Government
Deficit Commission Proposal: Reduce Social Security Increases; Maybe Eliminate Mortgage Deduction
- Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:41pm by
Scott Baker
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Leaders of President Barack Obama’s bipartisan deficit commission are proposing to reduce the annual cost-of-living increases in Social Security. It’s part of a sweeping proposal to wrestle $1 trillion-plus budget deficits under control.
The proposal would also set a tough target for curbing the growth of Medicare. And it recommends looking at eliminating popular tax breaks, such as mortgage interest deduction.
As proposed, the plan by Chairman Erskine Bowles and former Sen. Alan Simpson doesn‘t look like it can win support from 14 of the commission’s 18 members to force a debate in Congress. Bowles is a Democrat and was former President Bill Clinton’s White House chief of staff. Simpson is a Wyoming Republican.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 679 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 530 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 426 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 329 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 280 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 288 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 169 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 280 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (153)
libertyordeath87
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:25pmHow about cutting some entitlements and closing a few worthless departments? Oh and stop giving money to the UN. That should save a bundle right off the bat.
Report Post »missy8s
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:04pmThe top four cuts I would propose are..
1) Eliminate the Department of Education, $47.6 billion!
2) Eliminate the EPA, $10.6 billion!
3) Eliminate Housing and Urban Development, $17.83 billion!
4) Eliminate Health and Human Services, $562.8 billion!
WHAM!
I just cut $637.83 billion dollars from the federal budget!
Report Post »heavyduty
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:25pmThat’s all the Demos are good for is to raise taxes one way or another so they can spend more. The Demos are the ones that got us into this mess to begin with.
Report Post »nordspan
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:23pmEventually, those of us 51% that actually work, we‘ll be so tired of not getting rewarded that we’ll quit too, and then what will we have?? ?? Oh, the old eastern block mentality of giving up. This is so dark and dreary a thought that I’ll continue to speak up, share the information, and complain to the gov’t. Spread the word, just spread the word!
Report Post »Silversmith
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:22pmYou know when we entered into the “deal” of taking on a mortgage, the tax break was part of the sales pitch, an incentive to saddle ourselves with this debt. Taking it away feels more like breech of contract than anything else.
Silversmith
Report Post »bellerd
Posted on November 11, 2010 at 11:21amI think it’s slide 25 or 26 of the file above, they address the mortgage deduction. It is proposed to eliminate the mortgage interest deduction on second homes, home equity loans, and mortgages over $500,000. I think this will leave the mortgage deduction intact for most of the middle-class.
Report Post »Slobaphobe
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:20pmLet’s see..uhmmm…this plan is aimed at the middle class. Why? Alinsky states in his devilish wisdom that you can’t pull off the revolution without the middle class. Buckle up folks.
Report Post »Chicago Ray
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:19pmSo nice going after the Seniors and the disabled right at the top of the list/ Perhaps if they allowed Seniors and the disabled to make more than is allowed what they call SGA level which is a paltry 1000 dollars over their checks they wouldn‘t need COLA’s…. The system is set up to punish the seniors and disabled for trying to work and keeps them in the ‘welfare class’ if that’s the only income they rely on.
Seniors should be able to make as much as they can considering most only collect SSA for a couple years before they die. Everyone in my family died within 3 years of collecting after paying millions and millions into the system over 7 decades. It’s sick.
Stop welfare and food stamps number one unless the people getting them are willing to help clean up their cities or what have you to earn some of that ‘free money’ until they find better paying real jobs.
You‘ll see them in the work force in no time when they realize either way they have to work they’ll get off welfare in a heartbeat if they have to clean the sides of roads and public parks and graffiti removal and so on….
Report Post »bellerd
Posted on November 11, 2010 at 11:08amI wholeheartedly agree. Anyone receiving welfare or food stamps should be performing community service work. Imagine how much money would be saved by our local/state governments, if people receiving these benefits were cleaning up the cities, performing the landscaping work, simple maintenance on government buildings, etc. There are more than enough people receiving aid, who could be giving back to their community.
Report Post »Deb4ks
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:19pmI’m so sick and tired of these people never wanting to cut spending! Looking for ways to increase peoples taxes without really calling it a tax hike is not the way we want you going!
Remember the part about We the People? We the People have spoken and we want you to cut spending!!!
Report Post »sWampy
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:18pmHow about cut deductions for sports tickets the rich use to buy votes, contracts, etc.
How about cut deductions ear marked for collage athletics.
How about stopping all federal funding of public schools, send it back to the states where it belongs.
