Tom Fox said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Dude. You paid in yearly on average slightly less than me currently. You made that much for over 3 decades. That means you are an ultra high net worth individual if you even just saved on average about 20% of that annually.

You are going to cry over your entitlement of social security? If this is true, the only way to combat this is to disenfranchise those taking a government check from SS/Medicare or any of the other needs based entitlements. Take them out of the voting pool.

Apparently not even a multi millionaire can be convinced to give up $3.5k monthly check.

At this point it is laughable.

---

That is not the point. He played by the rules exactly as they were prescribed.

If you want to change the rules going forward, fine. Then round up the votes to change the rules and we'll all have to live with it.

But to change the rules after the game has been played is BS. So is trying to guilt-trip people into forfeiting the SS check they are due to receive. Total BS.

The attempt to shame people in line to collect their SS check will fail.

---

I'm 34 years into paying in myself and obviously pay the max on both sides since I am self employed. We can no longer afford to give away money. We are bankrupt.

Time to return to just paying for the original constitutional functions of the federal government and eliminated the FDR and LBJ welfare state.

---

Then change the rules going forward. They can be whatever you convince a majority of elected representatives that they should be. But stop trying to shame those who played by the rules after the game has been played. It will just alienate your efforts to reform the system going forward.

---

The absurdity of his post just demonstrates that there will never be reform without suffrage limitation. Collapse is the only thing that will end this idiocy.

I hope he enjoys a few new Richard Milles and maybe a John Mayer Daytona courtesy of SS while the country enters a death spiral economically.

---

And that's not happening either. It is delusional to think you're going to exclude people who've paid into SS from voting just because you don't agree with their take on it. I saw other posts from youngsters suggesting that people receiving SS benefits shouldn't have a voice in the process. Seriously? That is laughably, ridiculously, delusional... and that's putting it politely.

I'll agree the funding/benefits model needs to be adjusted. But I will fight tooth-and-nail to retain the benefits that I've been promised for 45 years of paying into it. I've never voted Democrat in my life and I despise those rascals, but I will absolutely flip on a dime and vote for a Dem if the Republicans try to renege on the deal with me. I come from a world where a deal is a deal, and your word is your bond.

You don't change the rules after the game has been played. Period. Put your effort instead into reforming it going forward.

---

You absolutely do when it will bankrupt you. You file bankruptcy and stiff your creditors. We should absolutely stiff our citizens and that includes me. And you've only paid in 11 more years than me.

And any entitlement should exempt you from voting. It is lunacy that you can vote yourself largesse from the treasury.

---

It won't bankrupt me. My check is coming in the mail. It might bankrupt those younger than you, so you better get to work figuring out how to reform the system going forward. But I guarantee that you won't have any luck dialing back SS benefits from old blue hairs. If you want to see Congress mobilized, just wait until the grandmas and grandpas come rolling into DC with their wheelchairs and walkers demanding fair treatment.

And largesse that I voted for? Laughable. I've funded entitlements for others, and I'm just as pissed as you at the amount of taxes I've paid into the federal treasury. But I'll be damned if I let them renege on the little bit coming back to me. Not happening. It's a matter of principle that I won't relent no matter what.

Boomer here.

I'd have no problem giving up my Social Security. In return, allow my heirs to inherit my IRA without the ten year provision implemented by Trump during his first term.

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Dude. You paid in yearly on average slightly less than me currently. You made that much for over 3 decades. That means you are an ultra high net worth individual if you even just saved on average about 20% of that annually.

You are going to cry over your entitlement of social security? If this is true, the only way to combat this is to disenfranchise those taking a government check from SS/Medicare or any of the other needs based entitlements. Take them out of the voting pool.

Apparently not even a multi millionaire can be convinced to give up $3.5k monthly check.

At this point it is laughable.

---

Whatever, dude. I paid in. Give it back to me. Until our government stops giving tax money to every single country on earth, I want my money back. When they do that, come talk to me.
But tell you what, you don't have to cash your SS check. Feel free to put your money where your mouth is.

slaughtr said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Dude. You paid in yearly on average slightly less than me currently. You made that much for over 3 decades. That means you are an ultra high net worth individual if you even just saved on average about 20% of that annually.

You are going to cry over your entitlement of social security? If this is true, the only way to combat this is to disenfranchise those taking a government check from SS/Medicare or any of the other needs based entitlements. Take them out of the voting pool.

Apparently not even a multi millionaire can be convinced to give up $3.5k monthly check.

At this point it is laughable.

