Show of HandsShow of Hands

omniku February 15th, 2019 1:01am

HYPOTHETICAL: would you make (or have made) a personal sacrifice of waiting 5 years longer for Social Security and Medicare to kick in plus a 3% reduction in your SS check if it guaranteed these programs would be sustainable for the next 200 years?

13 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

ovcourse 8646 FJB
02/15/19 9:02 am

Wait 5 years to withdraw my own money out of “the bank”? Not a chance.

TierasPet
02/15/19 6:40 am

If it worked, yes. However, this is a very far out hypothetical question, and would never actually work.

The Government has been punting on problematic and complex issues for a very long time now at the expense of future generations. I want that to stop now.

Wackacrat Harford County
02/15/19 3:52 am

No. A guarantee from the government is an oxymoron.

Reply
omniku dot com
02/15/19 5:16 pm

It’s a hypothetical. Just assume that’s the case.

ronderman North Carolina
02/14/19 8:06 pm

Sure. I don’t expect to get anything anyway.

Reply
bluerum29 optimistic idealist
02/14/19 7:22 pm

I have no intention of counting on ss payments when I'm older. And that's unfortunate because it should be our money.

wmorriso Indiana, US ofA
02/14/19 7:05 pm

By doing so, you will be approving the long time, systematic theft of Social Security funds paid in over these many years, by the Congress in their “robbing Peter, to pay Paul” actions. It is time this theft is halted.

Reply
omniku dot com
02/14/19 8:56 pm

So I’ll put you down as a “no” then, right? 😀

Are you saying it would be theft because you paid in and aren’t getting your full share? Or are you saying it’s theft period and you oppose the entire system?

.

wmorriso Indiana, US ofA
02/14/19 9:03 pm

It is theft, and I do not like they have continuously hid the facts from those who have paid since it’s’ inception. Most Americans have no idea about the theft, nor that the gov’t is borrowing billions to pay the older citizens their SS. The Social Security System is bankrupt!

omniku dot com
02/14/19 9:14 pm

Got it. No doubt we’re borrowing heavily and paying interest on the debt.

I wouldn’t say “theft”, I’d say more of a Ponzi scheme. There are ways to fix these programs, the hard part is doing it. I was mostly trying to figure out if people would self-sacrifice for future Americans.

.

Praetorianus Fair enough.
02/14/19 6:46 pm

200 years? Make it work for 50 and most people are covered.

Reply
omniku dot com
02/14/19 8:25 pm

That’s the idea... would you self-sacrifice for future generations of Americans?

Squidboy Snarkapottamus
02/14/19 6:38 pm

No. The full retirement age for me is 67. I can make that easy....but most blue collar workers won’t. Pushing it to 72 is unreasonable. There is an easy fix...just uncap contributions..or double the ceiling. It would suck for me...but I could deal with it.

Reply
omniku dot com
02/14/19 8:32 pm

Are you saying that because of the labor involved in blue-collar work or because the healthcare cost/risk gets too high?

Because as far as the labor goes, the days of working in the fields and salt mines are pretty much over. Most jobs these days involve labor that people could do well into their senior years if they wanted to. So maybe you work in retail instead of welding for your final years. (Since this is hypothetical, we’ll pretend for a moment we aren’t brink of automation Armageddon)

.

omniku dot com
02/14/19 8:35 pm

I hear you on raising the ceiling or uncapping, but the purpose of this poll wasn’t to find a solution for social programs or even debate them… I wanted to see if Americans are still willing to self-sacrifice for future generations of Americans. I’m saddened, but not surprised by the results so far.

.

Squidboy Snarkapottamus
02/14/19 8:48 pm

To be less polite...poor people die younger...many of whom will never collect SS and are incapable of working that long. I get the point of your poll....but working that long is just not possible for a lot of people. www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/05/31/because-poor-people-die-younger-in-the-u-s-our-politics-are-more-unequal-than-elsewhere/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7649f782020b
.

Squidboy Snarkapottamus
02/14/19 8:50 pm

Btw...re blue collar work....a lot of it is still physically demanding. My younger brother is a cement mason...he has busted his ass for 30 years. his body is broken and he can barely work anymore. He will die long before me.
.

omniku dot com
02/14/19 9:02 pm

Gotcha. Oh yeah I’m not saying there’s no hard labor out there. There absolutely is. And I see people doing it a lot longer than they should, physically. My father in law is a landscaper and he’s fucked up his body permanently. He’s still working even though he’s way too old for it.

As someone who would be hurt by it… would you support doubling the ceiling on SS contributions? How about removing the cap entirely?

.

Squidboy Snarkapottamus
02/14/19 9:30 pm

There are 2 problems with removing the cap entirely...and I’m not sure how to solve them. 1. Do you continue to escalate the benefit for these high earners? If so...it’s close to a break even proposition. If you don’t, then it becomes welfare. We need to find some middle ground.
2. I’m a moderately high income earner...but the real wealthy guys...Buffet, Gates, Bezos...etc...pay no SS tax...because they have no wage income. We need to figure out a way to nominally tax their income...or wealth.
.

omniku dot com
02/15/19 5:11 pm

I completely agree

CoffeeNow Powderpuff Leftist
02/14/19 6:26 pm

No, because I know what that means in reality. We have passed the point in time where SS is sustainable on SS inputs. It’s being supplemented with other funds. It’s already unsustainable, so in order to make this hypothetical work it just means more taxes from elsewhere pumped into this Ponzi scheme. No thanks. Let it die

.

Reply
omniku dot com
02/14/19 8:27 pm

That’s why this is a hypothetical. Just imagine the solution worked. Would you do it?

.

CoffeeNow Powderpuff Leftist
02/15/19 11:05 am

Still no, because I don’t believe in the program. I think it’s immoral

omniku dot com
02/16/19 6:33 am

Fair enough. It is worth noting that Social Security lifted more people out of poverty than any program. Before Social Security 40% of seniors were in poverty, after social Security it dropped to 8%.

Across all Americans (including non-seniors) it dropped total poverty by 7 percentage points (!!!) from 20.5% to 13.5%. That’s pretty astounding!

This is an to say that the system doesn’t need reform. It absolutely does. However clearly we were much worse off before Social Security and it saved a lot of people from poverty. So personally I think calling it immoral is a bridge too far. I’d go with dysfunctional, myself.

.

CoffeeNow Powderpuff Leftist
02/16/19 8:13 am

Forgetting for a second that it was a scam from the beginning (there is no “SS trust fund”, it all went into the general pool), it’s a crutch that people have misunderstood and become dependent on. I know people who don’t even save for retirement bc “that’s what SS is for”. That’s a major problem

omniku dot com
02/14/19 6:02 pm

💠

HYPOTHETICAL: would you make (or have made) a personal sacrifice of waiting 5 years longer for Social Security and Medicare to kick in plus a 3% reduction in your SS check if it guaranteed these programs would be sustainable for the next 200 years?

Yes / No

.

omniku dot com
02/14/19 6:03 pm

(The “or have made” is for anyone who is already retired… Would you have done it in before you retired?)