Elons Little Plan

[DIY-HP-LED]

The fact checks seem to be working well.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1587815798915072001

Considering Republicans announced the want to get rid of SS and Medicare, it's pretty much nothing in comparison, is it? In their eagerness to get the libs many might fuck their parents, grandparents and themselves in the end. Winning or conned?

 

[PadawanWarrior]

Considering Republicans announced the want to get rid of SS and Medicare, it's pretty much nothing in comparison, is it? In their eagerness to get the libs many might fuck their parents, grandparents and themselves in the end. Winning or conned?

That not true at all. It was one senator that came up with that idea. This is the kinda nonsense that the mainstream media says a few times and everyone buys without getting the facts. My mother tried to tell me that one day and I had to set her straight, lol. She voted for Biden,

 

[cannabineer]

That not true at all. It was one senator that came up with that idea. This is the kinda nonsense that the mainstream media says a few times and everyone buys without getting the facts. My mother tried to tell me that one day and I had to set her straight, lol. She voted for Biden,

a lot more than one senator.

House GOP Twitter Account Calls for Slashing Social Security & Medicare

From the Speaker's Press Office: Today, House Republicans began unveiling their extreme MAGA “Commitment to America” agenda – kicking off the roll out by spotlighting their continued commitment to a long-standing GOP agenda obsession: slashing Social Security & Medicare.

www.speaker.gov

 

[ActionianJacksonian]

Considering Republicans announced the want to get rid of SS and Medicare, it's pretty much nothing in comparison, is it? In their eagerness to get the libs many might fuck their parents, grandparents and themselves in the end. Winning or conned?

What a disgusting post that literally has zero to do with what I posted. Be proud of that.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

That not true at all. It was one senator that came up with that idea. This is the kinda nonsense that the mainstream media says a few times and everyone buys without getting the facts. My mother tried to tell me that one day and I had to set her straight, lol. She voted for Biden,

They are lying to con fools these people are traitors who tried to overthrow the government and you believe them?

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

What a disgusting post that literally has zero to do with what I posted. Be proud of that.

If you thought that was disgusting, why did you vote for Trump?

 

[PadawanWarrior]

a lot more than one senator.

House GOP Twitter Account Calls for Slashing Social Security & Medicare

From the Speaker's Press Office: Today, House Republicans began unveiling their extreme MAGA “Commitment to America” agenda – kicking off the roll out by spotlighting their continued commitment to a long-standing GOP agenda obsession: slashing Social Security & Medicare.

www.speaker.gov

Says Nancy Pelosi,

 

[Roger A. Shrubber]

What a disgusting post that literally has zero to do with what I posted. Be proud of that.

Whats disgusting is that this is the truth. republicans want to slash social security and medicare, they've said so themselves.
republicans have parents, contrary to the popular belief that they reproduce by mitosis, like bacteria. That means they have grandparents as well...If they cut spending for SS and medicare, they will indeed be screwing over their own parents and grandparents, and they seem to be ok with that.

 

[PJ Diaz]

a lot more than one senator.

House GOP Twitter Account Calls for Slashing Social Security & Medicare

From the Speaker's Press Office: Today, House Republicans began unveiling their extreme MAGA “Commitment to America” agenda – kicking off the roll out by spotlighting their continued commitment to a long-standing GOP agenda obsession: slashing Social Security & Medicare.

www.speaker.gov

I'm not fully educated on the subject, but it seems that they want to change things to protect Social Security, because the OASI Trust Fund is due to be insolvent by 2035, which will result in huge cuts to SS payments.

Here's part of the RSC "Blueprint To Save America":

"More than 55 million retirees, survivors, and their families collect benefits from the Social Security Old Age and Survivor Trust Fund (OASI), and the RSC Budget is committed to protecting and strengthening this critical program for those that need it most.342 Unfortunately, the OASI Trust Fund will be depleted in 2034.343 When the trust fund is depleted, Social Security beneficiaries will face a 24 percent cut in benefits that will grow over time. 344 This is an unacceptable and immoral outcome. To be clear, those who stand in the way of reform stand in favor of this 24 percent across-the-board cut. The RSC Budget recognizes it is paramount to honor Social Security’s commitments and to fully compensate those Americans and their families for the high taxes levied on them for decades to fund this program. Further, it would be fundamentally immoral to address the Social Security’s solvency issues by taking more money away from working class Americans and small businesses by raising payroll taxes, which is exactly what Congressional Democrats have proposed to do. We must strengthen Social Security to ensure it is there for the lower and middle-class retirees who depend upon it.

