Author Topic: Trump says reforming Social Security and Medicare is 'the easiest of all things' as he appears open (Read 1324 times)

jafo2010 · « **Reply #25 on:** January 23, 2020, 08:28:34 pm »

Trump is an idiot. He has said all along he would not touch Social Security. In an election year, expressing the desire to FIX Social Security and Medicare is a guarantee for him not being elected.

Seniors are the ones that vote, and he better retract these comments or he is kaput.

And the fact is, many people in America are living on the minimum payout of Social Security. I have known a number of folks doing so, and living to an old age by the way.

When Social Security was started in the mid 30s, life expectancy was 59, and they based the age 65 on the German Railroad Retirement Program. So, the average person was dead before being able to collect a dime. Now, the average person is living to be 78, and we have lowered the age to collect to 62(although a reduced amount).

The time has come to end the early ability to collect Social Security. Presently, it is age 67 to collect full SS. I say push that back to age 70, and open up the ability to fund individual accounts.

Trump with his big mouth better zip it on Social Security and Medicare.

And frankly, I bitterly resent the fact that refugees that never paid a dime into the system receive a greater sum than folks that paid into Social Security all their lives. Just plain wrong. Again, I am tired of Washington and their endless ability to ignore the American people.

Emjay · « **Reply #26 on:** January 23, 2020, 10:47:21 pm »

Quote from: Chosen Daughter on January 23, 2020, 03:14:53 am

Please no. I don't trust Donald Trump to do that.

Soooo... do you trust Pelosi? I do trust Donald Trump on this. He's been right on nearly everything. The democrats have jumped on this like vultures on a carcass. But he will do it without harming current recipients and being fair to future recipients.

libertybele · « **Reply #27 on:** January 23, 2020, 10:59:45 pm »

Quote from: jafo2010 on January 23, 2020, 08:28:34 pm

Trump is an idiot. He has said all along he would not touch Social Security. In an election year, expressing the desire to FIX Social Security and Medicare is a guarantee for him not being elected.

Seniors are the ones that vote, and he better retract these comments or he is kaput.

And the fact is, many people in America are living on the minimum payout of Social Security. I have known a number of folks doing so, and living to an old age by the way.

When Social Security was started in the mid 30s, life expectancy was 59, and they based the age 65 on the German Railroad Retirement Program. So, the average person was dead before being able to collect a dime. Now, the average person is living to be 78, and we have lowered the age to collect to 62(although a reduced amount).

The time has come to end the early ability to collect Social Security. Presently, it is age 67 to collect full SS. I say push that back to age 70, and open up the ability to fund individual accounts.

Trump with his big mouth better zip it on Social Security and Medicare.

And frankly, I bitterly resent the fact that refugees that never paid a dime into the system receive a greater sum than folks that paid into Social Security all their lives. Just plain wrong. Again, I am tired of Washington and their endless ability to ignore the American people.

I couldn't agree more and Trump stating this during an election year isn't going to win over more voters; in fact he's likely to lose quite a few. Trump is very good with the economic side of things -- surely he can come up with a way to keep SS solvent. First order of business -- NO SS for illegal, refugees, etc. That is a no brainer.

berdie · « **Reply #28 on:** January 23, 2020, 11:49:40 pm »

Quote from: libertybele on January 23, 2020, 05:14:15 pm

Obviously you can't retire on social security alone. The fact still remains that we are mandated to pay social security -- it's not even an option, it is of course taken directly out of our paychecks.

Again the problem arises from those getting $$ that have NEVER paid into the system. Yet, those who saved and who paid into the system are the ones that are going to see reduced benefits.

Ponzi scheme or not -- it is OUR money, NOT an entitlement!

I agree with all you say.

If the government wanted more tax money they should have just said that....not sold it as a "retirement supplement". When sold in that way, it's not an entitlement.

And I'm real sorry about the younger people that are "paying" for this. That was the deal when I went to work. So call your representative and botch them out. I wasn't even a glimmer when this started out..won't take the blame...just want my money out. And so will they when the time comes.

truth_seeker · « **Reply #29 on:** January 24, 2020, 12:23:55 am »

Upon reading the article from leftist yahoo, I see no statement that Trump intends cutting any benefits.

