liberal_at_heart]

59. They know they can't cut current Boomers benefits because Boomers have the voting

numbers to kick them out of office. No, Democrats will bide their time and cooperate with the Republicans and help SS die a death by a thousand cuts, freezing cost of living increases, and eventually cuts to future generations. They will do to SS what corporations have done to pensions. It will slowly die and fade away and Democrats will have helped Republicans do it.

[global1]

89. You Mean A Certain Female Democrat That Wants To Be President Will Let SS Die A Death By....

a thousand cuts. This is why I support Bernie and this is why Millennials support Bernie. Bernie won't let this important
program die. He wants to make it better and the way to do that is by raising the cap. It won't mean taxing educators, firefighters and the like as they are all paying because their incomes don't exceed the current cap. It is only going to effect those whose
incomes are such that exceed the current cap and they can afford it. Because she is courting those voters to help her get elected - she is giving them a pass.

[Autumn]

4. Looking for what is staring one right in the face is ridiculous.

[trumad]

5. Sounds good to me...

Of course Bernie supporters will twist it to sound like she's taking it away.

[jeff47]

33. Means testing is step #1 in destroying any spending program.

And she's proposing means testing.

[Fawke Em]

42. Means testing is the first step to taking it away.

1. Means Testing gets,
2. People over the maximum wage rate angry, which
3. Makes them not want to pay into the program, so that they,
4. Lobby (bribe) politicians to question why those people even have to pay into the program, which
5. Causes them to introduce and pass a bill to limit who pays into Social Security, so that
6. Social Security becomes insolvent since only poorer people are paying into it, which, finally,
7. Leads to its privatization using the myth that private companies better manage public funds.

We're not twisting it.

My first thought was "means testing" when she said that last night, too, and I wasn't getting talking points from anyone. Only my dogs were watching the debate with me and they didn't have an opinion.

[antigop]

48. "We're not twisting it." No, we are not. nt

[Fawke Em]

50. That so many people here heard "means testing" proves we're not.

I don't know how anyone heard anything else, to be honest.

[DhhD]

82. Who else but Wall Street would be administering the means test. Private testing costs money.

She needs to be very specific about all of these Plans that she talked about at the debate.

[antigop]

6. she wants to introduce "means testing". nt

[haikugal]

8. That's what I heard..means testing. nt

[lostnfound]

32. Which will screw the middle class again

And eventually destroy Social Security when it becomes viewed as an unfair hand out system

[antigop]

38. Yep. nt

[madfloridian]

65. Yes! Trying to make Soc Sec and Medicare look like hand-out systems. Free giveaways.

That's exactly what this is about.

[senz]

68. Exactly. Means testing makes it a welfare program.

Republicans and DINOS hate these "socialist" programs and will do whatever it takes to get rid of them. We will have to defend them forever. It will be worth it to do so.

[daredtowork]

80. Means-testing involves delays that can take years.

Look at the VA if not SSI. There will be bureaucratic backlogs as the depts that do the testing are cut or stall things to negotiate for theor own raises. People who can't afford a lawyer will fall through the cracks in droves. It will get to the point where legal representation is the only way to get it, and there is no safety net for the waiting or the denied. All the testers will be incentivized to deny people: to save taxpayer money and to clear their backlog. Eligibility specialists will be rated on cases closed.

Republicans and Libertarians will be constantly throwing wrenches in the program to "prove" it doesn't work.

Grandstanding politicians of all stripes will associate the "handout" with black people to turn white prejudiced white people against the "wasteful" program.

Tens of millions of dollars will be wasted on fraud mitigation because its more important to catch a handful of bad actors than allow desperate people subsistence.

Socialism - as in a mincome - would be cheaper to administer and protect the people who need the money most from being excludef. Recover any excess payments through taxes.

[rurallib]

9. that would be how I read it

and then you can set one SS recipient against another and let them tear each other apart as the teabaggers cut benefits down to nothing.