Protecting the Most Vulnerable in Old Age:

The reforms contained in this budget would ensure the survival of the Social Security program and protect the low and middle-income retirees who rely on it. They would not affect benefits for any current retirees or individuals nearing retirement. In fact, the first reform the RSC Budget would implement is the creation of a new minimum benefit equal to 15% of the average wage index (AWI) for workers with 10 years of earnings. This minimum benefit would also scale up to 40% of AWI for workers with 40 or more years of covered work experience. According to the Social Security Actuary, the new minimum benefit created in the Social Security Reform Act would provide a representative low-wage earner retiring in 2050 with 38 percent higher benefits than would otherwise be payable under current law.349 This benefit would be higher under the RSC Budget. Any retiring worker with Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) at or below 85% of AWI (approximately $47,300) and with 40 years of covered work experience would receive a higher benefit than under current law. Put another way, a significant number of current retirees would receive more in Social Security benefits under the RSC budget’s plan."

 

[cannabineer]

I'm not fully educated on the subject, but it seems that they want to change things to protect Social Security, because the OASI Trust Fund is due to be insolvent by 2035, which will result in huge cuts to SS payments.

Here's part of the RSC "Blueprint To Save America":

"More than 55 million retirees, survivors, and their families collect benefits from the Social Security Old Age and Survivor Trust Fund (OASI), and the RSC Budget is committed to protecting and strengthening this critical program for those that need it most.342 Unfortunately, the OASI Trust Fund will be depleted in 2034.343 When the trust fund is depleted, Social Security beneficiaries will face a 24 percent cut in benefits that will grow over time. 344 This is an unacceptable and immoral outcome. To be clear, those who stand in the way of reform stand in favor of this 24 percent across-the-board cut. The RSC Budget recognizes it is paramount to honor Social Security’s commitments and to fully compensate those Americans and their families for the high taxes levied on them for decades to fund this program. Further, it would be fundamentally immoral to address the Social Security’s solvency issues by taking more money away from working class Americans and small businesses by raising payroll taxes, which is exactly what Congressional Democrats have proposed to do. We must strengthen Social Security to ensure it is there for the lower and middle-class retirees who depend upon it.

Protecting the Most Vulnerable in Old Age:

The reforms contained in this budget would ensure the survival of the Social Security program and protect the low and middle-income retirees who rely on it. They would not affect benefits for any current retirees or individuals nearing retirement. In fact, the first reform the RSC Budget would implement is the creation of a new minimum benefit equal to 15% of the average wage index (AWI) for workers with 10 years of earnings. This minimum benefit would also scale up to 40% of AWI for workers with 40 or more years of covered work experience. According to the Social Security Actuary, the new minimum benefit created in the Social Security Reform Act would provide a representative low-wage earner retiring in 2050 with 38 percent higher benefits than would otherwise be payable under current law.349 This benefit would be higher under the RSC Budget. Any retiring worker with Average Indexed Monthly Earnings (AIME) at or below 85% of AWI (approximately $47,300) and with 40 years of covered work experience would receive a higher benefit than under current law. Put another way, a significant number of current retirees would receive more in Social Security benefits under the RSC budget’s plan."

where does it show the maximum benefit and the start age to be protected?
In order to assure Social Security, a revenue enlargement plan is needed. I see no sign of it.

In fact, I see no discussion in the above of the real plan, which is to reduce disbursements. That is the wrong way to proceed, and another instance of the GOP sticking it to the working class.

MAGA Republicans’ Plan to Force Social Security and Medicare Cuts

A Republican default on the national debt would exacerbate inflation, increase costs, and put Americans’ benefits at risk.

www.americanprogressaction.org

 

[Offmymeds]

A promise to eliminate the debt in 7 years by cutting spending and taxes, the Blueprint to Save America. Result of last two GOP efforts, economic collapses.

Try another kick, Charley Brown.

 

[PJ Diaz]

where does it show the maximum benefit and the start age to be protected?
In order to assure Social Security, a revenue enlargement plan is needed. I see no sign of it.

In fact, I see no discussion in the above of the real plan, which is to reduce disbursements. That is the wrong way to proceed, and another instance of the GOP sticking it to the working class.

MAGA Republicans’ Plan to Force Social Security and Medicare Cuts

A Republican default on the national debt would exacerbate inflation, increase costs, and put Americans’ benefits at risk.

www.americanprogressaction.org

Here's a copy of the 122 page .pdf for your review. The verbiage I lifted is around page 80:

https://banks.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fy23_budget_final_copy.pdf

 

[cannabineer]

Here's a copy of the 122 page .pdf for your review. The verbiage I lifted is around page 80:

https://banks.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fy23_budget_final_copy.pdf

Thanks, but in your own words, where is the language showing real protection of the program, and the revenue increase that is needed?

 

[PJ Diaz]

Looks like they want to eliminate benefits for billionaires; oh the horror!