---

Whatever, dude. I paid in. Give it back to me. Until our government stops giving tax money to every single country on earth, I want my money back. When they do that, come talk to me.
But tell you what, you don't have to cash your SS check. Feel free to put your money where your mouth is.

---

And that will do **** all. It needs to end for everyone. Hopefully, they just means test you out and make it a straight up entitlement.

Most boomers have zero savings as they spent everything on their children. Little generations x had to have their daily Happy meals, best clothes, nice cars, and college educations. Embarrassing if mommy and daddy lives in average home. Rack of debt on those CC!

Take away their SS, dumbasses should have gone childless as abortions were made legal in 1973. Beats looking at the grandson who thinks he is a granddaughter.

" boomers feel that they have contributed to a system - paid into it - and are therefore morally entitled to receive what they feel they are owed."

NO, as we did not CHOOSE to pay into a system and do not feel MORALLY entitled, we are LEGALLY entitled to the $$ the government took out of our paychecks / pockets. This is not like choosing to make an investment.

Make no mistake SS should be ended tomorrow. It is not the job of government to take care of people or make sure they retirement $$.

What needs to happen is SS needs to end on 12/31, no more, those that paid in do need to get their $$ paid back but the entire thing needs to be shut down.

I don't know why a politician with stones has never pitched this. I understand the political reason to not tackle Medicaid and Medicare which should also be shut down. But for SS it's easy, everyone that has paid in will get their benefits paid as prescribed, but the program is going to end, paychecks will go up, and individuals have more liberty and freedom to plan for their retirement themselves. You just can't shutter the program and not pay out what is owed, that will never work.

B-1 83 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

B-1 83 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Change Detection said:

---

The system should stop now. Pay the $44K out to all retirees, and nobody pays income tax until all they put in is made zero in the ledger.

---

Dont hate that idea.

---

Note this also categorically will not make current retirees whole; they're largely zero income tax payers.

---

Say what????.

---

The median retiree pays zero income tax each year. So in this proposal, they get a one time check of $44k and that's it.

---

Don't trip and fall backing up. "Largely"? I guarantee there are a ****load of retirees paying a ****load of taxes.

---

it's somewhere around 75%? What do you want from me?

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Dude. You paid in yearly on average slightly less than me currently. You made that much for over 3 decades. That means you are an ultra high net worth individual if you even just saved on average about 20% of that annually.

You are going to cry over your entitlement of social security? If this is true, the only way to combat this is to disenfranchise those taking a government check from SS/Medicare or any of the other needs based entitlements. Take them out of the voting pool.

Apparently not even a multi millionaire can be convinced to give up $3.5k monthly check.

At this point it is laughable.

---

Tom Fox said:

---

You absolutely do when it will bankrupt you. You file bankruptcy and stiff your creditors. We should absolutely stiff our citizens and that includes me. And you've only paid in 11 more years than me.

And any entitlement should exempt you from voting. It is lunacy that you can vote yourself largesse from the treasury.

---

The fact that people use the term "entitlement" for both welfare / SNAP and social security makes me shake my head in disbelief.

People and employers have paid into social security. Where did the welfare and SNAP recipients pay into?

Zobel said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Stealing from one is equally as bad as stealing from another. Worse? Neither is worse. They're the same.

---

The youth are on average poorer in both wealth and assets. Continuation of the system basically coerces them into transferring resources upward to a generation that has already accumulated homes, savings, and lifetime earnings, while knowingly paying into a system that is actively being bankrupted. This is effectively taxing the vulnerable to enrich the established, it's regressive. It inverts the natural order of societal support from strong to weak and undermines the common good framework of the social contract by robbing future growth, nevermind the intergenerational resentment. No one would do this to their own kids - it only passes by because of the anonymity of the government middleman.

This same mechanism is why welfare robs individuals from the virtue of charity.

---

THIS RIGHT HERE.

If conservative boomers had any integrity they would recognize this simple FACT. I'm 49 and I'm not planning for SS at all. At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

People need to wake TF up.

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Speak


You liberals TAKE THE CAKE.

We can cut spending in so many different areas and not blink an eyelash

Bring back DOGE.

Bird Poo said:

---

At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

---

I didn't buy my first home until 32. Oldest son got into his at 30. Middle and youngest sons will be 35 to 36 when they buy theirs. They're doing fine. What's your point?

HunterAggie said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

You absolutely do when it will bankrupt you. You file bankruptcy and stiff your creditors. We should absolutely stiff our citizens and that includes me. And you've only paid in 11 more years than me.