Futher I see no other specifics.

It is an fake news, article designed to negatively depect the Presidents intention.

As usual the gullible TDS #nevertrump faction posts the article, then uses it as their basis for their daily rantings.

libertybele · « **Reply #30 on:** January 24, 2020, 12:30:32 am »

Quote from: truth_seeker on January 24, 2020, 12:23:55 am

Upon reading the article from leftist yahoo, I see no statement that Trump intends cutting any benefits.

Futher I see no other specifics.

It is an fake news, article designed to negatively depect the Presidents intention.

As usual the gullible TDS #nevertrump faction posts the article, then uses it as their basis for their daily rantings.

Really??? I posted it to 'discuss' --- I didn't see it as a one of Trump's wisest decisions -- even at that, like I stated previously, Trump is great on economic issues -- I think he'd be able to come up with a way to keep SS solvent. If that sounds like I'm part of the TDS #nevertrump faction -- so be it.

Fishrrman · « **Reply #31 on:** January 24, 2020, 01:35:14 am »

RinVa wrote:
"By 2034, the Trust Fund is expected to be exhausted. Thereafter, payroll taxes are projected to only cover approximately 79% of program obligations."

2034?
That's a good ways' off yet. A lifetime in politics. Don't worry me one little bit.

79% of obligations?
That number is really pretty GOOD, considering how much debt OTHER federal programs rack up.

When it gets to that point, something can get worked out to "close the remaining 21%".

corbe · « **Reply #32 on:** January 24, 2020, 01:48:40 am »

IMHO, it's just red meat for consumption by the base. I agree with the other Briefers, even he is not stupid enough to touch this, particularly during an election year.

Hoodat · « **Reply #33 on:** January 24, 2020, 04:13:59 am »

Quote from: Right_in_Virginia on January 23, 2020, 04:07:49 pm

By 2034, the Trust Fund is expected to be exhausted.

There is no trust fund. 100% of current 'obligations' are met by taking money away from someone else.

Chosen Daughter · « **Reply #34 on:** January 24, 2020, 05:10:12 am »

Quote from: libertybele on January 23, 2020, 04:57:09 pm

You are absolutely correct. SS is NOT an entitlement. It is something that is mandated by Uncle Sam that you pay into. However there are arguments on both sides. Some state that over the average person's working lifetime, they will pay into social security more than they receive and on the flip side the government claims that the average person receives more in social security once they retire than they've paid into. I tend to believe that the average person pays more into social security than they receive.

The push now is for people to work to age 70 to receive a bigger benefit --- if that person only lives to 75 or 80, I find it very difficult to believe that they will receive more over that 5-10 year period than what they paid into all their working lives. Secondly, if social security is only going to be able to pay a percentage of what they normally would pay out by 2034, then what's the point of working additional years? Sure, the cut will be less to them, but they're are still paying into it for appx. another 5 years at age 70.

The problem are the illegals collecting that shouldn't, fraudulent disability claims and those who receive $$ who have never paid into the system. The will also probably be determined to be the most needy and won't see a cut. Just my opinion.

I feel like we've paid into the system all our working lives, we've saved in IRA's, 401k's and other savings accounts -- why in the heck are we going to see a cut in SS?? We will see a cut because of those that haven't paid into the system, nor have saved.

Cut payments to illegal immigrants yes, but leave my SS alone.

Chosen Daughter · « **Reply #35 on:** January 24, 2020, 05:12:16 am »

Quote from: jafo2010 on January 23, 2020, 08:28:34 pm

Trump is an idiot. He has said all along he would not touch Social Security. In an election year, expressing the desire to FIX Social Security and Medicare is a guarantee for him not being elected.

Seniors are the ones that vote, and he better retract these comments or he is kaput.

And the fact is, many people in America are living on the minimum payout of Social Security. I have known a number of folks doing so, and living to an old age by the way.

When Social Security was started in the mid 30s, life expectancy was 59, and they based the age 65 on the German Railroad Retirement Program. So, the average person was dead before being able to collect a dime. Now, the average person is living to be 78, and we have lowered the age to collect to 62(although a reduced amount).

The time has come to end the early ability to collect Social Security. Presently, it is age 67 to collect full SS. I say push that back to age 70, and open up the ability to fund individual accounts.

