Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You do represent your generation accurately. The graph proves that.

---

Of course. Libs spend like drunken sailors and then want to rob folks of what they have.

Instead of fixing our spending problem, libs want to take a product folks have already paid for.

Conservatives don't act like that. Libs do.

---

You probably think your generation voted for "conservatives". - in reality, you voted for the ones who spent all the money and turned the entire program into an entitlement Ponzi scheme that perpetually rolls its liability onto other people. You are quite literally using government taxation to take resources from other people.

By your own definition, you and your generation are the quintessential "lib" generation.

---

Nope. Stealing something already paid for to pay overspending is the lazy lib way. Stealing SS that folks paid for in order to fund welfare, Medicaid, and all the other BS we overspend on is exactly what is happening.

Folks paid nothing for their freebies. We paid 40 years for SS. So naturally libs want to steal that.

---

Can I stop paying my property taxes which are primarily used to fund public schools? I have no children in public schools anymore. I feel like the government is using taxation to take resources from me.

Rubicante said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You do represent your generation accurately. The graph proves that.

---

Of course. Libs spend like drunken sailors and then want to rob folks of what they have.

Instead of fixing our spending problem, libs want to take a product folks have already paid for.

Conservatives don't act like that. Libs do.

---

You probably think your generation voted for "conservatives". - in reality, you voted for the ones who spent all the money and turned the entire program into an entitlement Ponzi scheme that perpetually rolls its liability onto other people. You are quite literally using government taxation to take resources from other people.

By your own definition, you and your generation are the quintessential "lib" generation.

---

Nope. Stealing something already paid for to pay overspending is the lazy lib way. Stealing SS that folks paid for in order to fund welfare, Medicaid, and all the other BS we overspend on is exactly what is happening.

Folks paid nothing for their freebies. We paid 40 years for SS. So naturally libs want to steal that.

---

Framing someone wanting the money in their paycheck to go to themselves as "stealing" is actually a pretty socialist position, comrade.

---

Ok. I get the lib position. Sure, folks paid for SS. But they really shouldn't need it so let's just take it away. Been their policy forever.

Stymied said:

---

I'm fine for quitting the generational bashing. However, the "bridge" you talk of, and the one I mention above, will have no impact on anyone over 55. Because of that, it's really hard to take any of the feedback from anyone over 60 seriously as you have no skin in the game. You are going to get your benefits one way or another and nobody seriously says otherwise.

---

The issue you and others keep raising is that you're fundamentally concerned about getting your benefit after paying in for many years. That's a very fair and rational concern, and I support constructive solutions to address it. Solving it by "cutting boomers off at the knees" (not your words) isn't constructive. We've got to find a way to solve that without the result of screwing others. If all we try to do is pass around the disease to somebody else, that's a losing game. There was another poster a page or so back that quoted a Claude AI suggestion that could at least be a starting point for trying to find a solution.

Next thing these libs are goin mg after is paying bond interest. I mean, sure folks bought these bonds, but they really shouldn't have counted in thst interest and why should my paycheck go to benefit someone else?

According to these folks, paying bond interest to someone that bought the bond is socialism.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Stymied said:

---

I'm fine for quitting the generational bashing. However, the "bridge" you talk of, and the one I mention above, will have no impact on anyone over 55. Because of that, it's really hard to take any of the feedback from anyone over 60 seriously as you have no skin in the game. You are going to get your benefits one way or another and nobody seriously says otherwise.

---

The issue you and others keep raising is that you're fundamentally concerned about getting your benefit after paying in for many years. That's a very fair and rational concern, and I support constructive solutions to address it. Solving it by "cutting boomers off at the knees" (not your words) isn't constructive. We've got to find a way to solve that without the result of screwing others. If all we try to do is pass around the disease to somebody else, that's a losing game. There was another poster a page or so back that quoted a Claude AI suggestion that could at least be a starting point for trying to find a solution.