And any entitlement should exempt you from voting. It is lunacy that you can vote yourself largesse from the treasury.

---

The fact that people use the term "entitlement" for both welfare / SNAP and social security makes me shake my head in disbelief.

People and employers have paid into social security. Where did the welfare and SNAP recipients pay into?

---

It is absolutely an entitlement. There is a formula that pays out like 8 times more for the first dollars paid in FICA than the last dollars. So low income payers receive far more in benefits dollar per dollar than those that pay up to the cap.

That IS an entitlement.

Bird Poo said:

---

Zobel said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Stealing from one is equally as bad as stealing from another. Worse? Neither is worse. They're the same.

---

The youth are on average poorer in both wealth and assets. Continuation of the system basically coerces them into transferring resources upward to a generation that has already accumulated homes, savings, and lifetime earnings, while knowingly paying into a system that is actively being bankrupted. This is effectively taxing the vulnerable to enrich the established, it's regressive. It inverts the natural order of societal support from strong to weak and undermines the common good framework of the social contract by robbing future growth, nevermind the intergenerational resentment. No one would do this to their own kids - it only passes by because of the anonymity of the government middleman.

This same mechanism is why welfare robs individuals from the virtue of charity.

---

THIS RIGHT HERE.

If conservative boomers had any integrity they would recognize this simple FACT. I'm 49 and I'm not planning for SS at all. At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

People need to wake TF up.

---

Dude stop paying into SS, stop being a hypocrite and man up. Lead the way for those poor apartment dwellers.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Bird Poo said:

---

At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

---

I didn't buy my first home until 32. Oldest son got into his at 30. Middle and youngest sons will be 35 to 36 when they buy theirs. They're doing fine. What's your point?

---

I bought mine at 24. If a married couple wants to start a family and own a home, then they have to conform to your timeline to support boomers? That pretty selfish.

Zobel said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

The answer is for the government to quit spending money. Period. Full Stop. There is no other solution and any suggestion otherwise is flat out saying that you agree that it is perfectly acceptable to steal MY money from me or that you think it is perfectly acceptable to change the rules of an agreemen unilaterally just before the other party is to receive whatever fruits of said agreement are. And if you think either one of those is OK, you are a gigantic POS that has no business being in any position to make any decision, ever and honestly deserve to be put in a position where you get your ass kicked (in reality - physically get beat) every single day of your life until you die.

---

The problem is the only way to "quit spending money" as you say is the one you're not allowing. Entitlement spending is 65% of federal expenditures and 85% of revenues.

We have a huge deficit and someone is going to pay it. You're just saying YOURE not going to pay it, your kids are. The money is already "stolen" as you put it. You're just saying to keep digging and leave the next guy holding the bag. Someone has to put an end to the Ponzi scheme.

---

Not sure your generation, but since you're the "fix it and f over boomers guy" I say your generation should be the first to forego the SS and Medicare benefit for which you paid into.

Bird Poo said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Bird Poo said:

---

At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

---

I didn't buy my first home until 32. Oldest son got into his at 30. Middle and youngest sons will be 35 to 36 when they buy theirs. They're doing fine. What's your point?

---

I bought mine at 24. If a married couple wants to start a family and own a home, then they have to conform to your timeline to support boomers? That pretty selfish.

---

I bought mine at 24 too. I am 51 now, so we are essentially the same age.

5Amp said:

---

Bird Poo said:

---

Zobel said:

---

AgGrad99 said:

---

Stealing from one is equally as bad as stealing from another. Worse? Neither is worse. They're the same.

---

The youth are on average poorer in both wealth and assets. Continuation of the system basically coerces them into transferring resources upward to a generation that has already accumulated homes, savings, and lifetime earnings, while knowingly paying into a system that is actively being bankrupted. This is effectively taxing the vulnerable to enrich the established, it's regressive. It inverts the natural order of societal support from strong to weak and undermines the common good framework of the social contract by robbing future growth, nevermind the intergenerational resentment. No one would do this to their own kids - it only passes by because of the anonymity of the government middleman.

This same mechanism is why welfare robs individuals from the virtue of charity.

---

THIS RIGHT HERE.

If conservative boomers had any integrity they would recognize this simple FACT. I'm 49 and I'm not planning for SS at all. At the same time, I see my young adult kids do everything right and bust their asses only to look forward to living in an apartment complex. They may afford to own a home when they turn 35.

People need to wake TF up.

---

Dude stop paying into SS, stop being a hypocrite and man up. Lead the way for those poor apartment dwellers.

