2
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Myth- “social security is guaranteed”.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:44 am to Midtiger farm
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:44 am to Midtiger farm
quote:Right. In this day-and-age, Muslims have done little to justify that moniker. But naïvety regarding Islam is certainly not a boomercentric generational characteristic
I mean literally a month a go on 9/11you had George W Bush go into a interview and talk about how Islam is such a peaceful religion
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:46 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
I have another question: Please explain to me how SS is "Going to screw your kids and grandkids."
If the kids and grandkids of boomers pay into Social Security and then do not actually get benefits themselves from it as many people predict, that would be screwing them would it not?
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:51 am to NC_Tigah
Its the under 30 crowd that's lining up to vote for DSA, jew hating candidates around the country, not grandma.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:53 am to geoag58
quote:
You can vote in an end to SS. You can even get the end to have a cut off date that excludes some who have paid in some already. The problem you will face is getting people closer to retirement and less able to change their plans to vote for the new plan.
You won't be able to just stop it. You have to have some transition plan.
I don't think people realize how many Americans have no little or no retirement plan outside of social security. Almost 40% of people over 65 get half or more of their family income from Social Security. For around 14% of people over 65 that number is 90% of family income.
And the people over 65 right now were still part of the generation that maybe got a pension, and those are becoming more and more rare so those SS reliance numbers will only go up.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:54 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
But naïvety regarding Islam is certainly not a boomercentric generational characteristic
I mean the decades of the 1990s and 2000s when boomer politicians had a lot or the majority of the power is when the majority of Muslim immigration has happened
Posted on 10/8/26 at 8:56 am to Tigersforthee
quote:Of course it is.
Its the under 30 crowd that's lining up to vote for DSA, jew hating candidates around the country, not grandma.
They are also critical theorists rather than critical thinkers, Mf's severe boomer obsession being a case in point.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:13 am to ShrimperDan
quote:
If the kids and grandkids of boomers pay into Social Security and then do not actually get benefits themselves from it as many people predict, that would be screwing them would it not?
No more than the boomers paying in and not getting theirs.
Right?
This post was edited on 10/8/26 at 9:15 am
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:14 am to Tigersforthee
quote:
So what was your point again other than how unfair life is?
No need to make shite up about my posts.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:14 am to Midtiger farm
Correct, boomers imported human malware and act puzzled when a firm handshake can no longer get someone a job. I’m sorry they got screwed over by a ponzi scheme in SS, but it’s bootstraps time. Skip the daily latte and get a side gig.
This post was edited on 10/8/26 at 9:18 am
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:16 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Tired of this excuse. First of all, social security is not something you “pay into.” If it were, you wouldn’t need younger people to “pay into it” in order to get your check. But you do. Because this is a Ponzi scheme, not a retirement account. What you really mean to say is that your money was stolen from you — which it was — and now you want to steal from younger people to get restitution.
That’s the actual case you’re making and it’s exactly as morally deranged as it sounds. Second, your generation continually for decades voted for politicians who would keep the scheme going. You might not have invented social security, but you damn sure made certain it kept going. Why should younger people have to pay the price for the shitty policies you supported?
What is Walsh's suggestion (and others who agree with him) here?
Is he saying just totally kill SS as it stands...no more benefits being paid?
Is he saying to let the payouts be reduced as the money dries up?
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:17 am to ShrimperDan
quote:"Many people" are poor prognosticators.
as many people predict
quote:Yes it would be. The far more likely outcome is increased payroll tax rates w/ benefit reduction. The Government has zero interest in letting SS go, and that sentiment has nothing whatsoever to do with retirement.
If the kids and grandkids of boomers pay into Social Security ... that would be screwing them would it not?
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:19 am to moneyg
quote:
Is he saying just totally kill SS as it stands...no more benefits being paid
Long term phase out so whatever that looks like I would think most over 55 get most if not all their benefits
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:23 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No more than the boomers paying in and not getting theirs.
It’s called sacrifice
Seems like a concept boomers have a hard time wrapping their head around
And they would still get most of their benefits
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:23 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No more than the boomers paying in and not getting theirs.
Right?
Yes if you pay in and don't get a benefit that is getting screwed.
Boomers are going to get theirs. Are their kids and grandkids? Who knows.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:29 am to Midtiger farm
quote:
Long term phase out so whatever that looks like I would think most over 55 get most if not all their benefits
Certainly, those that support this realize that they will still be paying Social Security taxes while this is happening.
And, if the argument is that Social Security was always just another tax, then what's the argument for removing that tax?
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:30 am to Midtiger farm
quote:As has been pointed out, that would be great for taxpayers, but bad for DC. DC's motivation is to increase, not decrease, SS.
Long term phase out so whatever that looks like I would think most over 55 get most if not all their benefits
Posted on 10/8/26 at 9:32 am to NC_Tigah
Id predict they'll eventually raise or entirely eliminate the tax cap. Its currently around 185k so moving it to like a million, or entirely, (without increasing the max benefit) would add around 20 years to SSs solvency. Then the full retirement age will get raised from 67 to maybe 70.
According to AI, just those two changes would add about 50-55 years to social security solvency.
So while those two things may not be popular they certainly arent catastrophic either. This makes all the doom and gloom "social security wont be there for me" talk sound silly. Sure you may be a couple years older when you get it, or you may pay higher taxes if you're a really high earner but the basic program as we've always known it will stay intact.
According to AI, just those two changes would add about 50-55 years to social security solvency.
So while those two things may not be popular they certainly arent catastrophic either. This makes all the doom and gloom "social security wont be there for me" talk sound silly. Sure you may be a couple years older when you get it, or you may pay higher taxes if you're a really high earner but the basic program as we've always known it will stay intact.
This post was edited on 10/8/26 at 9:34 am
Posted on 10/8/26 at 10:22 am to Tigersforthee
quote:That presumes either an uncoupling from employer contributions, or an inevitable restructuring of compensation to circumvent FICA exposure. Otherwise it would represent a de facto top rate tax increase to ~50%. It also assumes a total uncoupling of contributions with benefits would be workable. So a fairly dubious calculation on AI's part, though it's more likely simply the AI being reliant on DC actuarials attempting to make a case for those taxes.
the tax cap. Its currently around 185k so moving it to like a million, or entirely, (without increasing the max benefit) would add around 20 years to SSs solvency.
Posted on 10/8/26 at 10:52 am to ShrimperDan
quote:
I don't think people realize how many Americans have no little or no retirement plan outside of social security. Almost 40% of people over 65 get half or more of their family income from Social Security. For around 14% of people over 65 that number is 90% of family income. And the people over 65 right now were still part of the generation that maybe got a pension, and those are becoming more and more rare so those SS reliance numbers will only go up.
Our president is 80, get back to work
Retirement isn’t a right
Posted on 10/8/26 at 10:56 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
No more than the boomers paying in and not getting theirs.
Right?
Not the same.
Boomers aren't in danger of not getting benefits if SS stays as is; they are on the cusp of retirement or already in it, and I don't see politicians doing anything to disrupt that even if they do implement plans for the future of SS.
The next generations are in much greater danger of reduced benefits or means testing.
Page 12 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News