Cruz I’m ‘Emphatic’ Balanced Budget Supporter, Want Means Tested Social Security

[Cyber Liberty]

What is curious is that "means testing" is diametrically opposite of how he is selling himself. He deserves an opportunity to disavow or clarify his remarks.

And no weasel words.  "People close to retirement" are weasel words.

[MACVSOG68]

What is curious is that "means testing" is diametrically opposite of how he is selling himself. He deserves an opportunity to disavow or clarify his remarks.

True and I'm sure he's rethinking it, as it would turn an entitlement into a welfare program.  Welfare is unearned benefits determined through means testing.  Social Security is an earned benefit, similar to other federal retirement programs, none of which are means tested.

[jmyrlefuller]

I'm not wedded to any mistake.

You pay FICA taxes in order to get money when you retire.

That's the simple premise of the plan.

I am an adult, and you telling me that I am not one because I don't agree with your is the sort of thing that start arguments where I end up being the "bad guy" for firing back in kind.

Why don't you stop the name calling and just engage in the debate?

No, you pay FICA taxes because you are legally required to do so.

And that's exactly what I'm doing, too.  It just pisses me off that the supposed "conservative" in the GOP race wants to penalize me for financing my own retirement.  It ought to piss everybody here off, and I'm more than a little disappointed that they're indeed pissed, not at the candidate but at me for demanding the goobermint abide by their contract.  One guy even calls us little children for expecting that.  I should just throw my money away for the common good (sounds like Hillary), that's the "adult" thing to do.

Come to think about it, I think this was the conversation we were having a number of months ago....

It's NOT YOUR MONEY, and it's already been thrown away on people older than you. Good grief.

You know what that is called? A Ponzi scheme.

[Cyber Liberty]

No, you pay FICA taxes because you are legally required to do so.
 It's NOT YOUR MONEY, and it's already been thrown away on people older than you. Good grief.

You know what that is called? A Ponzi scheme.

I'm aware the thread has grown long, into five pages now, but that does not excuse you from reading the posts in it before chewing out other posters.  I already said it's a Ponzi scheme.  Whose money it is is debatable. 

[DCPatriot]

FICA taxes came about to fund a stream of monthly income benefits for people of...or older than the established retirement age.

It was 'sold' to the American People as the sole means to fund the program.

Congress used that earmarked money as another petty cash fund to raid to fund other programs.  No different than a crackhead that...a week before the rent is due...instead spends it on getting high, with the same thought process..."I'll figure something out later".

No matter how one spins it, those monies contributed through FICA taxes is INDEED YOUR OWN MONEY.  It wasn't a surtax.  It was solely for your future old age retirement.

I'm going to take the same attitude as was described in the classic movie "Goodfellas", when a merchant reached the stage that he was an employee of the crime family, their attitude when then came around to 'collect':

"What?  your freezer broke and all your stock was ruined?  EFF YOU!  PAY ME!  Your place had a fire and you were closed?  EFF YOU!  PAY ME!!"


What?  You spent the country into oblivion and we're now over $20 TRILLION in the red?   EFF YOU!  PAY ME!!"

[GourmetDan]

What?  You spent the country into oblivion and we're now over $20 TRILLION in the red?   EFF YOU!  PAY ME!!"

Don't forget who you're dealing with.

Uncle will 'pay you' alright... but it might buy you a hamburger by the time they get finished debasing the currency.

That's the easiest way to get out from under a $20T debt and Uncle is all about taking the easy way out...

[Luis Gonzalez]

No, you pay FICA taxes because you are legally required to do so.
 It's NOT YOUR MONEY, and it's already been thrown away on people older than you. Good grief.

You know what that is called? A Ponzi scheme.

It is MY MONEY Jimmy.

In fact, there isn't a penny that the government has that isn't our money, ergo my money.

If you want to argue that my money has already been used on others, that's fine, but it remains my money that they forcibly took from me based on the premise that I would get it back later, so now, just like I paid for older people's benefits with my contributions, younger people will pay for mine.

If it makes you feel any better, the worker to retiree ratio is 2-1 right now.

My sons will pay for my benefits.

[flowers]

fl

[Cyber Liberty]

It is MY MONEY Jimmy.

