Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Obama: "My SS cuts are not my 'ideal' plan" So what? You want to cut all entitlements or you want to make everyone a welfare queen? In this country, it's either/or, there is no third option   (talkingpointsmemo.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting, obama, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, Cost of Living Allowance, Sam Brownback, entitlements, social security  
•       •       •

1726 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Apr 2013 at 10:40 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2013-04-08 10:54:20 AM  
9 votes:
Social Security can be fixed forever in one simple move:  Remove the payroll cap on SS contributions.

/wipe hands on pants
//repeat
2013-04-08 10:32:55 AM  
6 votes:
Obama proposes spending cuts and revenue increases that would result in $1.8 trillion in deficit reductions over 10 years, replacing $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts that are otherwise poised to take effect over the next 10 years.

Translation: Because the poor, the elderly, the veterans and everyone who has contributed to Social Security and Medicare should have to bear the brunt of the cuts, not the well connected businesses who depend on Federal dollars to keep going.

In other words, the continuation of wealth redistribution upwards cannot be interrupted, citizen. now grit and bear it while the programs you've paid into your entire life are gutted to make sure a defense contractor can keep making useless toys so that Congressmen and Senators can brag about bringing jobs to their districts and states.
2013-04-08 11:05:52 AM  
3 votes:
There really is no reason why Social Security is even being brought up in the first place. Social Security has NO involvement with the General budget. This crap is all Pete Peterson whispering like Gríma Wormtongue into Obama's ear.

And if Obama thinks this is all gonna be some cunning plan to make the republicans look bad because they won't raise taxes, he's already lost. All anyone will think of or remember was that Obama was the first Democratic President in History to use a grease gun on the slippery slope to eventually destroy Social Security.
2013-04-08 11:28:26 AM  
2 votes:

LouDobbsAwaaaay: I hate to say it, but Hillary would have been a better President.  We'd have some actual leadership in the White House instead of this nutless loser.


I'm sure you probably hate to say "President Obama" even more.

/sucks to be you
2013-04-08 10:59:26 AM  
2 votes:
Implement universal healthcare and push back the retirement age
2013-04-08 10:45:43 AM  
2 votes:

vernonFL: How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.


The longer we wait, the harder it is to ensure long-term balance.
2013-04-08 02:29:03 PM  
1 vote:

TV's Vinnie: Welcome to Fark.


At some point, this phrase became shorthand for "I have nothing, so I'm just going to make my being an idiot your problem".
2013-04-08 12:09:15 PM  
1 vote:

Serious Black: wjmorris3: Serious Black: wjmorris3: I'd go even further and end social security benefits for everyone, right now. The United States government does not have the authority per the Constitution to spend money.

[files.myopera.com image 438x400]

Seriously - if the government spent nothing, we'd be debt free in a matter of years.

That doesn't even begin to defend your claim that the federal government has no legal authority under the Constitution to spend money. It's just a stupid "no shiat" statement that nobody would ever endorse doing in real life.


If it were actually permitted, there'd be an amendment saying so, which there isn't!
2013-04-08 11:57:31 AM  
1 vote:
http://imgur.com/r/QuotesPorn/9WT3v

The owners of Amurica are tired of paying for all of you takers.
2013-04-08 11:45:28 AM  
1 vote:

wjmorris3: Philip Francis Queeg: Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: Serious Black: vernonFL: How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.

The longer we wait, the harder it is to ensure long-term balance.

Remove the income cap. Make the rich pay more of their fair share.

Just don't let them opt out of a program they don't need. Their fair share would go to zero. Oh noes.

And of course you are in favor of denying those who opt out any benefits what so ever if they end up not being rich when they are elderly, right?

I'd go even further and end social security benefits for everyone, right now. The United States government does not have the authority per the Constitution to spend money.


Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution would like a word.
2013-04-08 11:45:05 AM  
1 vote:

LouDobbsAwaaaay: I hate to say it, but Hillary would have been a better President.  We'd have some actual leadership in the White House instead of this nutless loser.


