Should Social Security be strengthened and saved...?

[kentuck]

...Or should it be allowed to deplete itself over time and let people invest their money elsewhere for their retirement?

What do you think about Social Security? Is it a program that we can no longer afford? Or can we find something better?

Do Democrats need to look at this issue in a different light? For what reasons should we keep Social Security??

[slackmaster]

1. Social Security is a compact between generations. Bust a deal, face the Wheel.

[NorthCarolina]

44. BUST A DEAL, FACE THE WHEEL!!!!!!

[CountAllVotes]

2. as a Nation we cannot afford to do without it

I just don't "get" why people want to get rid of Social Security.

Maybe they need a diagnosis like Parkinson's disease or some other horrible affliction before they wake the hell up and realize WHY.

Maybe they need to have a dead spouse on their hands with six kids to care for?

Maybe they have aging parents that can no longer work that they SURE AS HELL DO NOT WANT TO CARE FOR.

We cannot afford to not have Social Security.

We pay for it and it belongs to We the People!

[DesertFlower]

10. well said. nt

[sinkingfeeling]

19. I've wondered if they've ever sat down and figured up what they would need to save in order to

be free of all those 'big government' programs like SS and Medicare. I would estimate a need for $500,000 for 'retirement' and another $225,000 for medical insurance/costs per person. Guess they'd have no problem with saving that kind of money.

[CountAllVotes]

25. three surgeries in one year

The total for the three was = $200,000.00+ so far.

That is just for one episode of health gone bad.

The people that think up this crap live in a little world that belongs to only me me me me me me me me me me me ...

They cannot and do not think nor care about anyone else.

How very sad.

Some day they will learn however. The sad part is that by the time they figure this out, they'll be flat broke with nothing to fall back on. Oh well ... the stock market made me do it ... :puke:

:kick:

[Desertrose]

3. Definitely strengthened & saved.

Improve it & make it even better.

[mix]

4. Until the "free market" can provide for all, yes we need to save and strengthen it. nt

[fadedrose]

5. Democrats should live on their savings.....

for at least a few months before they starve, then throw them into the Grand Canyon. Charge them for trainfare there too.

[DrDan]

6. strengthen it - those with extra funds can invest elsewhere to augment their SS

but a minimum SS should be there for everyone.

[moondust]

7. If we can just do away with old people

who are no longer able to bust their asses to help make the super wealthy the super-duper wealthy then we won't need it, right? I'm sure it can all be done in a highly impersonal manner, perhaps by selling shares on Wall Street or something, so that the oligarchs never have to get close enough to make them feel bad.

Corporatized euthanasia anyone?

:sarcasm:

[WinkyDink]

16. And orphans and widows and the disabled. Sounds like a plan!

[bobbolink]

17. I strongly believe the word EUTHANASIA needs to be spoken LOUDLY in this context!

I have said this for a long time.... the connection needs to be made in no uncertain terms, and make conservatives... whether Dem or Rep, have to made the choice upfront.

[Dappleganger]

8. I fear the alternative.

Stock market? If we had done what Bush wanted to do, there would be no SS savings to speak of.

No SS altogether? Our race to the bottom will be complete.

[old mark]

9. First, there is NOTHING WRONG with SS- it has no drag on the economy, in fact,

it puts many millions of dollars into the economy, promotes jobs and keeps many of us old people from having to rely on Welfare...of christian charity...to survive. Please stop the rightwing idea that social security could be privatized- it does not work, and should not be considered. Please do not believe the right wing lies.

mark

[DesertFlower]

14. i agree. nt

[bobbolink]

28. You are 100% correct. Most of us here know that. The problem is the DEMS. WON'T. SAY. IT.

They are acting AGAINST us, not for us..... so where does that leave us?

Do we take up collections and take out huge ads in the NYT?

Do we take up collections and post billboards to this effect all over the US?

[old mark]

35. They make lots more money from Wall Street lobbyists

than they do from their salaries. They are working for the wrong people-and I mean both parties.

mark

[bobbolink]

36. That's exactly right, and we should have been fighting this back in the 70s...when it became obvious

If not before... like when Ike warned us. :(

However, this is now, and I think what we need to do is to use the only power we really have.... organizing and the vote. By working to spread our awareness to others, we can make it that much harder for them to override us.