---

My quotes from this very thread:

Quote:

---

I'm 45 and know that I won't see a penny of SS. I will also likely see my SS taxes grow 2x to 3x per year as they remove the caps to keep the merry-go-round moving. While I would see a fully maxed out benefit with current rules, I expect to be fully means tested out.

---

Quote:

---

BTW... I don't expect SS to ever go away. The practical thing would be to adjust COLAs, retirement ages for younger people, and probably means testing.

That would also mean that I would never see a dime. SS is just another tax down the hole as far as I'm concerned and it has been for a very long time.

---

I'm fine with no SS. I'm resigned to the fact that I'll never see it. Is it unfair? Sure. It's one of the pleasures of being successful. The government steals more from you to fund the circus. Sucks but it's the way it works!

The major annoyance in this thread (and many in the past) has been that if anyone mentions that anyone near retirement sees any pain, the AARP police comes out and acts like we are going to push grandma over a cliff or leave her destitute on the side of the road. While the practical solution will be to adjust benefits for those under 45 while increasing their taxes, "boomers" get no fans from current tax payers when they have violent reactions to nearly any adjustment.

As an aside, anyone 18 and older can actually join AARP and get access to the majority of their benefits outside of specific insurance/medicare supplements.

Ask your doctor if identifying as old is right for you!

Stymied said:

---

The major annoyance in this thread (and many in the past) has been that if anyone mentions that anyone near retirement sees any pain, the AARP police comes out and acts like we are going to push grandma over a cliff or leave her destitute on the side of the road. While the practical solution will be to adjust benefits for those under 45 while increasing their taxes, "boomers" get no fans from current tax payers when they have violent reactions to nearly any adjustment.

---

The annoyances run both ways, trust me. I'll soon be 62 and when somebody says I didn't pay anything into SS, that is utter and complete BS. I've got the receipts for SS taxes from when I was 15, or 47 years of paying into the system.

I also understand folks at your stage in life who've paid in for many years and are kind of "halfway" there. You've also paid. And you also deserve to be treated fairly.

Those just starting out in their 20's also deserve to be treated fairly.

We need to find a solution that treats everybody fairly. Again I'll go back to the Claude AI suggestion from earlier. It sounded like a reasonable starting point. Gradually wind down SS for older people, gradually ramp up private accounts for younger folks, and some kind of hybrid for those in the middle. You could design a solution that all generations could support.

But the roadblock is going to be political will... can we take that solution to our elected representatives and demand that they implement it?

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.

Rocky Rider said:

---

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.
Have you considered opting out of SS?

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The annoyances run both ways, trust me. I'll soon be 62 and when somebody says I didn't pay anything into SS, that is utter and complete BS. I've got the receipts for SS taxes from when I was 15, or 47 years of paying into the system.

I also understand folks at your stage in life who've paid in for many years and are kind of "halfway" there. You've also paid. And you also deserve to be treated fairly.

Those just starting out in their 20's also deserve to be treated fairly.

We need to find a solution that treats everybody fairly. Again I'll go back to the Claude AI suggestion from earlier. It sounded like a reasonable starting point. Gradually wind down SS for older people, gradually ramp up private accounts for younger folks, and some kind of hybrid for those in the middle. You could design a solution that all generations could support.

But the roadblock is going to be political will... can we take that solution to our elected representatives and demand that they implement it?

---

I'm all for finding a practical solution. However, math is math. The only way out of this is for someone to be treated less fair.

For any solution, even your claude one, the younger generations are going to have to have their ratios of "pay in" versus "pay out" adjusted. That will be:
- COLA adjustments
- Means testing
- Removing caps on SS wages without any increase in benefits
- Prolonged inflation to pay down our growing debt

Your benefits won't get touched. However, I can tell you those 20, 40, or 60 years younger than you won't be treated as fairly. It's just the way it's going to be.

You paid into the system. You will get what you are currently forecasted to get. I don't see that changing in the current political environment. However, it's disingenuous to believe that those behind you are going to be treated the same way. And if that makes you feel bad or angry for having that pointed out, sorry... it's just the way it is.

