Social security, a landmark liberal achievement

[PoliTalker]

Hello Cypress,

I notice all the proposals Republicans have come up with to turn SS into some kind of private stock market investment always studiously make sure that their parents and their peers are protected, and privatization only effects younger people.

Any kind of bait-and-switch come-on they can use will be attempted. Reminds of the 'great tax break' from Trump, where the tax cuts for the super-rich and big corporations are permanent but the ones for everybody else run out in 2027, fast approaching. Gotcha!

[Trumpet]

Countless people have benefited greatly from Social Security over the years; it's regrettable that The GOP wants to end SS.

[PoliTalker]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

Republicans try to appeal to younger voters by painting SS and Medicare as "entitlements" that were not earned, but given to them by currently-employed workers. There is just enough truth in that to appeal to the stupider ones.

The problem with turning SS into a 401(k) type scheme is the vagaries of the markets. What happens if the markets -- and all that money the government invested for you -- are down at the time you decide to retire? Either you accept less pay-out, or you continue working. The current scheme has concrete payouts which allows employees more freedom in deciding when to hang it up. There is no risk-taking. And you don't end up having to move in with one of your kids.

\

Continuing working is not always such a great option. Many people intend to do so only to get laid off before they can reach their intended retirement plan age. Age-discrimination is very common. Older workers have accrued seniority, full paid vacation time every year, and increasing health care expenses. Many an employer considers letting them go only to replace them with younger workers who are paid less, begin with no paid vacation, and don't have as many health issues. An attractive way for shameless for-profit non-human corporations to cut labor costs and increase profits.

Who cares what they may virtually 'owe' a worker who has dedicated their life to the employer? If it's not in writing, then it is not legally binding.

Toss the old to the curb.

Do not let their conscience disturb.

[Cypress]

Countless people have benefited greatly from Social Security over the years; it's regrettable that The GOP wants to end SS.

SS also served as a model for the rest of the developed world, resulting in an enormous benefit to the welfare of humanity at large.

[ThatOwlWoman]

Continuing working is not always such a great option. Many people intend to do so only to get laid off before they can reach their intended retirement plan age. Age-discrimination is very common. Older workers have accrued seniority, full paid vacation time every year, and increasing health care expenses. Many an employer considers letting them go only to replace them with younger workers who are paid less, begin with no paid vacation, and don't have as many health issues. An attractive way for shameless for-profit non-human corporations to cut labor costs and increase profits.

Who cares what they may virtually 'owe' a worker who has dedicated their life to the employer? If it's not in writing, then it is not legally binding.

Toss the old to the curb.

Do not let their conscience disturb.

You are exactly right. My husband spent his entire working career in IT with the same company. He planned to retire at age 60 or so. Three years before that could happen, he and several other long-time employees were laid off. They were replaced with H1B visa workers from India, who were paid far less and who received few benefits. As an incentive not to sue the company (a large national insurance company), they were offered six months salary and two years' health insurance if they would sign an agreement not to sue for age discrimination. They all accepted. We were more fortunate than many people in the same situation, including some of his former coworkers. He walked out CIGNA's door and right into a better-paying IT position with another company. We used the severance to pay off the house, he retired at age 60, and we moved up here.

Imagine though if you were a person with a physical type job like construction, nursing, electrician, police officer, assembly line, etc. who found working more and more physically difficult as you aged. You plan to retire as soon as possible because your body is failing you. But the Republicans took away social security and put your retirement benefits in the market, which was way down by the time you planned to hang it up. What then? My guess is that you'd see a large number of new applications for social security disability, assuming, that is that the Republicans hadn't destroyed that as well.

Ironically, the people most likely to be financially harmed by the (R) scheme are the same ones who typically vote for them.

[Saint Guinefort]

You are exactly right. My husband spent his entire working career in IT with the same company. He planned to retire at age 60 or so. Three years before that could happen, he and several other long-time employees were laid off. They were replaced with H1B visa workers from India, who were paid far less and who received few benefits. As an incentive not to sue the company (a large national insurance company), they were offered six months salary and two years' health insurance if they would sign an agreement not to sue for age discrimination. They all accepted. We were more fortunate than many people in the same situation, including some of his former coworkers. He walked out CIGNA's door and right into a better-paying IT position with another company. We used the severance to pay off the house, he retired at age 60, and we moved up here.

Imagine though if you were a person with a physical type job like construction, nursing, electrician, police officer, assembly line, etc. who found working more and more physically difficult as you aged. You plan to retire as soon as possible because your body is failing you. But the Republicans took away social security and put your retirement benefits in the market, which was way down by the time you planned to hang it up. What then? My guess is that you'd see a large number of new applications for social security disability, assuming, that is that the Republicans hadn't destroyed that as well.