Here is one suggestion I have...and Tansy Gold offered another really good one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x262779

[Enthusiast]

39. Good ideas expressed on that thread.

Thanks.

[bobbolink]

11. Naw, it's much more "progressive" to go back to a high rate of poverty for elders and disabled

people.

After all, according to many DUers nnow, we don't pull our weight for the party.

So, screw us.

[CountAllVotes]

26. you would think that a country so great as the USA

You'd think they'd have something called pride in helping the disabled and the elderly in our society - make the USA a country for other countries to look up to for an example.

Instead, we dig ourselves deeper into a huge hole from which no one can emerge.

It sickens me that America even allows the disabled and the elderly to live in poverty. SHAME ON THEM and yet they seem to almost take pride in it. These people coming up with these "plans" are as close to being psychopathic as it comes IMO. Any one that would endorse such an agenda is just plain despicable at best!

:dem:

[bobbolink]

34. Yes, it is shameful, psycopathic and despicable. Agree 100% with your diagnoisis.

Yet, those of us who are SUFFERING THIS CRAP are called "bitter" and worse because we keep pushing "progressives" to do more!

When you see people sinking into despair and hopelessness.... all in the name of "HOPE", it is heartbreaking. Yet, very few are willing to allow their hearts to be broken.

Any suggestions on where to go from here?

How to light fires?

[CountAllVotes]

41. Eliminating poverty would help but is it possible?

The system the way it is set-up now often encourages and reinforces poverty. Often a person becomes entrapped in this grip which is most often impossible to crack out of.

A few do however, but very few.

The best way to make freedom a reality for persons like this is to encourage them to go forward, not back wards in a society which encourages neither is how I see it.

How do we end poverty as it stands now remains a difficult situation to address as it is often hidden and kept in secret. It can give one an unnecessary sense of shame. Whatever leads a person to this road is most likely due to a force far greater than said person.

At this point it becomes a societal matter as everyone eventually becomes infected by this poisonous mode of thinking when exposed to it unless they are cautious.

Victims of this negative behavior tend to hide out and become more secluded and inward, thus reinforcing this negative cycle and its tenuous grip.

Can we find a way to perhaps reward such persons that have the guts to go on anyway? It seems to me that if anyone truly deserves a bailout, this sector of our society, thus far ignored by just about everybody (i.e., people don't know that the disabled in America make up 1 in 10 (3.6%) of the recipients, should in fact be at the top of that list (if there is in fact a "list"). How can these citizens be given a sense of worth rather than be viewed as sucklings on the teat of a cow as just one recent comparison noted. :grr:

and here we have:

>>Less than one half of 1% of Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries currently return to work. The 1999 Ticket-to-Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act (TWWIIA) charged the Social Security Administration with investigating early intervention strategies to divert some of the persons applying for benefits into work support programs before they enroll in SSDI. Any early intervention programming will require greater understanding of the claimant population. This analysis used data from the 1994 and 1995 National Health Interview Surveys to compare the estimated 3.3 million working-age SSDI claimants to the estimated 3.6 million beneficiaries. These comparisons showed substantial heterogeneity in both groups but found that claimants were less disabled, in better health, and more likely to be employed than beneficiaries. Both groups tended to have low incomes, and nearly 20% of claimants lacked health insurance. Approximately 70% of applicants (2.3 million) and beneficiaries (2.6 million) have not received vocational support services and do not believe that they need such services. These findings suggest that demand for vocational services vouchers may be low.

more here on this ... http://www.questia.com/googleScholar.qst;jsessionid=DEE889A7E487FECF25BD7A36539D2C48.inst1_2a?docId=5008329435

One guarantee must remain and that is Social Security. People that are old and sick should not be worried about decreased benefits, cuts, no raises, etc. This will only worsen an already stressed human even more; sick mind = sick body.

ENOUGH!

[bobbolink]

45. Its not possible until people decide its a priority. Until then.. suffering and death will be the

way of life in this country.

