• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Trump is coming after your SS and Medicare!

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,276
641
126
Along with humans living longer
SS isn't a problem. Health care is the big factor in the future if it isn't addressed. Plenty of ways to improve on ACA to try to control costs there. We should look at end-of-life care as a huge portion goes just into the last year of someone's life.

and tons of fraudulent/abused disability claims.
Virtually everyone I come across who has a problem with this has no problem with the military disability system even though it's waaaaaaaaaaay easier to obtain, compensates vastly better than workman's comp/SSI/SSDI and doesn't bar you (few exceptions) from working in the future.

The average age for people with SSI/SSDI is like 55, and you have forfeit at least a years worth of work (and probably more with the denials) and obviously aren't allowed to work once received. If someone's going through that, they're likely actually disabled or wouldn't be able to make worthwhile contributions anyway. What's more, the programs roll into SS retirement or the low income thing for the elderly at 65, so someone hardly makes out like a bandit.



Regardless, the concept of government managing an "investment" of sorts is fucking hilarious in the first place. Make a government mandated 401k where all wages have to enter and be placed in Index funds along with payment for an insurance program or something.

Fucking monkeys could manage money better.
Or you could just tax the wealthy more and boost/not cut SS.

If everyone is forced into a 401K plan that mandates a portion of wages, this isn't going to make everyone all rich through compounding. Nothing will change on the macroecon level in that scenario. It's just swapping stocks and treasury securities.
 
Last edited:

RamIt

Senior member
Nov 12, 2001
777
186
116
Don't worry, they'll structure the cuts so current old people aren't affected and you all will be like "heck yeah FYGM!"
I'm gen x. I want all people especially the ones under my age to share the benefits as well as the burdens equally. And fuck you for the assholic reply.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BUTCH1
Nov 8, 2012
18,431
3,840
136
SS isn't a problem. Health care is the big factor in the future if it isn't addressed. Plenty of ways to improve on ACA to try to control costs there. We should look at end-of-life care as a huge portion goes just into the last year of someone's life.



Virtually everyone I come across who has a problem with this has no problem with the military disability system even though it's waaaaaaaaaaay easier to obtain, compensates vastly better than workman's comp/SSI/SSDI and doesn't bar you (few exceptions) from working in the future.

The average age for people with SSI/SSDI is like 55, and you have forfeit at least a years worth of work (and probably more with the denials) and obviously aren't allowed to work once received. If someone's going through that, they're likely actually disabled or wouldn't be able to make worthwhile contributions anyway. What's more, the programs roll into SS retirement or the low income thing for the elderly at 65, so someone hardly makes out like a bandit.





Or you could just tax the wealthy more and boost/not cut SS.

If everyone is forced into a 401K plan that mandates a portion of wages, this isn't going to make everyone all rich through compounding. Nothing will change on the macroecon level in that scenario. It's just swapping stocks and treasury securities.
Oh Look! I can do that too!

1579928666603.png



It's hilarious the lunacy of people here that still fail to realize that Social Security wasn't a means to redistribute income. It was (and still is) a means of forcing people into a supposed "retirement" program.

The reality though, is that anyone with half a brain could put themselves into a much more competent retirement program.

But hey - say "government program" and make it forced and that automatically makes it successful right?
Even though it's in shambles debt wise?
Even though the ROI is far less than if you simply invested it yourself?


Yeah, naw - it's all good!

Christ - people in my fucking generation have to calculate our net worth based on the fact that we KNOW our social security won't be there for us in 30 years. Yet we know our paychecks will continue to gouge us for it.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
34,798
4,695
126
oh come on. You know they will make it so it happens after the last boomer has taken more then thier share.
Once baby boomers are gone, the following generations will decide what benefits to vote themselves. It's not a one way street. It might be a moot point anyways with automation and need for universal basic income.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
12,289
6,941
136
Oops, you may want to re-think that:

Trump voters.
Yeah, that article stupidly defines Trump's "base" as "those who like his insults and his tweets." Which evidently is a quarter of those who voted for him. It's a good bet that older folks are least likely to appreciate his verbal coarseness but they vote for him anyway. Defining "base" as that narrow a subset leaves the impression that Trump doesn't do well with the elderly.