Pacifico said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.

---

---

Have you considered opting out of SS?

Pacifico said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.
Have you considered opting out of SS?

---

---

Have you considered donating extra cash to the treasury when you file your taxes. You can.

Stymied said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The annoyances run both ways, trust me. I'll soon be 62 and when somebody says I didn't pay anything into SS, that is utter and complete BS. I've got the receipts for SS taxes from when I was 15, or 47 years of paying into the system.

I also understand folks at your stage in life who've paid in for many years and are kind of "halfway" there. You've also paid. And you also deserve to be treated fairly.

Those just starting out in their 20's also deserve to be treated fairly.

We need to find a solution that treats everybody fairly. Again I'll go back to the Claude AI suggestion from earlier. It sounded like a reasonable starting point. Gradually wind down SS for older people, gradually ramp up private accounts for younger folks, and some kind of hybrid for those in the middle. You could design a solution that all generations could support.

But the roadblock is going to be political will... can we take that solution to our elected representatives and demand that they implement it?

---

The only way out of this is for someone to be treated less fair.

---

I don't accept that as a predestined outcome. We can do better and should insist on a solution that all generations can support. That's really the acid test... ensuring that all generations support the solution. We should keep that as our focus instead of pointing fingers or assuming that somebody has to get screwed.

Rocky Rider said:

---

Pacifico said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.
Have you considered opting out of SS?

---

---

Have you considered donating extra cash to the treasury when you file your taxes. You can.

---

I guess it is important to you just like the 88% of retirees you referenced above.

It's interesting that seniors were not asked if the government should cut spending. Just asked about raising taxes.

Pacifico said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

Pacifico said:

---

Rocky Rider said:

---

I'm 64 and drawing SS. I'm fine with reducing SS benefits to live within the budget even though I and my employers contributed a lot of money to the fund.

The problem is 88% of retirees don't have $1M in the bank. A lot of people livin' large buying things they don't need, with money they don't have, to impress people they don't like. Frankly their family should take care of them financially instead of young folks that never met them.
Have you considered opting out of SS?

---

---

Have you considered donating extra cash to the treasury when you file your taxes. You can.

---

I guess it is important to you just like the 88% of retirees you referenced above.

---

I'm not into virtue signaling. That might be foreign to you. My SS is a meaningless drop in the bucket.

Your question is a waste of time and an emo argument. But I'm chilling out watching the CWS so I indulged you.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Stymied said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

The annoyances run both ways, trust me. I'll soon be 62 and when somebody says I didn't pay anything into SS, that is utter and complete BS. I've got the receipts for SS taxes from when I was 15, or 47 years of paying into the system.

I also understand folks at your stage in life who've paid in for many years and are kind of "halfway" there. You've also paid. And you also deserve to be treated fairly.

Those just starting out in their 20's also deserve to be treated fairly.

We need to find a solution that treats everybody fairly. Again I'll go back to the Claude AI suggestion from earlier. It sounded like a reasonable starting point. Gradually wind down SS for older people, gradually ramp up private accounts for younger folks, and some kind of hybrid for those in the middle. You could design a solution that all generations could support.

But the roadblock is going to be political will... can we take that solution to our elected representatives and demand that they implement it?

---

The only way out of this is for someone to be treated less fair.

---

I don't accept that as a predestined outcome. We can do better and should insist on a solution that all generations can support. That's really the acid test... ensuring that all generations support the solution. We should keep that as our focus instead of pointing fingers or assuming that somebody has to get screwed.

---

I appreciate your noble intentions, but I don't think there is a chance that will happen.

• The system is going bankrupt at current levels

• The ratio of SS tax payers to beneficiaries is only going to get worse

• The current political environment and political engagement skews heavily older in demographics
• Younger generations are leaning more socialist
• The "grandma going hungry" narrative will play very well in the news and social media

The solution will be borne by the younger generations and higher wage earners, whether they ask for it or not.