---

My point is that the OP is shining a light on a very real problem, and you have a bunch of olds saying "I'm gonna get mine".

There are reasonable avenues of reform, but if people don't recognize this problem while demanding theirs, then more power to you, comrad.

Texas12&0 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

schmellba99 said:

---

The answer is for the government to quit spending money. Period. Full Stop. There is no other solution and any suggestion otherwise is flat out saying that you agree that it is perfectly acceptable to steal MY money from me or that you think it is perfectly acceptable to change the rules of an agreemen unilaterally just before the other party is to receive whatever fruits of said agreement are. And if you think either one of those is OK, you are a gigantic POS that has no business being in any position to make any decision, ever and honestly deserve to be put in a position where you get your ass kicked (in reality - physically get beat) every single day of your life until you die.

---

The problem is the only way to "quit spending money" as you say is the one you're not allowing. Entitlement spending is 65% of federal expenditures and 85% of revenues.

We have a huge deficit and someone is going to pay it. You're just saying YOURE not going to pay it, your kids are. The money is already "stolen" as you put it. You're just saying to keep digging and leave the next guy holding the bag. Someone has to put an end to the Ponzi scheme.

---

Not sure your generation, but since you're the "fix it and f over boomers guy" I say your generation should be the first to forego the SS and Medicare benefit for which you paid into.

---

I'm cool with it being mine, Gen-X. But the longer we wait, the more drastic our deficit problem. By the time boomers finally leave the planet, we will probably be approaching 90 trillion. Think about that.

This argument here boils down to two POVs:

The people who are eager to virtue signal on the internet that they'll forego their Social Security, proving that they are better, more serious, more thoughtful people.

And those who have paid taxes out the wazoo for decades and are sick of everyone else getting a handout. And maybe, just maybe, they're relying on SS to help supplement their retirement. Despite what you read, not everyone on TexAgs is a billionaire.

Oh, you can take away the vote from old conservatives if you want. But get ready for President AOC and Senate Majority Leader Mamdani. You think things are bad now? Wait 'til those kommissars are in charge!

I've already said I'm game. Let's do it. The only problem is, it very well may be too little too late - and it won't be very long until I'm eligible.

EclipseAg said:

---

This argument here boils down to two POVs:

The people who are eager to virtue signal on the internet that they'll forego their Social Security, proving that they are better, more serious, more thoughtful people.

And those who have paid taxes out the wazoo for decades and are sick of everyone else getting a handout. And maybe, just maybe, they're relying on SS to help supplement their retirement. Despite what you read, not everyone on TexAgs is a billionaire.

Oh, you can take away the vote from old conservatives if you want. But get ready for President AOC and Senate Majority Leader Mamdani. You think things are bad now? Wait 'til those kommissars are in charge!

---

There's a 3rd - recognizing that we are majorly screwing our children towards a regressive dependent society and discussing ways to reform the system. Guess that's "virtue signaling".

This is such a neutral, unbiased framing of the issue.

Keller6Ag91 said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Speak


You liberals TAKE THE CAKE.

We can cut spending in so many different areas and not blink an eyelash

Bring back DOGE.

---

Hilarious that those suggesting we reduce entitlement spending, federal spending, wealth transfer, and deficit spending are accused of being liberals. I'm arguing for my own retirement security to be cut in order to prevent inflation and to enable tax reduction for my kids, and I'm entitled? Do you not hear yourself?

And we can't cut spending in any meaningful way without addressing this. Mandatory spending plus debt interest is more than tax revenue.

Anyone who was looking at this at a personal budget would start at the two biggest line items - and that is SS and Medicare. I've shared it already, but those two things plus debt service alone are 55% of federal revenues. The next biggest item is national defense at 14% of revenues. Yes, we spend 4:1 on retirement care vs military.

Non-Medicare health (CHIP, Medicaid) is 14% and unemployment, snap, etc are 8%. That's 87% of revenue right there.

All of the budget shutdown arguments, it's all theater - it's arguing over dribs and drabs while the whole thing goes by unnoticed.

Put another way - as a percent of GDP, SS is 4.6% and Medicare is 2.7%. Of every dollar of economic activity in this country 7.3% go to old people, many of whom admittedly don't need the money like the guy saying it's beer money. And you wonder why people say there's a problem here? We are literally bankrupting our nation for beer money.

I'll make a deal. Stop every penny of foreign aid. Abolish most of the worthless agencies. Fire 80% of the federal government workers. End ALL other forms of pure Federal welfare including Medicaid. Cut the defense budget by 20%. Close most of the bases overseas, etc

Do that first, then I'll agree to end SS right here and now for the sake of the children.

