Social Security 2.0 ??? - Page 2 - Politics and Economics

Two Plus Two Forums Other Topics Politics

Social Security 2.0 ???

...

Page 2 of 2

1 2

Page 2 of 2

1 2

11-03-2008 , 04:02 PM

#26

iron81

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 17,730

Quote:

Originally Posted by natedogg

It is a worthy goal.

If that is indeed your perception of what is the goal of social security (or something similar), then why not just open welfare up to old people so they are not impoverished but let young workers prepare for their own futures?

1. They can prepare for their own futures. No one is telling young people not to save.

2. Because the government needs the revenue to pay the current benefits.

11-03-2008 , 04:06 PM

#27

natedogg

veteran

Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 3,096

Quote:

Originally Posted by iron81

1. They can prepare for their own futures. No one is telling young people not to save.

2. Because the government needs the revenue to pay the current benefits.

But the current benefits do not support the goal of keeping seniors from being impoverished. If that's the worthy goal you want to achieve you should be wholly in support of totally undoing social security as it is now.

Also, the government *doesnt* need the revenue to pay current benefits. They are running a surplus on that (albeit tenuously connected) budget.

11-03-2008 , 04:28 PM

#28

PolvoPelusa

adept

Join Date: Aug 2008 Posts: 974

Quote:

Originally Posted by iron81

2. Because the government needs the revenue to pay the current benefits.

yikes. so what happens at the end of this path we are on?

- In 15 years, will ALL Americans stop receiving monetary compensation in return for labor and instead, each person will receive 31 doses of soma and a packet of benefit-stamps on the 1st of each month?

- What happens when everyone is paying 100% in taxes and the government needs more revenue to pay for the current benefits? war?

I think your reasoning skills need some work.

11-03-2008 , 04:35 PM

#29

pokerbobo

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 14,432

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolvoPelusa

- What happens when everyone is paying 100% in taxes and the government needs more revenue to pay for the current benefits? war?

Only the patritic people will continue to work past 75% in taxes. once it hits 90%, I'm sure most of those will start to question thier patriotism.

11-03-2008 , 04:46 PM

#30

pokerbobo

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 14,432

Quote:

Originally Posted by iron81

This program is not redistributionist. If anything, 401k's redistribute to the wealthy by handing out tax breaks to wealthier people that can afford to contribute to 401k's.

Ummmmmm, How is letting someone keep what is already thiers redistribution?

11-03-2008 , 05:11 PM

#31

ElliotR

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 30,029

Quote:

Originally Posted by PolvoPelusa

please back up your claim that this has "zero chance of passage"...

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChainWave

It doesn't worry you even a tiny bit that these are the types of ideas that are being championed by your elected officials?

The republicans are being run out of town. The only reason that we don't see more of these come up for a vote is BECAUSE they know it won't pass. They don't want to be on record voting for something like this when it failed. Once they get a sufficient majority as to not need the republicans anymore, you don't think we'll see all sorts of crap like this rammed through?

If not, then I hope you're right and I'm wrong.

LOLZ. Did you guys even read the linked story? This is some academic's plan and the two mentioned congresscritters wouldn't even go on the record as supporting it. Give us a break.

P.S. Don't think that I didn't notice that you misquoted my "near zero" assertion to "zero".