"Phase Out Auxiliary Benefits for High Income Earners – Ensuring Social Security provides a secure retirement for low and middle-income retirees requires modernizing auxiliary benefits, which are add-on benefits for the retired wage-earner’s spouse, children, and certain other dependents. These benefits provide higher benefits for wealthier families since auxiliary benefits scale up as a percentage of income and since wealthier families are much more likely to have a stayat-home spouse. Under current law, a billionaire over the retirement age could receive their normal benefits and gain an auxiliary benefit for a dependent child. In 2020, total auxiliary benefits for all spouses and children of retired workers cost $39.434 billion.358 For these reasons, the Social Security Reform Act would phase in a limitation on auxiliary benefits. The RSC Budget would expand upon the Social Security Reform Act’s reforms to gradually phase out such auxiliary benefits for high-income beneficiaries that do not need the extra support for their family members. Working- and middle-class families would still be eligible. "

 

[PJ Diaz]

Thanks, but in your own words, where is the language showing real protection of the program, and the revenue increase that is needed?

I already said that I'm not fully educated on the subject. As such, I don't have the information that you're asking for. I'm just exploring the topic myself.

 

[cannabineer]

Looks like they want to eliminate benefits for billionaires; oh the horror!

"Phase Out Auxiliary Benefits for High Income Earners – Ensuring Social Security provides a secure retirement for low and middle-income retirees requires modernizing auxiliary benefits, which are add-on benefits for the retired wage-earner’s spouse, children, and certain other dependents. These benefits provide higher benefits for wealthier families since auxiliary benefits scale up as a percentage of income and since wealthier families are much more likely to have a stayat-home spouse. Under current law, a billionaire over the retirement age could receive their normal benefits and gain an auxiliary benefit for a dependent child. In 2020, total auxiliary benefits for all spouses and children of retired workers cost $39.434 billion.358 For these reasons, the Social Security Reform Act would phase in a limitation on auxiliary benefits. The RSC Budget would expand upon the Social Security Reform Act’s reforms to gradually phase out such auxiliary benefits for high-income beneficiaries that do not need the extra support for their family members. Working- and middle-class families would still be eligible. "

odd that they don’t specify the income that gets designated high.

 

[PJ Diaz]

odd that they don’t specify the income that gets designated high.

Agreed.

 

[Offmymeds]

Looks like they want to eliminate benefits for billionaires; oh the horror!

"Phase Out Auxiliary Benefits for High Income Earners – Ensuring Social Security provides a secure retirement for low and middle-income retirees requires modernizing auxiliary benefits, which are add-on benefits for the retired wage-earner’s spouse, children, and certain other dependents. These benefits provide higher benefits for wealthier families since auxiliary benefits scale up as a percentage of income and since wealthier families are much more likely to have a stayat-home spouse. Under current law, a billionaire over the retirement age could receive their normal benefits and gain an auxiliary benefit for a dependent child. In 2020, total auxiliary benefits for all spouses and children of retired workers cost $39.434 billion.358 For these reasons, the Social Security Reform Act would phase in a limitation on auxiliary benefits. The RSC Budget would expand upon the Social Security Reform Act’s reforms to gradually phase out such auxiliary benefits for high-income beneficiaries that do not need the extra support for their family members. Working- and middle-class families would still be eligible. "

That's good, of course, but these are anecdotal examples. Where will the spending cuts come from? Who will get tax cuts?

When federal spending is cut, states and local burgs are forced to generate the difference. That is what caused the surge in local fees and fines that caused lawsuits. They're trying to keep the cops on the payroll and the library open without federal funding. Federal tax cuts mean local, primarily regressive tax increases, i.e., the poor are hit the worst as usual. It isn't magic.

 

[DIY-HP-LED]

Jimmy Kimmel calls out Elon Musk for pushing Paul Pelosi conspiracy

 

[hanimmal]

Looks like they want to eliminate benefits for billionaires; oh the horror!

"Phase Out Auxiliary Benefits for High Income Earners – Ensuring Social Security provides a secure retirement for low and middle-income retirees requires modernizing auxiliary benefits, which are add-on benefits for the retired wage-earner’s spouse, children, and certain other dependents. These benefits provide higher benefits for wealthier families since auxiliary benefits scale up as a percentage of income and since wealthier families are much more likely to have a stayat-home spouse. Under current law, a billionaire over the retirement age could receive their normal benefits and gain an auxiliary benefit for a dependent child. In 2020, total auxiliary benefits for all spouses and children of retired workers cost $39.434 billion.358 For these reasons, the Social Security Reform Act would phase in a limitation on auxiliary benefits. The RSC Budget would expand upon the Social Security Reform Act’s reforms to gradually phase out such auxiliary benefits for high-income beneficiaries that do not need the extra support for their family members. Working- and middle-class families would still be eligible. "

I say let them keep it, but also stop giving them tax breaks on it once they make more than the current cap.