+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: General Social Media & Marketing Forums (/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Social Marketing (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Why does Sharron Angle running against Reid want to privatize Social Security and raise the retirement age? (/thread-8429.html)
Pages: 1 2
- Bell Sound - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
Well put.
- El Tecolote - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
You're another one who is going to be surprised and bewildered when the GOP kicks the Dems' butts out of Washington on a rail come November.
- Brian - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
Because that would actually give people choices. You can probably invest that money at a risk level that you are comfortable with. As for retirement age increases we have been seeing those for the last couple of decades and will continue to see them regardless of who wins an election..
- kpk02 - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
As it sites right now, Social Security is a government piggy bank that has been completely emptied and filled with IOUs. Exactly how is privatizing it going to hurt? The money we've put in is already gone. They like to talk like it's expected that incoming payments are to pay out the people currently receiving Social Security, but that's not at all how it was designed to work. The money someone paid in should already be there for their retirement.
So considering that $0 of my Social Security payments are left, how is privatizing it going to hurt? Can you really end up with less than $0 left of an investment?
- Redjr01 - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
She obviously isn't planning on winning. There needs to be reform for senior citizen entitlements but privatizing the entitlements isn't the way to go. If they raise the retirement age, there will be a larger welfare class. Not many people, especially in construction, are productive in their late 60's and 70's. A do nothing politician can hold the job forever since they do nothing. Therefore, I don't listen to a politicians argument as to why the retirement age should be raised. The reform could be a simple as making a constitutional amendment that the SS fund cannot be touched other than to senior citizens that paid into the fund. This way, the money won't be pissed away by politicians.
- flower - 10-13-2012 10:49 AM
Privatizing Social Security might mean the government does not get all the contributions you make through payroll deductions. That would result in eliminating many social security programs that are paid from those contributions you make when you work. No one knows how it would work. These are the programs I know of that depend on your soc sec contributions. People who dont want to chip in to SS, forget they might need it before age 65 for many reasons, and maybe you wont be able to withdraw it. You have 401K for investment.
* Divorced spouses of over 10 years can receive spousal benefits after age 60 unless they are disabled, then the age is lowered to 50. Each ex-spouse of a divorced person gets the benefits.
* Each child of a divorced spouse from each marriage of over 10 years gets benefits
* Each child of a disabled parent can receive social security benefits
* Children born with a permanent mental or physical disability
* Each child of a deceased parent receives survivor benefits
* Legal senior emigrants who have not worked in the U.S. can get SSI
* Families can get benefits depending on income and family size of $2000 a month
* Pregnant girls and women of low income can get SSI
* Seniors whose retirement Social Security is 150% below federal poverty guideline receive SSI to make up the difference.
* Adults under age 65 can qualify for SSI if disabled short term
* Adults under age 65 can qualify for SSDI if long-term disabled