How would Americans strengthen social security?

[Direckshun]

This is how:



Blue is the percentage of people that support that particular reform -- red is people that do not support it (dark blue is "strongly," light blue is "lightly"; same is true for red).

This is based on a study by the National Academy of Social Insurance: http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/fi...icans_Want.pdf

The conclusions section is on page 29, and it starts off with this:



I'm not the kind of guy who believes we should always do as the polls dictate, but these are some ridiculously lopsided polls.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

I'm not the kind of guy who believes we should always do as the polls dictate, .

No bigger lie was ever told in DC.
You are a hoarder of Polls,links,threads,ect. Your life is a 110 watt wall outlet.

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

No bigger lie was ever told in DC.
You are a hoarder of Polls

Polls are terribly important. But I have never felt they should single-handedly guide policy.

[La literatura]

Medicare and Social Security ages need to be raised, even if Medicare does a good job of keeping down medical costs.

One thing is true: the rhetoric about insolvency is Republican strategy for tearing apart the fabric of the social safety net in this country. But so is another: when first enacted, age 65 was basically the average age of death. Modern medicine has adapted, and so should our laws.

[LiveSteam]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Polls are terribly important. But I have never felt they should single-handedly guide policy.

& I have never jerked off to

[Direckshun]

Originally Posted by LiveSteam

& I have never jerked off to

[ChiliConCarnage]

Originally Posted by La literatura

when first enacted, age 65 was basically the average age of death. Modern medicine has adapted, and so should our laws.

It's definitely a part of the issue. Unfortunately, it would make a lot of people mad so politicians have passed the buck.

There isn't a lot to do about the demographic changes though.

Back in 1950, as the baby boom was just getting started, each retiree's benefit was divided among 16 workers. Taxes could be kept low. Today, that number has dropped to 3.3 workers per retiree, and by 2025, it will reach-and remain at-about two workers per retiree.

[Prison Bitch]

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Polls are terribly important. But I have never felt they should single-handedly guide policy.

Translation: I pick the polls I want to use to base policy on. Polls that show strong support for things like gun rights or abolishing the death tax? Not good for policy.

[Bewbies]

I read this poll as wanting someone else to pay for it. Maybe everyone polled is "rich" and would be the people paying, but I doubt it...

[loochy]

Originally Posted by Bewbies

I read this poll as wanting someone else to pay for it. Maybe everyone polled is "rich" and would be the people paying, but I doubt it...

Well of course they want the "rich" to pay for it. They are rich and I'm poor so damnit, I deserve it.

[patteeu]

Originally Posted by La literatura

One thing is true: the rhetoric about insolvency is Republican strategy for tearing apart the fabric of the social safety net in this country.

No, that's not true. The vast majority of Republicans want to insure that we continue to have a social safety net. The rhetoric about insolvency comes from the reality that the current programs are insolvent and will soon become cash-flow insolvent as well if significant changes aren't made.

[Otter]

Where's the "Opt Out" option?

Take my pay, before I see it, borrow from it for more than it's worth then tell me a unicorn is going to drop my a check at 65. Anyone need a further reason to hate government?

[FishingRod]

I don’t think there should be a Cap on it but, likewise I don’t think the income taxes should be progressive. I don’t think we should leave the Tax rates as they are, Remove the cap and leave maximum amount of SS payments at the same level they are now. Most people are still are very much in favor of “other people” paying more.

Though I am not a religious person I think tithing where the poorest and richest person in the group giving the same % is a logical and fair plan that if followed for taxes would be better for everyone.

[petegz28]

It was a Ponzi scheme when it was designed and it still is.

[BigRedChief]

Originally Posted by patteeu

No, that's not true. The vast majority of Republicans want to insure that we continue to have a social safety net. The rhetoric about insolvency comes from the reality that the current programs are insolvent and will soon become cash-flow insolvent as well if significant changes aren't made.

Social Security is fine for another 25 years. It's so healthy we keep taking money out of it to pay for other things. The issue is people taking out money that never paid in and people getting 3X the money they put into the fund.

That being said, it still needs to be fixed for even more of a long term solution. Retirement is a long term plan.

Maybe means testing. If you have plenty of money you don't get the check. If your fortunes change, you get the money and back date to when you would have started drawing.

Raise the age to 67 for everyone 50 and under

Raise the FICA tax in paychecks