Fire all federal employees that have a job with federal requirements that they don’t meet yet have the job anyway do to their race, who they are related to, or who they gave money to. At least 1/3 of those that work for my organization meet one of those 3 categories. We recently went through an A-76 reorg where they took 1/2 of the top guys, shipped them off for a year of tdy to write a rfp to see how to reorganize us. When they got back, they sent the other half of the top money makers off for a year to respond to the request for proposal. These 2 groups account for over 60 of the total salaries/benefits in my organization, neither group was missed, all the work continued to be done, and by most accounts was done better without the useless drones getting in peoples ways. We could have let either group go and services wouldn’t be hurt at all, but instead what did they do, they forced a bunch of the 90% of the organization that got less than 40% of the pay into early retirement, gave themselves all raises, and patted themselves on the back for doing a good job.
Cut welfare 20% a year for the next 10 years, the churches will pick up the slack, they will educate/motivate people to actually lift themselves out of poverty. At the end of 10 years the 10.73% of current funding that is left will be enough to cover those to vile for the churches to have help.
Report Post »Chicago Ray
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:31pmThose are some fine suggestions, the breaks these people in congress have outlayed for they and their friends when they retire on huge pensions that eclipse by far what many people with only high school educations ever make in a year working their azzes off in the blue collar world.
We could probably safely fire and eliminate half the government payroll and not miss a beat. All that money saved gets rebated back to the taxpayers for the first years and the people in the government jobs with these cushy pensions should be the first ones‘ who’s retirement ages should be raised up to 70. The very first ones. That there saves a trillion dollars guaranteed.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:51pmI like the cut of your jib, sir! Great ideas.
Report Post »GeneralGeorgeHThomas
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:12pmFine, when everyone pays the same rate of income tax on every dime they make!
Report Post »missy8s
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:47pmTotally agree General!
We need to eliminate ALL TAXES ON INCOME AND INVESTMENT and go to a strictly consumption and receipts based system.
If EVERYONE paid 10% and nobody got deductions of any kind deficits or funding issues of any kind ever again.
The top four cuts I would propose are..
1) Eliminate the Department of Education, $47.6 billion!
2) Eliminate the EPA, $10.6 billion!
3) Eliminate Housing and Urban Development, $17.83 billion!
4) Eliminate Health and Human Services, $562.8 billion!
WHAM!
I just cut $637.83 billion dollars from the federal budget!
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:05pmAnd yet you wouldn’t cut a single dollar from the bloated military budget of approx. 650 billion dollars, at the same time turning America into something like a third world country because you cut 30-40% of all medical research (which is, contrary to popular belief, largely state-funded), all disease prevention, food and drug safety and dozens of other things that save American lives every day.
Well done, are you going to pursue a career in politics? Because I’d vote for that just to see how it turns out. Morbid curiosity, so to speak.
Report Post »missy8s
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:55pmGet rid of the Defense Procurement Administration.
WHAM!
$88 billion!
Let the DIA handle asset procurement and advanced technologies!
Report Post »Uber
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 6:25pmI would cut the Department of Energy => 25 Billion
Report Post »This department was put in place to make the US more energy independent. Thats not working out at all!
missy8s
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:11pmIf you notice the strategy here, this is designed to inflame the radicals and the idiot children of the left…
When they start their little “revolution” you won’t see one old guy throwing bricks, just teenage masked thugs and double dipping government union drones.
“The revolution will be televised” but the “truth” won’t be, this is a conspiracy of evil and the hateful leftist media is in on it.
Report Post »oldeagle101
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:11pmHow about cutting off all foreign aid…especially to countries that don’t like us!!
Report Post »Chicago Ray
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:25pmThank you thank you. No more AIDS money to Africa, no more subsidies for country’s relying on our military force to keep them free.
Now they pay for that luxury, our military may as well be paid by these countries sucking off their work and our country’s military might. I‘m sick of Euro Peeon’s whining about this and that.
Let them support their own military forces from now on or STFU and open your wallets and pour out those Euro’s. And no more aid in any form for the Muslim countries, forcing their rich monarchies banking all those petro dollars to start supporting these billions of terrorists in robes and turbans. I’m sick of that &^*() too.
Number three, the modern era Manhattan project to get off foreign oil to bankrupt that middle east forever and let Darwin take over.
Report Post »Disabledvet
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:11pmtake the $700,000 you gave as a grant to a college to study cow farts of cows that eat organic foods. stop spending so stupidly and hey why not give our social security back to us and let us invest it our way,
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:18pmThere is no social security to “give back”. The money you pay into SS isn’t being put into a savings account, it’s being used to pay for the SS of the previous generation. Your SS will be paid by the next generation of people (ie the college kids and young adults of today).
Report Post »GeneralGeorgeHThomas
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:11pmFine! When EVERYONE pays income tax on every dime they make! FLAT TAX FLAT TAX FLAT TAX
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:34pmNo, no flat tax, and no income tax.