Nobody 60+ should be personally shameful or bashful about receiving the benefits they paid for. However, it's not likely to get a lot of pats on the back from the people that are going to have to pay for it. And they shouldn't be surprised if those younger generations get cranky about it from time to time!

You can keep accusing people of being a "Lib" for not supporting your textbook liberal policies all day and won't be any more accurate.

To stick with your car analogy - you believed you were paying for a car. But at the same time, you also spent that money on vacations and other items. Now you want to force someone else to buy you a car because you believed you were paying for a car but you weren't.

You are literally the "lib" of your own nightmares.

I fully support the older generation being part of the solution, in partnership with other generations.

I'm admittedly an optimist, but there is a math-based solution here. Others have suggested it in the past. The basic recipe is a wind-down of government SS for older people and a ramp-up of private, market-based solutions for young people with some kind of a hybrid that's equitable for those in the middle.

The key is that solution won't come from within the government or our elected representatives. They are too protective of current-state and their political priorities. It needs to come together outside Congress and then be forced upon them by a broad coalition of voters demanding change. Count me in.

The politicians will eventually fund the SS deficit; but time will tell. The reason is the olds vote, and vote the issue, and young folks don't. All politicians care about is getting elected to enrich themselves, not the health of the economy.

Means testing will continue to be modified though because we can't have people that saved for their retirement rewarded in favor of those that blew their opportunities to save

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You can keep accusing people of being a "Lib" for not supporting your textbook liberal policies all day and won't be any more accurate.

To stick with your car analogy - you believed you were paying for a car. But at the same time, you also spent that money on vacations and other items. Now you want to force someone else to buy you a car because you believed you were paying for a car but you weren't.

You are literally the "lib" of your own nightmares.

---

No. You buy your own car. I've already bought and paid for mine.

You want to not put into SS fine. But that doesn't forgive the government its obligation to provide what I paid for. I have no issue with doing away with SS. Just refund the money I paid with interest. Or keep paying the obligation.

Taxes don't. Red to be raised. Fraud and waste needs to be cut. But the lib way is to just take what folks have paid for under the guise that "oh, you shouldn't need it anyway.

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You can keep accusing people of being a "Lib" for not supporting your textbook liberal policies all day and won't be any more accurate.

To stick with your car analogy - you believed you were paying for a car. But at the same time, you also spent that money on vacations and other items. Now you want to force someone else to buy you a car because you believed you were paying for a car but you weren't.

You are literally the "lib" of your own nightmares.

---

No. You buy your own car. I've already bought and paid for mine.

You want to not put into SS fine. But that doesn't forgive the government its obligation to provide what I paid for. I have no issue with doing away with SS. Just refund the money I paid with interest. Or keep paying the obligation.

Taxes don't. Red to be raised. Fraud and waste needs to be cut. But the lib way is to just take what folks have paid for under the guise that "oh, you shouldn't need it anyway.

---

You didn't buy a car. You paid for someone else's car with the expectation that I'd help pay for yours.

That's how Social Security works.

The problem is that when the math stops mathing, "I paid for it" becomes "make the next generation cover the difference." aka socialism in action.

But yes, PLEASE give me the option to opt out. Me and my generation paying into SS is the only thing keeping those retirement checks rolling

CheeseSndwch said:

---

How about instead of raising taxes we just reduce spending/government waste?

---

Cut the fraud at the state level.

ErnestEndeavor said:

---

All other things equal, eliminating the SS salary cap would generate an additional $243 billion per year.

---

How about starting with eliminating the billions in fraud. It seems every state has that with illegals and Visa abuse.

Pacifico said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You do represent your generation accurately. The graph proves that.

---

Of course. Libs spend like drunken sailors and then want to rob folks of what they have.

Instead of fixing our spending problem, libs want to take a product folks have already paid for.

Conservatives don't act like that. Libs do.

---

You probably think your generation voted for "conservatives". - in reality, you voted for the ones who spent all the money and turned the entire program into an entitlement Ponzi scheme that perpetually rolls its liability onto other people. You are quite literally using government taxation to take resources from other people.