In reality, Trump won 65 and older voters by 7 points.
 

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,276
641
126
Oh Look! I can do that too!
I don't disagree; you didn't look closely enough to my two reasons. If someone is making that decision to forfeit wages for at least a year, then what are the chances you think they're not low IQ, have a personality disorder, on the autistic spectrum, etc.? As I said, the average age of a recipient is 55 and rolls into retirement, so you hardly milked the system with a paltry benefit for a few to several years. SSDI maxes out at a whopping $2700 a month and SSI can't even pay rent, so the only people who would really entertain this are those with a career in the bottom half of jobs. Funny a pharm tech is barely above minimum wage and has crap benefits (the sort of jobs you are talking about!) but with just ~50 days of training in the military for the same job, you average at least 2X as much in 20 yrs in just base/BAH/BAS and then when you retire at 38 (no contributions needed), you get around ~$2500 a month (with COLA) for the rest of your life that stacks with SS, and you also receive massively subsidized health care for the rest of your life. Yeah... the private sector pharm tech who had the audacity to go on disability for several years was the one really milking the system.... Look at government employee compensation and money going to contracted out jobs first.

It's hilarious the lunacy of people here that still fail to realize that Social Security wasn't a means to redistribute income. It was (and still is) a means of forcing people into a supposed "retirement" program.

The reality though, is that anyone with half a brain could put themselves into a much more competent retirement program.
Nothing changes on the macroecon level if we got rid of SS taxes and forced people to put a set percentage of wages into 401Ks.


But hey - say "government program" and make it forced and that automatically makes it successful right?
Even though it's in shambles debt wise?
Even though the ROI is far less than if you simply invested it yourself?


Yeah, naw - it's all good!

Christ - people in my fucking generation have to calculate our net worth based on the fact that we KNOW our social security won't be there for us in 30 years. Yet we know our paychecks will continue to gouge us for it.
What are you assuming for compounding return if everyone started saving (which will lower aggregate demand significantly)? It's laughable when people point to Galveston TX as proof that putting everyone on a plan like that will make everyone so much better off for nothing.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

sportage

Diamond Member
Feb 1, 2008
9,307
1,385
126
Gee... I kinda hope Trump does cut the social safety nets.
And cut them to the bone. Cut them till it hurts.
Only because, it would be interesting to see if there is a limit for his followers?
Would the Trumpies starve their own kids to put the desires of Donald Trump first and above all?

Hitler rounded up the Jews and sent them to the final solution.
With Trump, would his people wait outside in line for hours to be the first to jump on that train?
When it comes to Donald Trump and his people, are we talking suicide here?
Is THAT it?
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
29,108
3,087
126
Preferably a Democrat one. The Repubs put the best of what they could find in the Oval Office by the name of Donald Trump, the narcissistic, egomaniacal, pathologically lying, adulterous tax cheat and money launderer.

So we now fully understand that they can't be trusted anymore with how they go about picking the leaders of their party and therefore the rest of us must make sure they don't harm themselves again like they did with picking that Russian sympathizing womanizer of theirs.
Yup, agree completely. I figure a new POTUS means a Democratic one come Jan. 20, 2021. IMO, to be a Republican nowadays is to be cursed big time.
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
31,895
10,667
146
Shocking. Pretty much if he promised something for all Americans then it's a safe bet he will not do that and pander to white nationalists and religious nutters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
3,336
2,329
106
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,190
6,239
136
I'm gen x. I want all people especially the ones under my age to share the benefits as well as the burdens equally. And fuck you for the assholic reply.
Sorry I twanged your ego. Your post read like something my 70yo mother would have said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,610
4,154
136
I hate to burst your bubble, everyone. But there is no way the baby boomers will be made to feel any of the pain they have inflicted on future generations. Even before Trump there have been efforts to cut these programs and every time you've got somebody like Paul Ryan signaling to the baby boomers that it's not them that will be screwed, just their decedents. You can expect the same from Trump.
 
