General Discussion

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)

5. You apparently dont understand Social Security. It doesnt need a trust fund.

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 02:07 AM

Dec 2012

The trust fund was to cover the baby boomers and when they are gone, it goes back to pay as you go like it was before.

Besides how much sense does it make to cut benefits so the benefits will last longer? What do you tell the seniors now that are hungry. It has to be the most stupid argument I have ever heard. Grandma, sorry you have to eat cat food, but look on the bright side. The fucking trust fund will last longer.

Raise the cap. It's that simple. What do you have against raising the cap?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

79 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

It's Official: A Democratic President Offered to Cut Social Security [View all] leftstreet Dec 2012 OP

Abusive? Seriously? dkf Dec 2012 #1

SS has nothing to do with the deficit leftstreet Dec 2012 #3

He has no clue about how SS works. He is ok if seniors go hungry today so he can have something rhett o rick Dec 2012 #6

So when do you address the solvency of social security? dkf Dec 2012 #7

Thank you for agreeing SS has nothing to do with the deficit leftstreet Dec 2012 #9

Well it does now since its being partially funded by the general fund. dkf Dec 2012 #12

IIRC, the general fund is repaying a loan it took from SS fund, not quite as you present it.. Lionessa Dec 2012 #13

Social Security is NOT being " partially funded by the general fund" Matariki Dec 2012 #16

It's one of their talking points leftstreet Dec 2012 #18

Let's call it for what it is...a "lying point." KansDem Dec 2012 #76

Exactly - and that is the only reason there is a possibility of a shortfall for Social Security liberal N proud Dec 2012 #52

SS trust has had over $2.7 Trillion taken from it, last I heard. AndyA Dec 2012 #53

Maybe in ten years? Since it is perfectly solvent for the next 22 years sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #38

You apparently dont understand Social Security. It doesnt need a trust fund. rhett o rick Dec 2012 #5

Pay as you go would then need constant changes to keep inflows and outflows in balance. dkf Dec 2012 #8

SS worked just that way for decades Major Nikon Dec 2012 #11

With much better demographics and less of a payroll tax burden. dkf Dec 2012 #14

The assumption that it will ever come to that is not guaranteed Major Nikon Dec 2012 #21

Demographic projections aren't going to change all that much. dkf Dec 2012 #22

It goes back to normal next month Major Nikon Dec 2012 #28

Pay as you go worked fine before Reagan. And the only "change" would be adjustments for COLA's. rhett o rick Dec 2012 #40

Without a trust fund what would have happened to SS payments during the latest downturn? dkf Dec 2012 #41

Research what happened before Reagan. The purpose of the trust fund wasnt to have a slush fund to rhett o rick Dec 2012 #43

Right now the relationship of payments to receipts is mostly positive. dkf Dec 2012 #45

No. He is trying to prevent the current taxpayers from having to repay the money JDPriestly Dec 2012 #20

How many times do you have to be told that SS IS solvent. . sabrina 1 Dec 2012 #23

Making the trust fund last longer is BS. Let grandma starve now so that someday rhett o rick Dec 2012 #47

We have 30 years to fix Social Security. RC Dec 2012 #59

I am also in the 40 range and i am astounded by the responses here. FedUpWithIt All Dec 2012 #70

But..but..the Republicans think it's a swell idea. Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 2012 #2

Reagan would be proud leftstreet Dec 2012 #4

My Letter to the President ProfessionalLeftist Dec 2012 #10

+1 leftstreet Dec 2012 #15

Nice. Shared on Facebook. Thanks. Dark n Stormy Knight Dec 2012 #17

+1000 Thank YOU! smirkymonkey Dec 2012 #31

I've been hearing the new GOP tactic is to split the left away from the Democrats melody Dec 2012 #19

New? Demo_Chris Dec 2012 #24

We're the only party strong enough to battle the Grand Old Psychopaths melody Dec 2012 #27

I look forward to that happening Demo_Chris Dec 2012 #33

Obama is playing the game melody Dec 2012 #56

The game? Demo_Chris Dec 2012 #68

I worked for Obama knowing he'd have no choice but to compromise melody Dec 2012 #69

What's the use in responding when anyone who disagrees with you folk has their remarks removed? n/t melody Dec 2012 #57

i can see a "sane" republican bloc datasuspect Dec 2012 #50

No, liberals aren't akin to tea party extremists, but extreme leftists, well ... melody Dec 2012 #54

OK, this commie will take this on......... socialist_n_TN Dec 2012 #73

Talking to you may be like talking to a tea party extremist melody Dec 2012 #74

That's sort of true......... socialist_n_TN Dec 2012 #77

This wouldn't hurt my feelings at all...... socialist_n_TN Dec 2012 #78

Yawn. It was the same ruse he's used the last three times. cliffordu Dec 2012 #25

But we WON!! Didn't you hear? It's a checkmate!! MrSlayer Dec 2012 #26

Yeah, it's a checkmate for sure leftstreet Dec 2012 #58

Explain why YOU would make an authentic offer to someone who is not negotiating with YOU in good patrice Dec 2012 #29

Some of us are depending on SS for our survival Fumesucker Dec 2012 #30

wrong. I have my Soc Sec plus a tiny very little pension < $300. @ mo. No health care. No savings. patrice Dec 2012 #34

I'm not sure if it's my fault or yours or neither Fumesucker Dec 2012 #35

You know, it's not fair, nor objective, to use words like "comfortable" and "phlegmatic". I suppose patrice Dec 2012 #36

So you aren't "comfortable" having a game of chicken played with your future? Fumesucker Dec 2012 #39

I am scared to death Milliesmom Dec 2012 #32

Healthcare is a huge factor in the way cost of living increases are calculated for Social Security FedUpWithIt All Dec 2012 #71

It takes a Democratic President to make the first stab in the back... lib2DaBone Dec 2012 #37

A Democratic President enacted the COLA. ProSense Dec 2012 #42

CPI and COLA are two separate things leftstreet Dec 2012 #60

hey, guess what. nothing happened. you know that? spanone Dec 2012 #44

... SidDithers Dec 2012 #46

If you never had twenty dollars and I gave you $10, would you consider that i cut your money? nt kelliekat44 Dec 2012 #48

Meanwhile, John Boehner lays weeping in a pool of his own sick. JoePhilly Dec 2012 #49

whatever he agreed to include for the republicans wasn't all the way fleshed out bigtree Dec 2012 #51

Since When Do You RobinA Dec 2012 #62

LOL good question leftstreet Dec 2012 #63

But he had his fingers crossed behind his back when he threw us under the bus! nt Bonobo Dec 2012 #55

If this is true I will go independant ...or maybe just give up and rob a bank for my retirement. L0oniX Dec 2012 #61

Social Security is not means tested treestar Dec 2012 #64

I agree democrattotheend Dec 2012 #66

I also agree n/t FedUpWithIt All Dec 2012 #72

K&R All the more abusive because it's so unnecessary. forestpath Dec 2012 #65

K&R closeupready Dec 2012 #67

They are doing this because they have borrowed too much against it....bastards. SugarShack Dec 2012 #75

Against the wishes of those who voted for him, many who didn't, Doctor_J Dec 2012 #79