[antigop]

12. "you can set one SS recipient against another" +1000 nt

[KoKo]

34. Yes...that's how I read it, also. n/t

[antigop]

7. " I will focus on helping those people who need it the most."

those people who need it the most

[TM99]

14. Yup, that would be means testing.

I am so sick of the death of a thousand paper cuts that is neoliberalism.

[antigop]

16. and people will vote against their own interest. nt

[TM99]

43. Most Americans, no matter their race

or gender, are horribly ignorant and willful in voting against their own best self-interests.

[antigop]

46. well, it's not like the corporate media actually reports on the issues.

I'm not letting people who remain ignorant off the hook, but I think the corporate media is part of the problem.

[TM99]

53. Yes and yes

to both.

Ignorance reinforced by corporate media with their manufactured consent.

[Recursion]

86. Which we've done for 30 years by taxing benefits that take total income over $32K

I mean, there's the fig leaf that the recipient "gets" the benefit and then has it "withheld", but it's plain old means testing. (And it really hits married couples who file separately because the cutoff for them is $0, not $32K.)

[Ed Suspicious]

17. Yup. Positioned very well to start filleting away those who don't need it so much. Dissecting will

begin in earnest under a Hillary administration. It will be a major bone to throw to republicans in a negotiation.

[antigop]

19. yep, it's right there. nt

[jwirr]

28. That is means testing. We already have a program called

SSI (not SSDI) that adds a supplement for those who are still under the poverty line even on Social Security.

I get SSI because my SSA check is only $278 a month. SSI supplements that to bring it up to $753 a month. SSI is a not from the SSA funds but is a tax supported addition.

If I am not mistaken the $753 is determined from the cost of living in ones area. This could be fixed by raising the monthly allowance for SSI (SSA + $$$=$1000 a month) and it would help those elderly and disabled persons who are under the poverty line.

I get so little because of some of the rules that applied to SSA such as not being eligible for a ex-husbands coverage if you had not been married at least 10 years. I think that law has been changed now but when I got my divorce it still applied. I was 3 months short of the 10 years.

And what I did (take care of a severely disabled daughter for 45 years) was never considered work under SSA rules.

[exboyfil]

37. The SSI floor is too low in my opinion

and should be raised at least to $15K/yr.

[jwirr]

45. Yes, it has never been adjusted since it became a law. So

the whole idea that she is going to help the poor on SSA is a very misleading idea. They have already been helped but the program needs to be adjusted to fit today's needs.

No one needs to touch the SSA program to fix this problem.

[Recursion]

87. To me SSI demonstrates the danger of spending without a dedicated revenue stream

Any attempt to increase it has to be wrangled from the general fund, with the predictable result that it's never increased.

[jwirr]

91. Yes, but it covers a huge group of people not just the elderly.

It also covers disabled children under 18 or who do not yet have a parent who is drawing SSA. And many elderly who are drawing minimum SSA and are still poor.

If it this problem is just shoved into SSA or SSDI it will break the bank. The fact that the floor for SSI has never been raised since it was created is the best proof we have that this country just plain does not care about anyone.

If we solve this problem by rolling it into SSA we are just transferring the problem into another program because many of these people are not paying into SSA in the first place. As an example my disabled daughter was on SSI from the beginning of her life and was only transferred into SSA when her father started collectins SSA.

One thing about SSI is that these poor have always been in the state programs for the poor - the SSI was a federal program to help the states deal with the cost. It has always been in the general fund and means tested.

I do not think that this can be fixed by putting these people in SSA because many of them are already in SSA and are still poor. And children like my daughter are slated to enter SSA when they are eligible.

How do you think it can be fixed without an increase in SSI payments?

[Historic NY]

10. I had an aunt who raised 3 children and was out of the main stream work force

for years, working some part time jobs a few hours a day when the kids were in school. Well after 25 + years was divorced and then the reality of having to play catchup with SS sent in. She worked 19 yrs for the school district until she suffer a catastrophic illness, not enough for the full pension. Thankfully they kept her on the payroll unsing a combination of accumulated time, etc until she reached her anniversary date. She lost her house because it was too expensive to keep up and pay medical too....in the end she needed around the clock care and moved in with children. W/o the illness she had planned to work until 70. I see quite a few older women working longer to have the extra dollars to pay the tax bills.