I have yet to understand why the party that normally appeals more to the older American (GOP) would make so much noise about eliminating or limiting Social Security. I get that they want to shift everything over to the "free market" where someone else can make some scratch off of it rather than having it "help" people, but why would they needlessly antagonize the only voting base they can usually count on is beyond me.

But corporate America already offloaded their pension obligations in preference to 401k's and forcing everyone into the "stock market" so that they could bankroll the finance folks to play fun "games" with the money and occasionally crater the economy, so I guess telling Americans that we are OFFICIALLY back in the "Gilded Age" is how the whole game plays out.

[Yakuda]

Your word can't be trusted.

Provide a link to a reputable mainstream news source

Your total SS benefit is calculated based on your wage income

So Georgie's privilege gets him more money than a grandmother? That doesnt seem fair now does it?

[Yakuda]

Lifetime-benefit, starting at age 62:

Retire @ 62 - $2,102/month
Retire @ 65 - $2,683/month
Retire @ 67 - $3,161/month
Retire @ 70 - $4,022/month

Whered you get these numbers?

[Cypress]

Whered you get these numbers?

SS.gov.
Those are my SS benefits based on my work history.

[PoliTalker]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,

You are exactly right. My husband spent his entire working career in IT with the same company. He planned to retire at age 60 or so. Three years before that could happen, he and several other long-time employees were laid off. They were replaced with H1B visa workers from India, who were paid far less and who received few benefits. As an incentive not to sue the company (a large national insurance company), they were offered six months salary and two years' health insurance if they would sign an agreement not to sue for age discrimination. They all accepted. We were more fortunate than many people in the same situation, including some of his former coworkers. He walked out CIGNA's door and right into a better-paying IT position with another company. We used the severance to pay off the house, he retired at age 60, and we moved up here.

Imagine though if you were a person with a physical type job like construction, nursing, electrician, police officer, assembly line, etc. who found working more and more physically difficult as you aged. You plan to retire as soon as possible because your body is failing you. But the Republicans took away social security and put your retirement benefits in the market, which was way down by the time you planned to hang it up. What then? My guess is that you'd see a large number of new applications for social security disability, assuming, that is that the Republicans hadn't destroyed that as well.

Ironically, the people most likely to be financially harmed by the (R) scheme are the same ones who typically vote for them.

They are told they might get a better benefit through the market. What they are not told is that entails greater risk. There simply is not greater ROI without greater risk. The financial gurus know this but are quiet about it when championing a market-based system to replace SS.

The beauty of SS is that it is a secure system.

The only thing it needs is more young workers. And guess what? They are clamoring to get into the USA and fulfill that role. Republicans are very fearful of this because they might all vote Democrat. So they are dehumanized and blamed for the things the rich and powerful have done to workers. And Fox viewers bought it hook line and sinker.

It's so easy to sell hatred to the rumor-driven misinformed.

[Yakuda]

It is a fantastic system. For those who think not having it would be better, they need only look at how many seniors passed into destitution after they were too old to work before Social Security. It is the very reason the system was created.

First it's a.ponzi scheme. Next every dollar stolen from me for this ponzi scheme would have been better invested by me than the govt. Lastly lots of people out live what they "contributed" and that strains the system.

[Cypress]

So Georgie's privilege gets him more money than a grandmother? That doesnt seem fair now does it?

SS is calculated based on your work history, that's fair.

You might be the first person in history to demand everyone get exactly the same SS benefit.

[Cypress]

First it's a.ponzi scheme. Next every dollar stolen from me for this ponzi scheme would have been better invested by me than the govt. Lastly lots of people out live what they "contributed" and that strains the system.

You've been duped by rightwing media personalities.

I was also told 40 years ago that SS wouldn't be there for me when I retired.

[Yakuda]

SS is calculated based on your work history, that's fair.

You might be the first person in history to demand everyone get exactly the same SS benefit.

Why not? It's expected everywhere else. George's privilege as a white man unfairly allowed him to make more money than a grandmother. If that's fair then people who work more hours than others and earn more as a result is fair.

[Saint Guinefort]

Hello ThatOwlWoman,



They are told they might get a better benefit through the market.

Yup. We all heard that. And the minute I hear that some finance-obsessed bean counter has to do the same job as me to not retire in penury I'll believe that it is a fair system.

What they are not told is that entails greater risk. There simply is not greater ROI without greater risk. The financial gurus know this but are quiet about it when championing a market-based system to replace SS.

As one commentator I once heard say: we are all forced into the stock market in order to provide the capital that finance folks play their risky games with. They need the unwashed masses putting money into the system. And since not every person in the US is a financial maven the financial sector games players are counting on that money just sitting there.

I have no clue how to read the stock market but my entire future existence is a function of that. That's why I want finance people to have to do MY JOB as well so they can face this kind of fear.