Trump with his big mouth better zip it on Social Security and Medicare.

And frankly, I bitterly resent the fact that refugees that never paid a dime into the system receive a greater sum than folks that paid into Social Security all their lives. Just plain wrong. Again, I am tired of Washington and their endless ability to ignore the American people.

I read he is walking it back now.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/trump-tries-to-walk-back-entitlement-comments-as-democrats-pounce/ar-BBZgTTw?ocid=spartanntp

Gefn · « **Reply #36 on:** January 24, 2020, 08:03:26 am »

Bookmark.

Emjay · « **Reply #37 on:** January 24, 2020, 08:26:31 pm »

Quote from: Right_in_Virginia on January 23, 2020, 04:07:49 pm

Social Security trust funds were moved to the government's general funds by Lyndon Johnson in 1968 to help pay for the Vietnam War. They've remained there ever since.

By 2034, the Trust Fund is expected to be exhausted. Thereafter, payroll taxes are projected to only cover approximately 79% of program obligations.

The full extent of Lyndon Johnson's harm to the country may never be known. We have not had a decent Democrat president since Truman. Obama may have been the worst after LBJ.

Some of the posters here are so irritating. Every time I come back for a visit, I get riled up. Especially the old women. With the harm the democrat party is attempting right now; with the total move to socialism of that party, I cannot even imagine whining about anything Donald Trump does. Trump has actually been a great President and I honestly think he was chosen by God.

And, back to the subject, I do trust Donald J. Trump to find an equitable solution to the SS problem. Everybody had better pray that he's re-elected. I shudder to think what would happen if any of the current crop of democrats were elected.

truth_seeker · « **Reply #38 on:** January 24, 2020, 08:52:10 pm »

Yet another instance of Fake news,, p3ddled by Trumps opponents.

MSN. Shumer.

Read thelinked article for yourself.

darroll · « **Reply #39 on:** January 24, 2020, 08:59:31 pm »

Come on,
Trump is not cutting Social Security.
About half of Oregon is on some kind of a free ride for illegals.
Free, Free, Free
They even raised our heating bill and gave the money to liberal illegals.

Gefn · « **Reply #40 on:** January 25, 2020, 01:22:38 am »

Quote from: Emjay on January 24, 2020, 08:26:31 pm

The full extent of Lyndon Johnson's harm to the country may never be known. We have not had a decent Democrat president since Truman. Obama may have been the worst after LBJ.

Some of the posters here are so irritating. Every time I come back for a visit, I get riled up. Especially the old women. With the harm the democrat party is attempting right now; with the total move to socialism of that party, I cannot even imagine whining about anything Donald Trump does. Trump has actually been a great President and I honestly think he was chosen by God.

And, back to the subject, I do trust Donald J. Trump to find an equitable solution to the SS problem. Everybody had better pray that he's re-elected. I shudder to think what would happen if any of the current crop of democrats were elected.

I just saw that Caro is publishing another biography on LBJ this year. I think itâ€™s due out in Spring?

jafo2010 · « **Reply #41 on:** January 25, 2020, 04:24:28 am »

Quote

Emjay...And, back to the subject, I do trust Donald J. Trump to find an equitable solution to the SS problem. Everybody had better pray that he's re-elected. I shudder to think what would happen if any of the current crop of democrats were elected.

He will not be re-elected if he continues speaking any smack on Social Security or Medicare. Foolish. I am sure his handlers cringed big time.

And Emjay, trust him at your peril. To assume he would not cut Social Security is foolish. I can easily see cuts being part of the solution. What burns me, is that he has spoken in the past of increasing payouts for Social Security. He is giving the Dems ammo as a flip flopper on this and you can bet they will use this in ads in the general election. I can hear it now....Trump has vowed to fix Social Security at Davos by making cuts and taking Medicare benefits away from our seniors. You do not want this unstable man behind the curtain to destroy two essential programs for our seniors.