No. Hilary would have been beaten by McCain armed with over 20 years of right wing planning. We'd have Sarah Palin sitting behind Dick Cheney's old desk right now, writing up a new list of Americans to be rounded up for the crimes of everything from practicing witchcraft to whistling on a  Sunday.
2013-04-08 11:40:13 AM  
1 vote:
I have an even better approach than raising the ceiling: a 1% tax on all capital gains above 100,000k, no increase in SS payments beyond the current max.   We'd fund social security for centuries.
2013-04-08 11:35:27 AM  
1 vote:

LouDobbsAwaaaay: DROxINxTHExWIND: I'm sure you probably hate to say "President Obama" even more.

/sucks to be you

I voted for the guy.  Twice.  And I was glad when he beat Hillary in the '08 primary.  But I've grown tired of his castrated, milquetoast approach to dealing with the GOP.  I think if Hillary were elected instead of Obama, things would be better.


And you blame that on Obama? Its not his fault that Republicans in Congress were are not ready for a black President.
2013-04-08 11:29:57 AM  
1 vote:

Cletus C.: CPennypacker: Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: Serious Black: vernonFL: How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.

The longer we wait, the harder it is to ensure long-term balance.

Remove the income cap. Make the rich pay more of their fair share.

Just don't let them opt out of a program they don't need. Their fair share would go to zero. Oh noes.

They can opt out of the program if they want to. They still have to pay the tax

The key word here is fair. Such a subjective thing.


Oh look a Libertarian who still need a harsh coQpunch! Hold still.
2013-04-08 11:29:06 AM  
1 vote:

redmid17: Hmmm if Dems and Reps don't like it, there has to be a semblance of merit to the proposal

 WRONG!

It's such a gigantic stinking turdburger that it even makes a republican gag.
2013-04-08 11:28:06 AM  
1 vote:

Cletus C.: CPennypacker: Cletus C.: TV's Vinnie: Serious Black: vernonFL: How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.

The longer we wait, the harder it is to ensure long-term balance.

Remove the income cap. Make the rich pay more of their fair share.

Just don't let them opt out of a program they don't need. Their fair share would go to zero. Oh noes.

They can opt out of the program if they want to. They still have to pay the tax

The key word here is fair. Such a subjective thing.


Not really. If you get to use the american workforce to bolster and facilitate your fortune, then you can pay a proportional share of your income to ensure that they can eat and have somewhere to sleep after you're done using their labor. Sounds fair to me.
2013-04-08 11:27:16 AM  
1 vote:

Ned Stark: Vote for lesser evil, win, receive evil. Shock and horror.

Thankfully the teabaggers, for all their other sins, will never permit such a thing. Get yer gub'mint hands off my social security!


Actually, they'll say, "if it wasn't for them damn blacks and mexicans, my benefits wouldn't be cut".


/all of this country's problems can be traced back to welfare queens
//Shhhhh, lets not even talk about Defense
2013-04-08 11:26:49 AM  
1 vote:
I hate to say it, but Hillary would have been a better President.  We'd have some actual leadership in the White House instead of this nutless loser.
2013-04-08 11:23:27 AM  
1 vote:

Uzzah: 47 is the new 42: I was going to say something like this.  Why is there even a payroll cap on SS contributions in the first place?  I honestly don't know what the reasoning was when it was instituted.

Because there is a maximum benefit. The person who pays into SS on a $10 million salary gets the exact same monthly benefit as someone who pays into in on a $100,000 salary. I'm not saying it's the most persuasive explanation, but that's the explanation.


A max SS benefit to a rich person is chump change. A max benefit to a old or disabled NON rich person is the difference between life and death.

I'd rather see the latter have a fighting chance to survive.
2013-04-08 11:15:41 AM  
1 vote:
Worst. Socialist. Ever.
2013-04-08 11:09:21 AM  
1 vote:

vernonFL: No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.


It's a classic "frog in the boiling water" scheme. The changes are small and barely felt at first, but year after year the missing money gets more and more noticeable. The longer you live, the hungrier you will get.
2013-04-08 11:07:09 AM  
1 vote:
Not sure about this one. The current talking point is that the reduction is 0.3% per year or an average loss of $ 42 per year to a recipient, and it doesn't invalidate COLAs, which are much more significant.  Of course, that number will keep going down, so there will have to be something that levels it out.  It would probably be worthwhile to provide means testing to the process as well.  Social Security could be administered more effectively, but everyone seems to be averse to addressing complexities in a complex system.

