"Democrats Pound Republicans Over Their Push to Privatize and Cut Social Security"

That is no lie, friend, it is based on FACT as pronounced by Republicans time and time and again. And the elderly and people on food stamps should be plenty concerned at this point about this important matter.

 

SS is the US's prime government sponsored Ponzi scheme. The money you paid into it is long gone if you are collecting today. That money was used to pay those while you were working. What you are getting is the money being paid into it now by the working class. With unemployment at the sick level it is, less money is going in , while more money is being paid out. There is no 'investing' . That is a myth.

So I am curious to know what exactly is the democrat's plan to make SS solvent?

 

Be glad to. Sorry I had been unable to reply any sooner but I get pretty busy sometimes and not able to come here as often as I would like.

The names of REPUBLICANS who are pushing to privatize Social Security (and there may be more, these are the better known ones) are:

Senator (and Senate Minority Leader) Mitch McConnell - Republican
Congressman Paul Ryan - Republican
Senator Lindsey Graham - Republican
Senator Rand Paul - Republican
Senator Mike Lee - Republican
Congressman Joe Walsh - Republican
Congressman Austin Scott - Republican
Congressman Allen West - Republican
Congressman Rep. Jason Chaffetz - Republican
Joni Ernst - Republican Candidate for U.S. Senate (from Iowa)

That is why we keep stressing the need for voters, especially the elderly, the disabled, the retired and others who are on Social Security and Medicare, to be well aware of whom they vote for during these midterm elections because Republicans would very much like to destroy the present way Social Security is handled to replace it with Privatized Accounts. That is not what is needed. We need to Keep Social Security AS IS for all Americans and to Protect it from changes Republicans are more than eager to make that would, in effect, make it so much harder on those who are elderly, retired, ill or disabled to survive should there be any CUTS or drastic changes from the way it is structured now. A vast majority of those on SS and Medicare have no other source of income to survive on or fall back upon so any changes made would be very drastic for them and some may not be able to survive that.

Republicans: Let's Cut Social Security, Too
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/04/republican-social-security-cuts

 

Why not let individuals invest a portion themselves? If they lose then they individually lose. If you knew anything about the stock market historical gains, you would realize how stupid your comments are!

 

That was not the version of social security that I remember. The point was to allow people to contribute to a program that would give them some assurance of a retirement income.

"The welfare of humanity is always the alibi of tyrants."

Your comment fits this quote perfectly.

 

Still in denial of the truth when presented. How sad for you but yet so typical.

 

Still in denial of the Truth, I see. Well that figures. You can't refute the fact that Blacks are not going to the GOP and that women are still strongly Pro-Democrat as well as ALL minorities. So, dish out the proverbial scat in the hope that someone somewhere will believe it. Sad to be you.

 

There was no gamble. There was a guaranteed return, with potential for much greater returns.... and it paid off.
Either case was better than SS as it stands now.

 

ffs, your OP and this post are so full of complete lies. It has never been about taking it away from the government and handing it to private companies.

The GOP wants to give the OPTION of private SS because the government plan has been so abysmal.
The left want people forced to stay in a plan that they will pay a hell of a lot more into, then they will ever get back.
ffs, why does the left hate Americans?



Under the Ryan plan, those 55 and older would not be affected one way or another; they would simply receive benefits as they are set up today. Workers under 55 would have the option to stay in the traditional government-run system and receive benefits as promised or to opt for personal retirement accounts in which they could invest roughly a third of their payroll taxes. Those personal accounts would be a series of funds managed by the government. It would partially privatize Social Security in the sense that people would own their own accounts and choose among government approved-investments.

Oh, the horror!

"those 55 and older would not be affected one way or another" ... Oh,. so seniors aren't affected at all. oops. Is it too late to edit your OP?


See... this is why people laugh when you guys whine about some fairy tale "war on women" or "GOP racism".... no one takes you guys seriously.
The entire left is a bunch of lying, talking-point-repeating con artists... who have repeatedly made fools of their own voter base.
You guys even tried this same argument against Bush... and failed miserably.


From the left-leaning Politifact: Democratic exaggerations about "privatizing Social Security"


Unless you think the dems are complete idiots, fauxrage is a waste of time.... it doesn't win elections.

Educate yourself and stop repeating the lies.

 

The facts? What facts? It's a DNC talking point, period, and Dem's have been dragging that lie into every election for years.

 

Which says what?! You still have presented NOTHING in the way of links or proof that any Republican of any kind of national stature has said anything about cutting Social Security. But, in the interest of being kind to the handicapped, I'll GIVE you one: "Crusader Rick" Santorum!

Rick Santorum is the kind of Repubican you hyperliberal Democrats love because he so often acts as a life buoy for your sort when you're drowning in your own socialistic stew. He blows around all the time about Roe v Wade, and, he did advocate cutting Social Security for the sake of the children and the grandchildren (none of whom have paid a dime into any mandatory government benefits system).