WHAT A DUMB F*&^!!!! To say I am pissed over this is an understatement. I go out there selling Trump to everyone, and this stupid jack *ss unloads my sales kit. He keeps this up, and I just might not bother voting, and if I do not vote, that is three votes, minimum in my household alone, and hundreds if I just shut up.

roamer_1 · « **Reply #42 on:** January 25, 2020, 04:32:49 am »

Quote from: jafo2010 on January 25, 2020, 04:24:28 am

WHAT A DUMB F*&^!!!! To say I am pissed over this is an understatement. I go out there selling Trump to everyone, and this stupid jack *ss unloads my sales kit. He keeps this up, and I just might not bother voting, and if I do not vote, that is three votes, minimum in my household alone, and hundreds if I just shut up.

No really @jafo2010 , RESPECT. That you can be critical shows you are not just singing along, as so many do.

Hoodat · « **Reply #43 on:** January 25, 2020, 04:38:34 am »

The Social Security budget needs to be cut. Thirty percent of current outlays go to persons below retirement age. Social Security should be for retirement only. And it should go into an actual retirement account - one that the taxpayer gets to choose.

If ANY President did this, I would make it my personal crusade to repeal the 22nd Amendment and make that person President for Life. This country would experience growth greater than the Reagan years.

roamer_1 · « **Reply #44 on:** January 25, 2020, 04:42:46 am »

Quote from: Hoodat on January 25, 2020, 04:38:34 am

The Social Security budget needs to be cut. Thirty percent of current outlays go to persons below retirement age. Social Security should be for retirement only. And it should go into an actual retirement account - one that the taxpayer gets to choose.

If ANY President did this, I would make it my personal crusade to repeal the 22nd Amendment and make that person President for Life. This country would experience growth greater than the Reagan years.

Actually it should be gone. It is not within the aegis of the feds

Chosen Daughter · « **Reply #45 on:** January 25, 2020, 04:58:15 am »

Quote from: roamer_1 on January 25, 2020, 04:42:46 am

Actually it should be gone. It is not within the aegis of the feds

What do you want to do with the money that people have paid in?

Hoodat · « **Reply #46 on:** January 25, 2020, 05:07:07 am »

Quote from: Chosen Daughter on January 25, 2020, 04:58:15 am

What do you want to do with the money that people have paid in?

That money has already been spent, just like every other tax. Not sure why this is so difficult for you to understand. You seem to have this silly idea that the government has your money and will faithfully give it back to you with interest.

Hoodat · « **Reply #47 on:** January 25, 2020, 05:07:25 am »

Quote from: roamer_1 on January 25, 2020, 04:42:46 am

Actually it should be gone. It is not within the aegis of the feds

Word.

jafo2010 · « **Reply #48 on:** January 25, 2020, 05:35:22 am »

If Trump were smart, and that is suspect for me, he would talk about broadening the Social Security Program and increase benefits for USA citizens.

What we have right now is refugees receiving a far greater sum, never having paid one dime than the average Social Security recipient. This is wrong. So, to begin fixing this f*&^ing nonsense, END REFUGEES coming to the USA. Those refugees that are not citizens are given a set period of time to receive benefits, and those benefits end. Let them work 40 quarters just like USA citizens to be eligible for Social Security, and let that payout be based on what we citizens receive, and not some inflated sum way beyond what Americans receive. I can tell you, that burns my *ss big time. And I know a number of people like this, receiving big money and never having paid a dime into the system. It's wrong.

roamer_1 · « **Reply #49 on:** January 25, 2020, 05:41:46 am »

Quote from: Chosen Daughter on January 25, 2020, 04:58:15 am

What do you want to do with the money that people have paid in?

That is the tricky part. I don't think you can just overturn it. I think it needs to be taken out of the hands of the fed and, for instance, placed in a trust run by the governors combined, supplemented by federal dollars until the current obligations (to the old and disabled strictly) are fulfilled by attrition... Sunset at that time...

As to the rest, and ongoing, I think that needs to be according to the state, with both federal and state credits for those taking care of the elderly (thinking family care and corporate retirement matching)... and similar programs through county and religious organizations...

Something similar in medical. It is the jurisdiction of the states respectively, not the feds, and of religious charities historically. I think it needs to go back that way, with relief as needed... If a guy has an ailing mother in his house, his burden is increased, and I think helping him is better than any government could do - both in care and in cost.

But that also means that all governments need to keep their mitts out of medical and charity and actually allow dedctions, 100%, for anything related to anyone for their participation, as much as is possible.