Last edited:

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,649
13,732
136
I hate to burst your bubble, everyone. But there is no way the baby boomers will be made to feel any of the pain they have inflicted on future generations. Even before Trump there have been efforts to cut these programs and every time you've got somebody like Paul Ryan signaling to the baby boomers that it's not them that will be screwed, just their decedents. You can expect the same from Trump.
Gawd. Trickle down inequality has taken its toll on Boomers, as well. Those of us who have much at all were mostly more lucky than good. Why the fuck any middle class American wants to cut their own benefits down the road is beyond my comprehension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

RamIt

Senior member
Nov 12, 2001
777
186
116
I would gladly cut my benefits to get our debt under control. The government credit ponzi scheme is gonna kill the younger generation.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
61,649
13,732
136
I would gladly cut my benefits to get our debt under control. The government credit ponzi scheme is gonna kill the younger generation.
The people wanting to cut benefits have no intention of controlling the debt but rather of maintaining shamelessly low taxes for the Rich. Buying the GOP has been an excellent investment for right wing mega billionaires.
 

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,388
3,035
126
The people wanting to cut benefits have no intention of controlling the debt but rather of maintaining shamelessly low taxes for the Rich. Buying the GOP has been an excellent investment for right wing mega billionaires.
You just said a mouthful!!
 

RamIt

Senior member
Nov 12, 2001
777
186
116
The people wanting to cut benefits have no intention of controlling the debt but rather of maintaining shamelessly low taxes for the Rich. Buying the GOP has been an excellent investment for right wing mega billionaires.
Cut benefits, raise taxes or whatever to get the deficit down.
 

BUTCH1

Lifer
Jul 15, 2000
19,642
1,257
126
Okay, we've trimmed SS but not at a rate to keep up with the tax cuts handed out to the wealthy. Maybe we should stop handing out debt-supported tax cuts to the wealthy and we wouldn't need to make more cuts to SS.
Yup, T H I S.. Last year Fed-Ex paid ZERO, I repeat, ZERO in federal taxes, a saving of $2.4 billion. Like most Co's they spent the majority on stock buy-backs making the fat cat's owning tons of stock much richer by the stock value going way up. Sure, entitlement programs have issues, but come on, shaving dollars off those who often get by with little is a slap in the face. I qualified for SS last year but did not file, I want to wait as long as possible to up my monthly benefit, I might have to re-think that now.
 

BUTCH1

Lifer
Jul 15, 2000
19,642
1,257
126
oh come on. You know they will make it so it happens after the last boomer has taken more then thier share.
Really?, my "share" at this point, (If I file for SS tomorrow), at age 62 is $1,385/month. Such opulence!, I might have a problem spending all that treasure-trove!.
 

BUTCH1

Lifer
Jul 15, 2000
19,642
1,257
126
I would gladly cut my benefits to get our debt under control. The government credit ponzi scheme is gonna kill the younger generation.
I hear what you're saying but the recent tax cuts are the problem IMHO, billions and billions not collected and stock buy-back's galore, how the hell would any POTUS and his GOP cronies rack up a $1.3 trillion deficit with a 3.8% unemployment rate is astounding. Some generation is going to have to pay that back, do these people not have kids and grand-kids? I'm eligible for $1,380/mth if I file tomorrow, is that amount breaking the government's back?.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,402
3,941
126
Really?, my "share" at this point, (If I file for SS tomorrow), at age 62 is $1,385/month. Such opulence!, I might have a problem spending all that treasure-trove!.
the boomers are pushing to make it so others get even less.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
23,393
2,662
136
Really?, my "share" at this point, (If I file for SS tomorrow), at age 62 is $1,385/month. Such opulence!, I might have a problem spending all that treasure-trove!.
In his defense, your generation continues to enact policy that means his "share" may very well be 0.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

ASK THE COMMUNITY