Trump wants to defund Social Security ?

no obama stole taxpayer money to make up for the loss, and created further debt.

President Trump want's to privatize socialist programs so they remain ethical, solvent, and efficient.

 

I, sure @Patricio Da Silva supported defunding social security in 2009.

 

No. Congress passed a bipartisan bill that directed funds to certain areas that Obama signed. Nobody "stole" taxpayers money WRT this particular point.

And privatization does none of those things except to add a profit motive which only adds to the cost and ends up becoming the primary focus. Also Trump does nothing that costs him to benefit someone else.

 

socialist programs cover both Taxpayers and non-taxpayers, obama stole Taxpayer money to pay for deadbeats on the welfare rolls.

President Trump is under funding social security to make way for a more profitable safety net to Taxpayers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatization

 

Nobody had to, because of how it was structured.

It was a 2% cut, hardly enough to 'end Social Security' noting that Social Security was, in theory, not harmed because Congress replaced the funds with general revenue (the revenue the government collects from other taxes). One more thing, medicare was expanded.

Trump, on the other hand, wants to kill the ACA entirely, without a replacement.

 

See #30

 

Incompetent rebuttals are [highlighted pertains to your comment] non arguments, especially those which contain vacuous (unsubstantiated) declarations, rebuttals rife with weasel words ( improper use of generalities ) ad hominems, loaded phrases, egregious logical fallacies and misuse of logic terms, off topic, off point, (includes 'kill the messenger" tactics which are highly debatable [unless the messenger is a well-established unreliable source; a CTer, etc.] ), flaming, and otherwise disingenuous remarks, childish and simplistic thinking, including, but not limited to, comments of self puffery and all it's variants (such as shaming, trivializing opponent's argument, mockery) etc.,

 

1. The payroll tax cut proposal did not even come close to making it in the bill and was DOA.
2. Social Security is primarily funded from interest on money through trust funds invested in federally guaranteed securities at a rate above 2:1 over payroll tax.
3. If the Social Security Reserve is exhausted, BY LAW Congress must still fund payouts using general tax revenue. However, the payout amount may be reduced to about 80% of today's rate.

https://www.aarp.org/retirement/social-security/questions-answers/how-is-social-security-funded/

The OP is nothing more than another "Chicken Little" media spin.

 

Barely surviving, not particularly successful for me and lots of others and Republicans constantly trying to improve it and make it more secure and Democrats constantly opposing.

 

Yet would be a good idea instead of just a hand out. We have to get people back to work and if they can keep more of their paycheck and have more net income by working instead of collecting welfare and other subsistence that is exactly what we need.

 

Then explain the Trust Act which was put into the HEAL's act as a provision.

 

Repubs want to get their hands on your money and put yous in the poor house, what damn good Christians they are.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/column-gop-slips-attack-social-215246065.html

 

First sensible thing he's done this year.

Social Security is a freaking disaster. It's made billions of people helpless and dependent.

 

How does it do that?

 

The Commies have this stuff right, as infuriating as that probably sounds to the average Libertarian.

 

By handing it out unconditionally (other than via means testing .. the worst possible measure).

Ever seen what happens to lab rats when all their needs are met? We're not better.

 

I see, so those that get SS never did pay it forward with say forty or fifty years of work and the payment of SS taxes?
Your demented altruism for never ending gleeful dickishness is noted...Should those lazy rats not have available 401K funds at retirement age also?

 

This isn't about WELFARE. I'm 100% in favour of welfare, always.

No idea why you thought I meant no welfare, because I said nothing of the sort.

 

how about this, if you think the right can do better, offer their plan and if it fails offer them what social security would have, if your right, that would never happen, so the guarantee would cost nothing

 

Exactly which also makes Republicans scoffing at the national debt saying stuff like think of our grandchildren (looking at you rep. jim banks) so much more laughable

 

On the contrary, the Left (the real Left, not the cafe variety) can do better.

 

Its irrelevant imo who wrote it, is the message true or not and why?

 

So Trump wasn't advocating for a payroll cut cut?

 

So to hell with it all together then right? Might as well go for the jugular by way of a payroll tax cut?

 

Never changes, does it?