Now, observe -- this is what we do when we make claims and broad statements in this Forum -- we provide LINKS to information! What a concept! . And it is one you would do well to practice if you want to have any credibility here. OK... the promised link on Santorum: http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/santorum_goes_after_social_security.php . BTW, Santorum's big presidential campaign went down like the "Titanic" after he mouthed-off, and pissed-off, the entire Baby Boom generation of over 80,000,000 voters who have worked for this EARNED benefit.

You see, it's one thing for me to pick on "Crusader Rick" -- unless I provide a link. But, no link? Then it's nothing but vaporware.... OK, I've given you one Republican with national prominence who wants to cut Social Security. Now, can you name one that you found on your own?

 

""""or to opt for personal retirement accounts in which they could invest roughly a third of their payroll taxes. Those personal accounts would be a series of funds managed by the government. It would partially privatize Social Security in the sense that people would own their own accounts and choose among government approved-investments.""""

OK, but when those investments go belly up and those investors lose everything on those GOVERNMENT APPROVED investments(MORE BIG GOVERNMENT) the law should state that they get NOTHING more from the government , no food stamps, no car payments, no mortgage payments, no money , no nothing because THEY opted out.

The privatization plans did NOT include government management , that wouldn't be privatization, it would go to their buddies on Wall Street who are all honest .

Right now anyone is free to , at age 62 , take their entire SS check and invest it and become millionaires by age 65-70......

 

Anyone who doesn't think Republicans have been trying to privatize SS for years just hasn't been paying attention......yes, one would need a link if one knew nothing about the subject and it's long history...to pretend it hasn't happened is convenient but not honest.

 

the stock market is not guaranteed, it's a gamble

 

that is what social security does, we all pitch in, and our elderly and disabled benefit.... if your lucky enough to live that long, you will benefit too

the first people to pitch in paid for the elderly of their day and now we are and should be doing the same

Your view fits this quote perfectly. - "the me me me mentality"

.

 

that was a pretty cruel question.. You know that there is no answer for that question, other than the same old "If they get the chance they will make old people eat the babies of the poor". mantra that they always use.

With the market already artificially inflated my 0bama, money printing and requiring a correction before it can return to reality we might want to wait before we put SS in that meat grinder.

I stable times it would be hard to keep SS money from being miss used but it would still be better than what 0bama has been doing with tax payer money in the name of progressivism.

 

They are not in the stock market.......

Jesus they have a guaranteed return rate of 4%

 

The investment company guaranteed a return.
That has nothing to do with the stock market.
It means they will make up the difference to get to that guaranteed percentage.

How is that a gamble ?!

 

Yes, there is "horror" in the Ryan plan simply because he aims to restructure the program in a way that would prove more costly to recipients down the road. Can he GUARANTEE that with his plan there will be no downside if the stock markets crash as happened during the Bush years?

Also, that is only Ryan's plan. There are many other Republicans with similar convoluted ideas that can inevitably be as costly to citizens and could even prove to be more devastating without a Guarantee that their money will be 100% Safe (like most all banks guarantee) and that they will receive it in the full amount they are owed as they are now doing under present Social Security structuring.

You are trying to sell a rancid policy to the American people that is full of holes hoping they don't catch on. But they are not naive. They know exactly how a Republican Plan would work and what they ultimately stand to lose vs. current Social Security that does not put all of that uncertainty into their being able to obtain their money regularly as they do. Therein lies the difference. Many would much rather choose current Social Security over any Republican's plan to change it. There can be little argument there as statistics continue to show. The only ones that would ultimately go for your plan is your own right wingers, let's face it. Americans cannot afford to gamble that much with their retirement money which may be all that they have to survive upon. They simply can't take that risk nor do they want to.

As for "repeating the lies" (from your side), you certainly do a very good job of that yourself.

 

That's right. It IS a gamble as there is never a guarantee with the stock market. And no matter how they try to pitch it, it's still the same ol' crud.

- - - Updated - - -

What investment company or companies? Name them. Let's read through all of their fine print to see what they would really be offering.

 

First Financial Benefits invests the accounts conservatively, Mr. Gornto said. The company guarantees a minimum rate of return of 3.75 percent to 4 percent on the accounts to safeguard employees’ benefits against inflation and severe drops in market rates.
Employees can elect to put their portion of the contributions into riskier investments, like mutual funds and stocks, potentially to generate more interest.
At retirement, employees in the Alternate Plan can choose to take the money in a lump sum, take monthly benefits for a given time period or take a lifetime annuity, with slightly reduced benefits.



Wasn't that hard to find... but you're welcome.

 

That isn't something that should be arbitrarily and capriciously pushed on every American. It sounds like a Republican plan that Republicans would want for themselves and they're welcome to it. But all other Americans should have the freedom to remain in the present Social Security system as they much prefer without a Republican Congress threatening them with wanting to change Social Security from its present structure.

 

More Demo-rat scare tactics to put the fear in grandma and grandpa.

- - - Updated - - -

The stock market has done nothing but gone up since it was created.

 

I'm not sure what part of "can opt in" soars so far above your head.

Regardless, it doesn't matter what it sounds like to you. It's a plan that already exists, and was very, very successful in Texas.