In fact, there isn't a penny that the government has that isn't our money, ergo my money.

If you want to argue that my money has already been used on others, that's fine, but it remains my money that they forcibly took from me based on the premise that I would get it back later, so now, just like I paid for older people's benefits with my contributions, younger people will pay for mine.

If it makes you feel any better, the worker to retiree ratio is 2-1 right now.

My sons will pay for my benefits.

Jimmy sounds like he's decades away from retirement, therefore doesn't have much skin in the game.  He's one of the two people paying benefits to a retiree somewhere, and I can't say I blame him much for being miffed about it.  He's probably got a good nest egg going for himself, fully expecting zero in SS.  That's been my approach for a very long time. 

That said, he sure is cavalier with our (yes, "our") money.

Besides, I don't take very kindly to brats telling me, "Suck it up, buttercup."

[Luis Gonzalez]

Jimmy sounds like he's decades away from retirement, therefore doesn't have much skin in the game.  He's one of the two people paying benefits to a retiree somewhere, and I can't say I blame him much for being miffed about it.  He's probably got a good nest egg going for himself, fully expecting zero in SS.  That's been my approach for a very long time. 

That said, he sure is cavalier with our (yes, "our") money.

Besides, I don't take very kindly to brats telling me, "Suck it up, buttercup."

I have a friend who is what could best be described as a Moderate liberal, we used to get into all sorts of debates about social programs and the funding of social programs.

One day, coming to the realization that I'd been missing the single most important point in the debate, and what is (I believe) one o the cornerstones of liberalism, I prefaced a burgeoning round in our forever debate with a qualifying statement:

"We will discuss and debate whatever you want to debate or whichever program it is that you believe is worthwhile and generally essential to the well-being of the people and the general cause of social and economic justice , but there is one thing that I want you to understand without question. My money is my money, and it remains my money regardless of whether or not you believe you have a better idea on how to use any portion of it."

I will be 100% in the camp of anyone who wants to end the SS program, so long as someone calculates how much I paid into it over my lifetime, and cuts me a inflation-adjusted check for the full amount.

[Fishrrman]

Folks.... remember what happened back around 2005, when George W. Bush thought he could spend a little of his "political capital" and the Pubbies began making a little noise about "reforming" Social Security and raising the retirement age...?

[truth_seeker]

Folks.... remember what happened back around 2005, when George W. Bush thought he could spend a little of his "political capital" and the Pubbies began making a little noise about "reforming" Social Security and raising the retirement age...?

I remember that it did not play well, and in 2006 the Dems clobbered the GOP in the midterms.

FICA is typically the largest single deduction from paychecks. People in general learn it is their eventual social security.

Politically it doesn't play well with people of any age, to effectively say we're thinking about changing that program.

"Privatize" became "eliminate," and "means test" becomes "take away."

I didn't go to Harvard, but my common sense helps me with such issues. Welcome to the real world of Presidential politics, Senator Ted.

[Cyber Liberty]

I have a friend who is what could best be described as a Moderate liberal, we used to get into all sorts of debates about social programs and the funding of social programs.

One day, coming to the realization that I'd been missing the single most important point in the debate, and what is (I believe) one o the cornerstones of liberalism, I prefaced a burgeoning round in our forever debate with a qualifying statement:

"We will discuss and debate whatever you want to debate or whichever program it is that you believe is worthwhile and generally essential to the well-being of the people and the general cause of social and economic justice , but there is one thing that I want you to understand without question. My money is my money, and it remains my money regardless of whether or not you believe you have a better idea on how to use any portion of it."

I will be 100% in the camp of anyone who wants to end the SS program, so long as someone calculates how much I paid into it over my lifetime, and cuts me a inflation-adjusted check for the full amount.

100% plus inflation!

 

It's surprising how easily you can corner a social justice warrior simply by asking him "to whom does money belong?"  An interesting corollary question is, "What is the purpose of taxes?"  If the answer is, "To raise money!" then the chap has a chance of learning something about the Laffer Curve.  if it's "To ensure fairness!" then just give it up, he's unteachable.

Bravo!  I've had that conversation with people in that "forever debate" class of friend, and I told them exactly what you told him.  I also said that because I respected his intelligence, he is to respect mine as well and don't insult it.