[Human101948]

13. The big problem was the medical bills, wasn't it?

National health care is the answer. While we are not Denmark or Sweden or Germany, we sure could learn a lot from them. Like how to cover everyone, have better outcomes and reduce the cost of medicine overall.

But, as Hillary said last night, rah rah 'Murica, we're number one and we can't learn anything from anybody 'cause we're number one!

[jeff47]

35. She might have been able to apply under her husband's contribution

There are mechanisms where someone can claim under their spouse's contribution.

But I know very little about it other than my mother-in-law was in a similar situation - got paid almost nothing while putting husband through school, then got paid nothing. She collects based on her now-ex husband's SS contributions.

[Historic NY]

52. He was self-employed but wasn't good with finances...

I think he got around $800 a month. Both are gone now he died last Nov.

[Recursion]

88. O'Malley has a plan that begins to address that, incidentally

It considers up to five years (hopefully this would be increased) of child or elder care as time spent working for purposes of calculating SS and Medicare benefits. That unfortunately probably wouldn't have been enough for your aunt's situation (and I think you have to work at least some before you take it), but it at least starts to address the financial penalty caretakers are hit with.

[Broward]

15. She's still talking in Third Way tongue.

[Enthusiast]

72. Imagine that.

[moobu2]

18. Sometimes you can read thing a little too carefully

and actually read something into it that just isn't there.

[antigop]

21. and...thanks for the kick so more people can actually read what she said. nt

[EndElectoral]

23. That's why a follow up question for specifics is warranted.

[Fumesucker]

67. Not when it's a lawyer or politician making the statement

And Hillary is both.

[one_voice]

20. My parents are both on Social Security...

retired---what they get together is below poverty. They'd make out better--as far as getting additional help--if they got a divorce. My dad gets a very tiny pension, my mom took a giant hit in '08. Both my parents have worked since they were teenagers, so they could live below the poverty level when they retired. Ain't life grand.

For those who want to preach about saving money---they had 6 six (blended family) and a lot of very poor relatives they depended on them, it just wanted possible.

Thankfully they have children that help them, but there are far too many seniors that don't. It's a fucking joke. Work your whole life to live in poverty.


eta: this wasn't against Hillary...it's to make a point the whole system sucks ass.

[EndElectoral]

24. Read up on senior's situations before Social Security

[jwirr]

29. Yes, they were much worse off than we are even when we

are under the poverty line. Thanks to FDR.

[Fawke Em]

51. You don't have to have a lot of children and poor relative to find it difficult to save.

My husband and I make a decent living, but everything we earn goes to pay bills.

I was a single Mom for many years and had to use credit to make ends meet when expensive home or car repairs happened. Still haven't been able to get out from under those debts completely. I'm trying, but it comes to a halt when another expensive car or home repair is needed.

Can't win for losing.

[Babel_17]

22. It's just a short snip

It's just a short snip, but you could lay it on top of the trial balloons the Obama administration floated and not obscure anything. Many of us here voiced our opposition to those trial balloons.

[JDPriestly]

25. Yet another reason I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.

The cap has to be raised. It is only fair.

The people who earn over $113,000, virtually all of them, earn that money thanks in part to the work of other people.

There is nothing wrong with earning a good salary thanks in part to the work of other people.

But, if you are earning good money, more than is absolutely necessary to survive, then you should pay into Social Security which helps a lot of people who cannot work and who are not receiving enough in benefits to live a decent life.

Elderly people, disabled including mentally disabled people, and children who have lost a parent in certain cases, rely on Social Security to survive.

We should raise the cap. Hillary is very weak on Social Security. I do not trust her on that issue. She is a Republican on that issue.

Hillary has the mindset of a wealthy person.

She wants to "help" the poor, but does not want social programs that are not means-tested.