The median net wealth of those 60 and above is like $150k including their home equity.

Many would be at the soup kitchen if not for SS. Beer money my rear.

Logos Stick said:

---

I'll make a deal. Stop every penny of foreign aid. Abolish most of the worthless agencies. Fire 80% of the federal government workers. End ALL other forms of pure Federal welfare including Medicaid. Cut the defense budget by 20%. Close most of the bases overseas, etc

Do that first, then I'll agree to end SS right here and now for the sake of the children.

---

Ok. Foreign aid is less than 1% of the budget. Firing 80% of all the workers and abolishing most of the agencies would be a 80% cut to non-defense discretionary spending; 10%. All welfare is 22% of spending. So that brings you to a grand total of 33% cut to the federal budget. We still are running a deficit.

If we cut military spending (during a Cold War with China - smart) we end up budget neutral, maybe.

I think maybe yall just aren't aware of the spending?

Logos Stick said:

---

The median net wealth of those 60 and above is like $150k including their home equity.

Many would be at the soup kitchen if not for SS. Beer money my rear.

---

It's in this thread
https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3584920/replies/71521731

Two - great. Let's means test it. Those who are really poverty stricken should get it - that's the original intent.

That's not the point. You guys want to start with SS on your quest to save the nation.

Show us you are serious by getting rid of the undeniable worthless spending first. We don't have to eat the elephant all at once here. A 30% cut gets us just about back to even.

China is dying. Their population demo and outlook is seriously dire. We can cut 20% of defense without blinking.

Entitlement gets confused with the adjective being entitled.

It's a technical term about federal spending - mandatory federal outlays for programs where eligibility set by law automatically entitle people to benefits, and spending is driven by the number of eligible people and benefit formulas, instead of and without congressional appropriations. This means to change it, Congress has to pass a law. Not capped by the budget process.

As a result almost 90 percent of this increase in projected spending over the next decade comes from SS, Medicare, and interest.

Yes, you start with SS. When you are in a hole, the first place is to stop digging. It is by far the largest line item on the budget, and it's a stupid, horrible socialist welfare program that never should have existed.

Everyone by and large agrees with this.

The only reason people are opposed to doing anything about it is because it hits their pocket books. Well, that's the same reason democrats vote for welfare and handouts, too. You can say I paid in, and that's true, but it doesn't change the facts on the ground. Someone gets cut, now or later.

Putting it onto your children is wrong. Admitting that is the first step.

Hey youngsters, there is an easy answer, you need to vote in politicians who will cut/end entitlements.

Bet you won't be able to do it. And, welcome to the last 60 or so years.

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

You've earned $35M+ in your 32 years of working?

Baller Alert!

Can we come party at your place(s)?

Once the Democrats get back in power and implement means testing for receiving social security for "the rich", you've got no chance of getting a dime out of SS.

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

Tom Fox said:

---

slaughtr said:

---

For 32 years I've paid the maximum you can pay into SS. Every. Single. Year.
On top of that, I've paid roughly $7,000,000 in Federal taxes during that time. But sure, I'm the selfish one because I want my SS check when I retire. As promised.

I've heard how entitled youngsters are but this takes the cake.

---

Dude. You paid in yearly on average slightly less than me currently. You made that much for over 3 decades. That means you are an ultra high net worth individual if you even just saved on average about 20% of that annually.

You are going to cry over your entitlement of social security? If this is true, the only way to combat this is to disenfranchise those taking a government check from SS/Medicare or any of the other needs based entitlements. Take them out of the voting pool.

Apparently not even a multi millionaire can be convinced to give up $3.5k monthly check.

At this point it is laughable.

---

Whatever, dude. I paid in. Give it back to me. Until our government stops giving tax money to every single country on earth, I want my money back. When they do that, come talk to me.
But tell you what, you don't have to cash your SS check. Feel free to put your money where your mouth is.

---

And that will do **** all. It needs to end for everyone. Hopefully, they just means test you out and make it a straight up entitlement.

---

Got it. So you won't. You must hate America. Not only did I pay the max every year, but for 20 of those years I was self employed, so I had to pay both the employee and the employer portion. I'm taking every penny of my $5,000/month check when I start taking in a couple of years.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Agreed let's get rid of it. Also get rid of Medicaid too because people should be responsible for themselves.

Social security is and has always been an income redistribution scheme. We need to eliminate it completely. Im down for it. Are you?

---

They're never going away. To do so by either party is political suicide. Just have to try to reform as efficiently as possible.