Repeal the income tax and replace it with nothing. The very notion of an income tax is socialist to its core. It should have never happened in these united States in the first place.
Repeal the income tax, replace it with nothing, and reduce government spending by only allowing fully constitutionally vetted programs to be funded. Ta da, debt gone and surplus in 10 years maximum.
Report Post »Ronko
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:08pmIts really simple reform social security put a limit on the amount of years that you pay out and that eliminates a 1/3 of the problem right there. Also tell the ponies in washington not to spend or waste my money on crap that we don’t need.
Report Post »saneromeo
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:08pmIts a simple fact of life that progressives don’t understand. You want out of debt you spend less than you take in, on the flip side is if you want to lose weight you burn more calories than you consume. They seem to get the two ideas mixed up, hey maybe we should set up a gov’t agency to tell us the sky is blue too…
Report Post »wianno94
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:03pmYje commision recomends raising the age to 68 or 69 by 2075. Here’s an idea. Stop SS altogether for anybody under the age of 16. NO pay in, NO payout. Prorate it for everybody between 17-50. Viola(not French), in 60 years or so, NO SS. Same for Medicare.
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:10pmWhere would you get that money for the people 17-50 who probably want some money when they’re old? They’ll pay into SS all their lives but there is no next generation to pay for them. Someone would have to pay for that.
Report Post »LLATPOH
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:13pmIndeed – stop at a certain age, prorate for older. Lots of people (including myself) will get hosed out of what we’ve put in, but this has got to stop.
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:21pmPeople who paid into SS for decades would be out of a LOT of money. I don’t see that as a workable solution. Whoever starts into that direction would commit political suicide.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:30pmYes, exactly.
There is no easy way out of this. There is going to be pain, and lots of it. Pro-rating, will cost us (you and me) taxes to be certain. Let’s pay it and be done with it, even if it hurts, so that people who now depend on it now (foolishly if innocently) are not hurt. Then everybody today under 18 doesn’t pay anything in or receive anything out, and by the time 2075 rolls around SS is gone, history, a ghost.
There is going to be pain, as I mentioned. It can be a moderate amount now, or it can be a total collapse of our entire system of constitutional governance just a few years from now. To hell with politicall expediency, and frankly to hell with the AARP who will scream and claw and play every dirty trick under ths sun. If we can’t fight and sacrifice to save our children and grandchildren, what good are we anyway?
Report Post »kaydeebeau
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:35pmThe taxes on everyone for SS will have to continue for all non-retirees to pay the bill for the current unfunded liabilities – this is an illustration of how paying off the current debt will be for future generations.
There does need to be a cut-off at some point (soon) where no new folks are added to the roles and those that are within 10 – 20 years of retirement age now will be the last to participate in the benefits. The rest of us will just have to resign ourselves to conitnue to pay – I don’t exactly mind since I am paying for my parents (who paid in for more that 50 years when there was no other option like 401k)
We have to help those seniors currently on it understand the goal is to keep it for them.
there will be more things like this necessary for us to suck up if we are really serious about cutting the debt and the deficit. We have to make the hard spending cuts – after all the big wasteful spending is capped first!
Report Post »mallsniper
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:02pmIf you are a generation X ‘er, you knew Social Security et al was just another tax on us.
Report Post »So we invested in 401k, knowing that this will be our only way of retiring.
So politicians attack Wall Street, and devalue the dollar, all for one goal.
Hmmm…I wonder what that goal could be.
My government (both R and D) working together to kill every free minded citizens current and future wealth.
I just cannot understand what that could accomplish.
;)
silentwatcher
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 11:53pmabsolute control.
Report Post »sawhite
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:57pmHow about killing the health care bill, eliminating support of illegals, quit funding pork projects, sell back GM, quit taking all the money out of the social security program. Eliminating or reducing deductions is still raising taxes. The problem isn’t the income its the out go. If you want us to work until we’re 68, fine. But if no company wants to employ us at that age, how iwll that work? There are only so many WalMart greeter positions. How about letting us have some of those $150k per year governmant jobs at $70k to augment our retirement? Are these really the best ideas they could come up with??
Report Post »myfamily04
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:05pmI totally agree…I would take one of those positions for 50k with all of the other freebies that they usually get.
Report Post »Have-Gun-Will-Travel
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:56pmdoes have less spending this SS is only a small part
Report Post »layoff 10% of goobernment employees
freeze all other gooberment jobs for 3 years
myfamily04
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:02pmYou should also add to take at least a 5% pay cut!
Report Post »OneRepublic4us
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:07pmInstead of laying them off just give government workers a 50% pay cut to bring their pay down to private sector pay. If they don’t like it they can quit.