Bernie seems to want to do away with a lot of the means-testing and replace it with higher taxes for the rich but then giving rich the same benefits that Hillary would give only to the poor.

I'm with Bernie on this. Let's do away with the bureaucracies that collect all that information about whether people qualify for Medicaid, qualify for college tuition assistance, etc. and spend the money we save on the services that can be provided.

Social Security is utterly necessary for older people. There are not enough jobs for people to continue to work into their late 1960s. We have so many young people out of work.

We need to raise the cap on wages to insure that Social Security is there for all of us and for future generations.

[lostnfound]

36. Instead of raising the, which gets raised every year anyway, how about paying back

Instead of raising the cap, which gets raised every year anyway, how about paying backThe Social Security trust fund using actual top-tier income tax rates ? Hasn't the trust fund been robbed to pay for military expenditures and other Wall Street welfare projects?

[jwirr]

98. I think you are confusing the COLA with the cap. The COLA

gets raised according to the inflation rate in the year. The CAP is a number that refers to the amount of money a person makes and pays on into SSA. So a rich person only pays on a portion of his/her income.

[lostnfound]

99. Not confused.. The cap has risen in most years, as follow:

2000 76,200
2001 80,400
2002 84,900
2003 87,000
2004 87,900
2005 90,000
2006 94,200
2007 97,500
2008 102,000
2009 106,800
2010 106,800
2011 106,800
2012 110,100
2013 113,700
2014 117,000
2015 118,500

[jwirr]

100. Thank you. I did not know that.

[lostnfound]

102. I still agree with the idea that we need a more progressive tax rate in general but..

I think it should target the really high end more than the high wage earners. People raising families, earning $200,000 a year and living in an expensive city in a nice neighborhood for the sake of the kids may be paying $120,000 in taxes between income tax, state tax, social security, Medicare and property tax; while others making $200,000 a year in the stock market Maynard tax bills that are only half as much.

Recognizing that this math still leaves $80,000, which is far better off than the majority, there's a social dimension to be considered too. When only one out of ten family members make it into that level, but the other nine are struggling along on sub-tier wages because middle-class wages have become so compressed, who do the other nine turn to for help?

The Reagan-era tax cuts are the root of many evils.

Bernie suggested taxing all income over $250,000 withe the payroll / social security tax. I think that would provide more benefit to the Main Street economy.

[jwirr]

103. I agree. And I think Bernie might be the only candidate

running that people would trust to work on our tax system.

[Blus4u]

40. The cap on SS wages needs to be raised or done away with.

If nothing more than to assist with coverage of the multitude of minimum wage (and low wage) earners in the workforce now. They aren't all high schoolers living with mom & dad.

Peace

[antigop]

44. JD, the wealthy benefit from the whole arrangement

There have not been enough tax revenues raised, so the government has had to borrow from the SS trust fund.

Tax revenues haven't been high enough because of the tax cuts that have benefited the wealthy and because of corporate welfare.

Now to pay the money back to the trust fund, the wealthy won't pay. She is looking for somewhere else to get the money.

[Eric J in MN]

26. Sounds like Obama's Chained CPI proposal.

I wish they'd asked her directly about Chained CPI.

[Cheese Sandwich]

30. Sounds like she wants to move Social Security toward a "need-based" welfare program

Bernie would rather expand it into a bigger retirement program.

[antigop]

47. and I hope people understand the difference. nt

[exboyfil]

54. In part it already is

*Taxing benefits over a certain income level.
*Graduated benefits based on lifetime earnings (the three levels - 90%, 32%, 15%)

The graduated approach is why I think removing the cap is a logical extension of the program. It is just a fourth level 0%. Income over the current cap is just not included in the S.S. calculations.

Right now if you include the HSA exemption on income, only those individuals (not families) making $122K are impacted by the removal of the cap. A two income family right now making up to $234K is still paying their full income towards social security (assuming both are earning the max $117K).

So few families are impacted by removing the cap.