By your own definition, you and your generation are the quintessential "lib" generation.

---

Nope. Stealing something already paid for to pay overspending is the lazy lib way. Stealing SS that folks paid for in order to fund welfare, Medicaid, and all the other BS we overspend on is exactly what is happening.

Folks paid nothing for their freebies. We paid 40 years for SS. So naturally libs want to steal that.

---

Can I stop paying my property taxes which are primarily used to fund public schools? I have no children in public schools anymore. I feel like the government is using taxation to take resources from me.

---

How about those of us that never had kids?

Cromagnum said:

---

Pacifico said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

You do represent your generation accurately. The graph proves that.

---

Of course. Libs spend like drunken sailors and then want to rob folks of what they have.

Instead of fixing our spending problem, libs want to take a product folks have already paid for.

Conservatives don't act like that. Libs do.

---

You probably think your generation voted for "conservatives". - in reality, you voted for the ones who spent all the money and turned the entire program into an entitlement Ponzi scheme that perpetually rolls its liability onto other people. You are quite literally using government taxation to take resources from other people.

By your own definition, you and your generation are the quintessential "lib" generation.

---

Nope. Stealing something already paid for to pay overspending is the lazy lib way. Stealing SS that folks paid for in order to fund welfare, Medicaid, and all the other BS we overspend on is exactly what is happening.

Folks paid nothing for their freebies. We paid 40 years for SS. So naturally libs want to steal that.

---

Can I stop paying my property taxes which are primarily used to fund public schools? I have no children in public schools anymore. I feel like the government is using taxation to take resources from me.

---

How about those of us that never had kids?

---

Consider it a civilization tax for refusing your duty to the species.

Eliminating the max cutoff will keep SS solvent until around 2051 and combining this with increasing the tax rate by 0.6% (to 13%) would keep it solvent until the 2070s.

Crfb.org has a SS reformer tool to play around with different scenarios.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

SS needs to be phased out not propped up.

---

Quote:

---

I'm not promoting cutting off those that are receiving benefits or even cutting/eliminating benefits for those nearing retirement. But somewhere, probably for current workers in or around their early 40s there needs to be a staged elimination and quit withholding from their paychecks.

---

That is what Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill and Federal Reserve Chair Alan Greenspan thought, too. It could have been done back in 2002.

A big no on this but also while we are eliminating SS can we welfare and Medicaid. Let's not focus on one handout while people demand free healthcare, housing, baby formula, etc.

This is Boomers in a nutshell.

But do you say the same about the bottom 50% when they demand the rich to pay more so they can continue to mooch and not pay income tax? Do you say the same about the poor who continue to take from the government.

I get it's fun to pick on the olds but why not the same hatred for the poor or the bottom 50% who aren't ponying up or the lolfat tubs of goo who just take. What about the college loan idiots demanding they get their degree paid off? Shouldn't we dislike all of them instead of cherry picking?

Why are we blaming the boomers...lol, they didnt create social security. Democrats in the Lost generation and the GI generation with a marxist president did.

I hate being called a boomer. I have very little in common (generationally) with someone nearly 20 years older than me.

But that aside, plenty of us "Boomers" would have happily opted out of the Social Security system when we were young. We would have given up all claims of future government payments in exchange for not paying into the system throughout our lives. But you know what? We didn't have that choice.

So I find it the highest insult to insinuate that we are (now) somehow Greedy for expecting the social security compact to continue. I am well aware that I probably won't receive what the formula currently says I will receive. They will either cap benefits or means test me out of it. I have expected that to happen for years and I accept it as a fact of life. The government continually takes more and more from those that are successful and responsible.

But DON'T call me greedy.

Buncha dumb in this thread

No one has paid into crap

There wasn't a "fund" until recently

It was a treasury account that has been raided for decades by all politicians

The only concern was having available cash to pay current beneficiaries, everything else was spent

No one saved it for you

It wasnt invested

The money is gone

all of these decisions and choices were made before I was born

The previous generations voted for those decisions