82% of Voters Oppose GOP Push to Cut Social Security for Americans Under 50 - Voters would rather see taxes on wealthy Americans to ensure Social Security remains a guarantee for all

submitted by g0ldfish from commondreams.org

all 48 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]EthnocratIndependent 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (25 children)

No amount of wealth taxes will save social security. This is one of the many effects of our ageing society.

[–]UncleWillard56 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I disagree. The 70's and back had a tiered tax system that worked because it allowed the middle-class to grow. The middle-class is essential as we buy70% of the goods and services these billionaires make. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate the rich, I just envy them. However, they played the game and won. Even those with advantages and pedigrees. However, if they destroy the middle class, all you have is haves and have-nots and that will likely lead to a violent revolution. It's in the best interest of the rich to pay more taxes. They'll still be rich, but the rest of us won't be completely impoverished and will still buy their crap.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are talking about something that existed long ago.

The middle class…

[–]g0ldfish[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Indeed

[–]yellowsnow2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They have answered that question already. Just a few months ago the world spokesman of the rich said "you will own nothing" and be a slave, and "we don't need most of you". And since then the rich in government power have been looting the country's treasury just as fast as they possibly can. The global UN campaign slogan "build back better" always meant after they destroy what exists.

They have been openly telling you what they will, and are, doing for 70 years now. Don't take my word for it. They admit to it themselves.

How I learned to love the New World Order. by Joe Biden Wall Street Journal 1992. https://i.imgur.com/a4xGZc7.png PNG

Vice President Joe Biden calls for the creation of a "new world order" at the Export Import Bank conference in Washington on April 5, 2013. https://youtu.be/b1AMYHHAXhI YouTube

"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." —Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950

.

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries." --David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991

.

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion, Russians! or coronavirus!], whether real or promulgated [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government." —Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

.

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all." --Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992

[–]g0ldfish[S] 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

If you know the numbers, you know you're wrong.

In 2023, there will be $1.10 trillion in tax revenue for Social Security (partially for your Social Security Trust Fund). (https://www.thebalancemoney.com/current-u-s-federal-government-tax-revenue-3305762)

That's similar to Social Security revenue for 2020: https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/releases/2021/#8-2021-2

Total annual expenditures of the Social Security Administration is around $1 trillion, and had been $1.1 trillion in 2020: https://www.ssa.gov/news/press/releases/2021/#8-2021-2

Almost none of that added to the $2.8 trillion currently in the Social Security Trust Fund, which is a major problem for those under age 65: https://ssofficelocation.com/resources/social-security-trust-fund/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_Trust_Fund

Here's what's in Biden's $3.5 trillion plan to tax the rich: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-tax-increase-rich/

Because of aging Boomers, Social Security revenue and payments to Boomers might not remain the same in the next decade. To budget for a potential shortfall, taxing the wealthy by 1% would result in $1.6 trillion in revenue in the next decade. https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/can-wealth-tax-raise-revenue-its-sponsors-hope

Taxing the wealthy by 10% would result in $16 trillion in revenue.

But let's be honest: the GOP have exploited the middle class for the past 40 years, and this latest request to take your money that was paid for Social Security (essential for the middle class) is another abuse of the wealthy, against of the 99%. Reversing previous tax cuts for the wealthy is appropriate where "trickle down" has been known as a ponzi scheme fruad of the past 40 years, benefitting ONLY the wealthy, while killing off the middle class and American Dream. There are so many charts showing this increasing income inequality. Have a look.

[–]MagicMike 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Democrats ran Congress from 1954 until 1995. They set up the system we have. And you want to blame the GOP, most of whom are gutless RINO vermin? Not hardly.

[–]g0ldfish[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

False

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

You are making the false assumption that the wealthy are just going up sit there and take a 10% tax rather than either find ways to avoid it or even leave the country.

[–]g0ldfish[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's not a false assumption for the specific Biden proposal.

Tax reform includes staff for the IRS (previously voted against by Repubs) and cancellations of tax loopholes like offshore tax havens. Non-Domenstic investors should also be taxed much more than they are, in the US and UK.

Regardless, previous tax cuts and loopholes should be reversed. Unlikely that rich donors will allow Congress puppets to do that, but it's the CORRECT proposal from the Biden Admin.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

You can make laws that force them to stay.

[–]MagicMike 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Maybe we can make laws to force them to think?