But for what it's worth, it's a small bargaining chip right now - I'd like to see what the President can get out of it.  If revenue can be found to cancel the sequester and offset the effects to better give short term stimulus to the economy, that would be something.  Also, if tax code can be revised to generate more revenue and lower burden on elderly, as well as better management of the bottom line for Medicare, it's possible that the individual economies of the social security recipients will be more than offset.

It's not about the 1st step but the last one.
2013-04-08 11:06:40 AM  
1 vote:

Bravo Two: Grand_Moff_Joseph: Social Security can be fixed forever in one simple move:  Remove the payroll cap on SS contributions.

/wipe hands on pants
//repeat

This.


And this is also why it will never happen.  Because the majority of Americans do not understand why the system is rigged for the wealthy.  This cuts across both Republicans and Democrats.  Both parties have wealthy backers who must be appeased.
2013-04-08 11:03:45 AM  
1 vote:

Serious Black: vernonFL: How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.

The longer we wait, the harder it is to ensure long-term balance.


Yeah, like with an asteroid - if you see it coming a long way out, you can just nudge it a little. If you ignore it and leave it to later politicians to sort out, they will probably do the same thing. And then when the asteroid is just about to strike earth you finally are forced to act at the last minute and nuke it and hope.

One thing to remember is that SS grows faster than inflation, so even if nothing is changed when it cuts back (to 75% of normal outgoings I think is the current plan), the actual payments will still be about the same, or even somewhat higher in real times than what a equivalent current SS recipient would be getting, so the doomsday scenarios that get talked about of "getting nothing back by the time I retire" are not based on reality.

The other thing to consider is that programs like SS always look bad when the economy is weak. In a few years time the US economy might be booming and suddenly the projections show the funding will be secure until 2080 or whatever, so it is a good thing to be careful not to overreact.
2013-04-08 11:01:10 AM  
1 vote:
FTFA: "You see, you don't change America by changing Washington - you change America by changing the states," [Brownback] said. "And that's exactly what Republican governors are doing across the country - taking a different approach to grow their states' economies and fix their governments with ideas that work.

Here in NC, the Publicans are cranking up the derp to 11.  Amendment One, "tax reform" to shift taxes from the plutocrats to the rest of us, that establishment of religion resolution (which fortunately is kaput), two year wait for divorce, prescriptions for pseudoephedrine.  All in the name of freedom and small government.
2013-04-08 10:57:43 AM  
1 vote:
You know who else wanted to fully fund the SS?
2013-04-08 10:53:32 AM  
1 vote:
These are the same cuts the top 2% can't afford, right?
2013-04-08 10:43:06 AM  
1 vote:
How much would the average poor grandmother's Social Security check get cut? Would next month's check be $10 less?

No, its probably a very small change in the increase of the amount of the checks over years. Of course I DNRTFA so I could be wrong.

Also, Social Security isn't a program that is in imminent danger of collapse, we still have 20 or more years for that to happen, so its not like we really need to reform it now.
2013-04-08 10:42:24 AM  
1 vote:

Aarontology: Obama proposes spending cuts and revenue increases that would result in $1.8 trillion in deficit reductions over 10 years, replacing $1.2 trillion in automatic spending cuts that are otherwise poised to take effect over the next 10 years.

Translation: Because the poor, the elderly, the veterans and everyone who has contributed to Social Security and Medicare should have to bear the brunt of the cuts, not the well connected businesses who depend on Federal dollars to keep going.

In other words, the continuation of wealth redistribution upwards cannot be interrupted, citizen. now grit and bear it while the programs you've paid into your entire life are gutted to make sure a defense contractor can keep making useless toys so that Congressmen and Senators can brag about bringing jobs to their districts and states.


Translation translation:

media.tumblr.com
 
Displayed 29 of 29 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report