GOP Going After Medicare/Social Security

L

Lesh

Verified User
To pay for their Donor Relief Act "tax cuts"

Slowly but surely, Republicans that supported the trillion dollar Trump tax bill are revealing their true motivations: slashing Medicare and Social Security.

During a Sunday interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) urged entitlement reform as the deficit continues to balloon as a result of the GOP tax cuts.

“I do think we need to deal with some of our spending,” Stivers said. “We’ve got try to figure out how to spend less.”

Stivers, who also serves as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), is a self-proclaimed “budget hawk” and frequently criticized national debt levels under the Obama administration. Despite his previous trepidation at increasing the deficit, he voted in favor of a costly tax bill that even the White House admitted would not pay for itself over time.
 
Lesh said:
To pay for their Donor Relief Act "tax cuts"

Slowly but surely, Republicans that supported the trillion dollar Trump tax bill are revealing their true motivations: slashing Medicare and Social Security.

During a Sunday interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) urged entitlement reform as the deficit continues to balloon as a result of the GOP tax cuts.

“I do think we need to deal with some of our spending,” Stivers said. “We’ve got try to figure out how to spend less.”

Stivers, who also serves as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), is a self-proclaimed “budget hawk” and frequently criticized national debt levels under the Obama administration. Despite his previous trepidation at increasing the deficit, he voted in favor of a costly tax bill that even the White House admitted would not pay for itself over time.
Click to expand...

This stuff should all be handled through private enterprise.
 
Nothing in your plagiarized unsourced post supports your thread title that they are specifically "going after medicare/social security". That said, hopefully Ryan leaving will dampen the effort to privatize SS. I would far rather see the program become means tested than to see it wiped out by Wall Street automated trading.
 
Lesh said:
During a Sunday interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) urged entitlement reform as the deficit continues to balloon as a result of the GOP tax cuts.

“I do think we need to deal with some of our spending,” Stivers said. “We’ve got try to figure out how to spend less.”
Click to expand...

Without some changes there will already be less revenue than necessary to cover current benefits. Benefits began exceeding revenue in 2010 and the $2.5 trillion surplus is being used to cover the shortfall. When the surplus is gone there will only be enough revenue to cover 70% of benefits.

So "going after" Social Security is just a derogatory description for something that will have to be fixed.
 
Lesh said:
To pay for their Donor Relief Act "tax cuts"

Slowly but surely, Republicans that supported the trillion dollar Trump tax bill are revealing their true motivations: slashing Medicare and Social Security.

During a Sunday interview with CNBC’s John Harwood, Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH) urged entitlement reform as the deficit continues to balloon as a result of the GOP tax cuts.

“I do think we need to deal with some of our spending,” Stivers said. “We’ve got try to figure out how to spend less.”

Stivers, who also serves as chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC), is a self-proclaimed “budget hawk” and frequently criticized national debt levels under the Obama administration. Despite his previous trepidation at increasing the deficit, he voted in favor of a costly tax bill that even the White House admitted would not pay for itself over time.
Click to expand...

"Going after"?
try "reform", "deal with SOME of our spending" and "figure out how to spend less".
 
Flash said:
Without some changes there will already be less revenue than necessary to cover current benefits. Benefits began exceeding revenue in 2010 and the $2.5 trillion surplus is being used to cover the shortfall. When the surplus is gone there will only be enough revenue to cover 70% of benefits.

So "going after" Social Security is just a derogatory description for something that will have to be fixed.
Click to expand...

Lift the cap of SS.
 
Flash said:
Without some changes there will already be less revenue than necessary to cover current benefits. Benefits began exceeding revenue in 2010 and the $2.5 trillion surplus is being used to cover the shortfall. When the surplus is gone there will only be enough revenue to cover 70% of benefits.

So "going after" Social Security is just a derogatory description for something that will have to be fixed.
Click to expand...

Odd that we can have a 1.5 trillion dollar tax cut that benefits the rich almost entirely and then claim that we don't have enough money to pay for things like SSI and Medicare huh?

Oh and pass a trillion dollar spending bill as well.

We seem to "find money" for things "we" (Republicans) want to huh?
 
Ending what the Repubs call "entitlement programs", has been a plan since Reagan. They have cut taxes and spent like crazy to increase the debt to such a degree, that they can claim we cannot afford any support programs. Ryan admitted it a short time ago. The bankers have had their eyes on the Social Security Fund of 3 trillion bucks for a long time. They will not quit til it is theirs. Repuib mantra..Fuck the poor. Take their money .
 
Threedee said:
As well as the benefits?
Click to expand...

I don't know how the Benefits are 'laddered'. I'm sure there are brackets. Congress or the 'bean counters' can figure it out.
Just as a question, do you think the Billionaire will really be affected either way?
 
Jack said:
I don't know how the Benefits are 'laddered'. I'm sure there are brackets. Congress or the 'bean counters' can figure it out.
Just as a question, do you think the Billionaire will really be affected either way?
Click to expand...

He will still take out more money than he presently does.
 
Flash said:
Without some changes there will already be less revenue than necessary to cover current benefits. Benefits began exceeding revenue in 2010 and the $2.5 trillion surplus is being used to cover the shortfall. When the surplus is gone there will only be enough revenue to cover 70% of benefits.

So "going after" Social Security is just a derogatory description for something that will have to be fixed.
Click to expand...

Raise the payroll tax cap and the problem is solved forever
 
Threedee said:
He will still take out more money than he presently does.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how it is structured. I doubt the additional income is much of a factor in the lifestyle of a Billionaire. It does interest me though how the 'Little People' are so concerned for them. (?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top