[HereSince1628]

12. Republicans appeal to fear, Dems MUST appeal to security

If not the base is doomed to a major diaspora with no guarantee of a meaningful coalesce around some people friendly ideology.

That sort of casting around in the darkness can be either good or bad, and there is really no telling how it would go. Charismatic leaders but flawed leaders have plagued such movements.

[kctim]

13. Of course it should be saved

But we should get back to using it as a safety-net program, not the retirement plan it has become.

[kentuck]

20. Can you explain how we could do that?

What would a "safety-net program" consist of?

[kctim]

37. First

we have to get people back to believing in social security as it was intended, a safety net to help those in need. People need to save for their own retirements instead of blowing money on material BS. Once that is done, fewer people will need social security and it can be used more effectively to help the ones who truly need help.

[WinkyDink]

15. Is this another "satire" post on GD?

[kentuck]

21. True DUers love satire.

:hippie:

[suston96]

18. Repeat: there is nothing wrong with Social Security....

Want to strengthen it? Create jobs. Millions of them. Drop the unemployment down to 5% and the Social Security problem vapors will disappear.

As will much of the budget deficit.

[kentuck]

22. Thanks to everyone who responded.

I believe this is an issue we need to be thinking about.

[DesertFlower]

23. there's a very simple answer to saving

social security. remove the cap. keep it the same for the employers. think about how much money would go into the fund.

why should the rich pay the same amount as everyone else?

[kentuck]

24. As Thom Hartman noted on his show...

It would only be on those making $106,000 and above. If a company can afford to pay their folks that much, surely they afford to pay the same FICA insurance as the rest of us...

[DesertFlower]

30. i thought about that, but there

might be some small business owners who pay their employees that much.

of course, IBM, american express, etc. can afford to.

hubby usually hits the cap around september and it's nice to have an extra $7-800 a month for a few months, but if it means saving social security for everyone, we're okay with that.

[kentuck]

32. That's the bottom line...

You have extra money that is not taxed after a certain level. I think you are patriotic in willing to save Social Security.

[DesertFlower]

33. thank you.

i wish everyone felt the way we do especially the rich.

[SheilaT]

27. You have to ask?

Anyone who thinks SS should be privatized is an idiot. Or so rich as to not understand how necessary SS and Medicare are to the vast majority of older Americans, as well as many younger ones who also depend on it.

Anyone who thinks our current health care system is just fine either has one of the Cadillac plans, or has never gotten sick enough to run up against limits or pre-existing conditions or any of the other ways insurance companies have to avoid actually paying for health care.

[damntexdem]

29. Social Security is a huge success that should not be attacked.

It could have a temporary cash-flow problem as we Boomers move through and before we're all gone; but this can be easily fixed by raising or eliminating the income cap on FICA taxes.

If Dems do not uphold Social Security, then the Democratic Party should be utterly destroyed.

[jwirr]

31. I am on SSA minimum benefit. I think that the cap on ss tax should

be raised significantly for the individual. I do not know if the matching company portion should also be raised because I do not know how it would effect small business. Other than that I do not have any ideas about it. I do know I do not want it cut or privatized in any way.

[Enthusiast]

38. If we can't afford social security

we can't afford to continue the nation. Close it down, shut the doors.

Social security has its own dedicated funding mechanism. It is fully funded. The citizens can't help it if the government has gone on foreign adventures of choice while slashing taxes on the ultra wealthy.

[bobbolink]

42. I agree... shut down the whole damned thing. Sauce for the gander, etc.

But that isn't going to happen.

The citizenry has been too programed to blame the victim, and there aren't any forces trying to redirect that blame.

[lumberjack_jeff]

40. WTF are you talking about?

Define "strengthened". Define "saved".

Social Security is doing exactly what it's supposed to do. Absent any changes, the trust fund will be paid out between now and 2037 (when the last baby boomer is 73 and the first is 95). After that time, Social Security will pay out 75% of the projected 2037 benefit.

The disability insurance fund merits immediate fixing, other than that, it's fine.

[defendandprotect]

43. Social Security is our most successful program -- runs huge surplusses -- !!

it should be strengthened even further - and benefits should be increased --

COLA'S should be repaid and restored!!