Who is John Galt?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

For example, we made laws that made the mass exodus of factories from the US.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/zN6JV2GXyvg

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Like China has?

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes.

[–]EthnocratIndependent 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Muh 99%.

[–]iamonlyoneman 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

ponzi schemes be like

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Hmmm... a Ponzi scheme that has been paying inflation-adjusted benefits to people for, IDK, 80+ years? That's a new one.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Tell us you don't know what a ponzi scheme is but use different words

[–]TaseAFeminist4Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's cute, but you might benefit from considering what I actually wrote and incorporating what you figure out into what you think and say about this topic.

There are Ponzi-like aspects to what's going on, but I think a more reasonable (and less neckbeardy) analysis would consider the management of the Social Security Trust Fund from the same risk-reward perspective that one would apply to any mutual fund or pension fund.

Social Security, arguably at least, isn't endangered because someone absconded with the investments therein to furnish their Upper East Side penthouse, Madoff-style (or whatever). It's endangered because the Silent Generation / WWII-era types who set it up wanted Muh Safe Investment and federal government bonds seemed to fit the bill.

The Ponzi-like aspect is that the rest of the Federal Government took the proceeds from those bonds and wasted them on imperialist bullshit and bread and circuses for the improvident.

We need to be emphatic about the fact that what they spent that money on is their fucking problem- the DoD, Medicare Part D, whatever. Calling Social Security a Ponzi scheme distracts from that real, correct analysis, which is very much written into law.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The SSA had a webpage explaining all about how it isn't a ponzi scheme. They were harassed and mocked until they took it down.

You're the kind of explainer who details how it's not real socialism and if only we did it right blah blah blah.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No amount of wealth taxes will save social security.

This is true.

However, money was paid into it as an investment by everyone, and both political parties spent this money.
There should be a surplus.

People are going to really lose their minds when they learn that their pensions invested in US Treasury bonds, and there's no treasure in the Treasury.

[–]g0ldfish[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

However, money was paid into it as an investment by everyone, and both political parties spent this money.

Hence: reversing some of the tax cuts should be part of the process to get money back into the Social Security Trust Fund. Perhaps also close some of the non-essential foreign military bases.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

Tax the undocumented workers for breaking civil law.

[–]KyleIsThisTall 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's literally a criminal law: tax avoision.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Do you mean Tax Evasion?

Assign them a TIN to use as an SSN to file taxes.

[–]iamonlyoneman 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

As usual: Nobody asked me. Let me keep my tax dollars and save my own money. A 13% raise this year would help my retirement out significantly.

[–]tyranicaloverlord 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

We need to axe all of social security. It's a program to buy out votes from Americans. It's communist bullshit. If we didn't have social security people would be fiscally responsible.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

would they?

[–]g0ldfish[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

No. Tyranicaloverlord is an imbecile

[–]Tarrock 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Vote manip. Another common dreams thread no one cares about on the top of the front page, 40 mins into its creation.

[–]IkeConn 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The GOP is always shooting themselves in the foot.

[–]g0ldfish[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Yes.

I wonder what the Republicans aged 50 and under think of these potential cuts to their Social Security payments in the future (I think there will be cuts, part of a process that started with the Reagan Admin), which is one reason I posted this report.

[–]Gaslov 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They need to reduce ss to the childless.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

On the wealthy. I don’t know what that means. They don’t ever tax the wealthy.

[–]MagicMike 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Bullshit. The top 1% pay about 34% of collected Federal Income Tax.

The top 20% pay around 86% of collected income tax.

They are subsidizing the rest of society, composed of meth heads, Fen filth, loafing ghetto scum, and all the rest who hate the people who keep them alive.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Okay. But I don’t believe you.

You are also none of those people, maybe cool down.

[–]Rah 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Finish Social Security. Give total tax amnesty to anyone over 60. Dont let BlackRock buy the world with your 401k, americans.

[–]WoodyWoodPecker 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

https://youtu.be/bsyu1OaknXw

[–]neolib 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Don't confuse OP with /u/go1dfish, notabug.io creator.

[–]jet199 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

He's less koi

[–]g0ldfish[S] 1 insightful - 4 fun1 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

🤪

[–]chottohen 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We must do more than just carp.

[–]Mark_Shill 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

This article is biased bullshit, look at her other articles

[–]unagisongs 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

However they'll embrace it when the Democrats do the dirty work.

[–]at_finn 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Sorry guys we spent your money...to bad..so sad