Sunday, 19 February 2017

Bernie Sanders just proposed a law to save millennials' retirements

quote [ The bill would lift the payroll tax cap on highest earners and extend the life of the program through 2078. Currently, Social Security is funded through a 6.2% payroll tax that only applies to the first $127,200 a person earns in a year. The Sanders ... would lift the cap on all income above $250,000. ]

Common sense, and deader than a door nail.
[SFW] [politics] [+4 Good]
[by bbqkink@10:15pmGMT]

Comments

Seneki said @ 11:07pm GMT on 19th Feb [Score:1 Funny]
That thumb to me says "Hey Pete, you've got something on your forehead"
gma said @ 10:25pm GMT on 19th Feb
Conservatives have convinced younger Americans that social security is bankrupt and won't be there for us and largely we've accepted that as inevitable and don't care.

Even though it's good through about 2040, and needs only small changes to last much, much longer (and a change like the one proposed here would stop it from being such a regressive tax). Even though it's a highly popular program. Even though Americans are doing terribly at saving for retirement and could really use social security benefits. Even though the deal was we pay in now and future generations pay us back later, and we've been paying in with every paycheck.

It's honestly impressive the job they've done laying the groundwork for the eventual death of social security.
bbqkink said @ 10:34pm GMT on 19th Feb
Nothing new...

During the 1935 debate over Social Security, Republicans likened it to slavery and dictatorship.

"Never in the history of the world has any measure been brought here so insidiously designed as to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers and to prevent any possibility of the employers providing work for the people," said Rep. John Taber (R-NY).

"The lash of the dictator will be felt," said Rep. Daniel Reed (R-NY), "and 25 million free American citizens will for the first time submit themselves to a fingerprint test."

Rep. James W. Wadsworth (R-NY) cautioned that passage of Social Security would open the door to a government power "so vast, so powerful as to threaten the integrity of our institutions and to pull the pillars of the temple down upon the heads of our descendants."
lilmookieesquire said @ 11:42pm GMT on 19th Feb
I think it's more like a loss of faith in government. Could any person blame them? Clinton and Obama have been their only "liberal" role models.
gma said @ 4:54am GMT on 20th Feb [Score:1 Insightful]
To be fair to Obama, he proposed something along these lines in the 2008 campaign (it was either just lifting the cap entirely, or the same kind of thing with a gap and it kicks back in). I think sincerely, too, but the stonewalling from congress meant a half-assed healthcare reform was the only progressive thing he could muster in 8 years.
raphael_the_turtle said @ 9:56pm GMT on 20th Feb
Obama proposed a lot of things he later backtracked on. Pretending it was just obstructionism isn't doing anybody any favors.
foobar said @ 5:34am GMT on 20th Feb
Even though the deal was we pay in now and future generations pay us back later, and we've been paying in with every paycheck.

That's just a shell game the boomers used to steal from their children.

Sure, they get to pay for the much smaller generation that came before them, and then they try to force the smaller one that follows to pay for them.
bbqkink said[3] @ 1:58pm GMT on 20th Feb
My God not everybody was born yesterday. you sound more and more like a Republican spout bullshit with no facts to support your opinion...SS was started in the 30's not the 70's ...you like Trump need to find a different foil everything is not a boomer trying to harm you.

"Never in the history of the world has any measure been brought here so insidiously designed as to prevent business recovery, to enslave workers and to prevent any possibility of the employers providing work for the people," said Rep. John Taber (R-NY).

The cap was $3,000 from 1937–1950 and has bee raised over 30 times since then...we boomers are old but not 150 years old.
foobar said @ 2:53pm GMT on 20th Feb
In Canada it was the boomers. Not everyone is American.
bbqkink said[1] @ 2:56pm GMT on 20th Feb
Well The Social Security administration is a specific American law, and Bernie Sanders is an American senator. so I assumed that is what you were talking about.
Please explain how it is different in Canada?

From what I can tell there is no correlation between the programs, different on their face, and at first glance the Canadian one is better.

The Canadian Safety Net for the Elderly
foobar said[1] @ 3:47pm GMT on 20th Feb
Social security is a general term.

Ultimately it doesn't matter who put it in place, whether the boomers as in Canada or someone else, elsewhere. Boomers still exploited it, failing to pay their fair share and now expect to be able to loot the program.

Response to edit: social programs from anywhere in the developed world are generally going to be better than they are in the US.
bbqkink said @ 7:42pm GMT on 20th Feb
I give up.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
Karma
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things

Karma Rankings
ScoobySnacks
HoZay
Paracetamol
lilmookieesquire
Ankylosaur