I actually would like to see the removal of the cap go towards ensuring at least currently defined benefits and a pay as you go system going forward. The withholding rate should be adjusted downward until it is required for future benefits. Another thing is the that the Treasury must make good on the money that the Social Security recipients loaned to it.

Another consideration is the inclusion of investment income into Social Security.

[highprincipleswork]

41. Wow, you can say that again.

Looks like the Middle Class may have to do without or with less under these plans.

That's how it sounds to me.

[zappaman]

49. She wants to do away with social security just like Obama!!!

And did you hear her say "if elected, I will send troops to Syria"?

[Samantha]

57. That is similar to what people said in 1983 when the system was reformed

They had to save it from failing when the slate of Babyboomer retirements kicked in. Ultimately, they raised the fica tax (I believe it was doubled) and raised the retirement age. The excess funds were of course put into the Social Security Trust Fund, as well as the Medicare Trust Fund. And then Uncle Same promptly raided it.

Sam

[antigop]

61. kick nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. "Needs based" = welfare.

Social Security is popular because it is not welfare.

[Armstead]

63. Gee if she hadn't supported Welfare Deform.....

Maybe those people would already have a source of help and support

[hay rick]

64. "I'm going to look for ways to try to make sure it's solvent into the future."

Ways to make it solvent could be means-testing, chained CPI. raising the full benefit age...or raising the cap. Until Hillary explicitly says she is in favor of raising the cap and against the regressive "savings" alternatives I won't trust her on the issue. Her language in the debate leaves a lot of bad alternatives to raising the cap still on the table.

[Oilwellian]

78. My first thought was...that's Chained CPI lingo

We heard the same thing from Obama, including "the poor seniors will be exempt from the cuts in SS." Hillary just added a twist by singling out poor women on SS.

She played the sexist card throughout that debate.

[hay rick]

83. Raises this question in my mind:

What programs or principles are worth sacrificing to demonstrate that we do not discriminate against women when we select the leader of our country? True equal opportunity should also mean equal responsibility.

[senz]

70. Apparently an unimportant issue to the pundits who raved about her "performance."

I loved it when Bernie said, without hesitation, "Raise the cap."

We need a president for the people.

[RiverLover]

75. Who cares -what- she said. She was just so poised & looked so presidential.

Where are your priorities, senz???

[CharlotteVale]

71. I do not trust any politician who talks like that. I am

a woman and I trust Bernie on SS. Hillary will do whatever her banker buddies want her to do.

[Enthusiast]

73. Means testing will make social security into welfare. We all know how that worked out in the past.

And there is this:

[mmonk]

74. One of two very serious issues I have with her and the Democratic Party's

neoliberal infrastructure now. I can't keep voting to f*ck myself and my family because the two parties continue to represent corporate America.

[azmom]

76. I won't be voting for that.

[senz]

79. Kicking because this issue is very important to the majority of Americans.

[DemReadingDU]

84. ditto

[global1]

90. This Is A Very Important Difference Between Bernie & Hillary And At The Next Debate....

Bernie needs to point that out. With him SS will continue on. With Hillary it is doomed. This is another reason that she has been named the 'presumptive nominee' by the powers that be (tptb). They can live with her as President - because she will fall in line with what they are wanting and that is for SS to fade away. This is why they have blacked out coverage of Bernie - because he is a threat to tptb's plans.

[sabrina 1]

92. BS response. Sanders raised the question of where she stands on the Chained CPI and

it was not answered. Cooper cut it off and went to the next question

But she NEEDS to be asked that question.

Or will she 'move to the Left' again before the next Debate?

[mmonk]

93. Does this mean my disabled children have to reach a certain level

of poverty before they can receive SSDI?

[antigop]

94. mmonk, very good question. I really wish Social Security would be brought up at the debates.

Questions need to be asked:

1) Will you support cuts to Social Security (and Medicare) for ANYONE? (including SSDI)

2) Do you support raising the Social Security cap? If not, why not?

3) Define "vulnerable".

I really wish those questions would be asked at the debates.