Report Post »walkwithme1966
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 10:25pmHow about making cuts in the defense budgets such as weapons systems what we don’t need!!
Report Post »http://maboulette.wordpress.com
Marcobob69
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:54pmThere are many Americans, myself included, that depend on their Social Security benefits every month just to survive. With the dollar being devalued by the fed, everything will be rising in price. How are the seniors supposed to keep up WITHOUT a COLA every year? Why is it that the first thing politicians want to cut or eliminate directly affects seniors and or the disabled? Can someone please answer that question, I’m sure there are many seniors and disabled people that would love to hear the answer.
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:02pmBecause people are asking for it, mostly. Politicians like to be elected and they achieve that by making promises. And there are scores of people calling for a reduction/defunding or removal of social security since it’s essentially socialism.
The usual justification for this is that people should look after themselves and save up enough money to live through their twilight years while they’re of working age.
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:09pmHonestly something about Social Security does need to be done; even if it is a gradual phasing out of part of it, to be combined with peoples IRA plans, and investments. There are several realalistic plans to be looked at where the safety net will still remain, and still be able to allow investments of small parts of a persons SS tax deductions into an effective return.
It can be done, and something does need to be done.
It needs to be done in a realistic way, and a safe way at the same time.
Report Post »SRH
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:27pmSomething has to be done about social security because it is the biggest drain on our federal budget. We simply can’t afford it because we have more money being drawn from it that being paid into it. That being said, it is not feasible to simply say “we are cutting social security tomorrow.” It has to be phased out. The goverment has told citizens for decades that social security is there for them when they retire or if you become disable. Many older citizens did not save for retirement as they probably should have because of these promises by the federal government. Therefore, we have to give our citizens time to save for their own retirement with a phase out method.
I’m 30 years old, and I have known for 15 years that I would never receive social security. I knew that the system was unsustainable and that I needed to prepare for my own retirement. No matter that I have been paying into the system for 15 years; I won’t see a dime of it returned to me because by the time I reach retirement age, there won’t be any money available in the system. It will have collapsed on its own by then. Just read your social security statement; It says right in the opening paragraphs that the system will be out of funds relatively soon if something isn’t done (I forget the exact year, but it isn’t far off).
Report Post »bobby535
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:29pmIt can be phased out without hurting the people currently on it or within a certain amount of years of being on it, and it SHOULD be done. The program is a scam, and breaking us.
Why not put some money away for yourself? I can’t really talk, because I haven’t saved any myself, and the money that has been taken out of my checks will never go to me if phased out, but that’s fine. I didn’t know what was right in my early working years, I was never taught to save but now I know.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:41pmI would be ok with eliminating social security if the government will give me back what I have already paid in so I can invest my money. Everybody say fifty or younger gets reimbursed to invest thier money as they see fit and the fifty and olders continue to receive SS when they retire unless they make enough to live comfortably without it from other investments. Would that work as a way to kill SS without hurting anyone?
Report Post »Nvrforget
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:58pmKate, it probably would hurt everyone because the money being paid out to people fifty or younger would have to come from somewhere.
As I mentioned in another post, the SS isn’t a savings account, the money you pay into it gets spent the moment it leaves your wallet. You pay for the previous generation, and the next generation (college kids and young adults of today) is supposed to pay for you.
The money you’re trying to reimburse people with would have to come from somewhere, and the money for people 50+ who would still receive SS would have to come from somewhere. This would necessitate SERIOUS cuts in other areas. That would be incredibly painful if at all possible and any politician who starts down that road would commit political suicide.
If there was an easy way to solve this problem, it would have been taken already. The only solutions would be so painful that no politician would dare touch them.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:03pmNVR I realize that anything we did would be very costly but in thirty or forty years SS would be gone.
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:03pm@Untamable Kate
That is among several plans I have seen and is realalistic indeed. One thing to take into account though is the truly disabled people on SSI and SSD. We need to figure out how to handle their situations as well. I am not talking about those who are just freeloaders, I mean the truly disabled who depend upon it – or another solution that will work needs to be found. Perhaps a mixture of non-profit groups such as churches, or such and govenrment? I do not know a efficient solution(s) as of yet.
Report Post »New-American-Saviors
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:54pmVoter Remorse Yet ?… It‘ll get better and better I’m certain. This Dictatorship has got to go. I’m certain there are other solutions. But might as well pay back the people that are turning against you.And PUNISH the ones that Own a House,Make the Payments on time.
Don’t Anyone dare say “Un-Believable”. it’ll get better.
Report Post »TheGreyPiper
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:54pmIt’s probably time to phase out Social Security as a mandatory tax anyway. Like all socialism, it’s essentially a pyramid scheme, and the pyramid has reached the last level. Time to make it a check-off on the tax returns, let them as want to trust their dough to the government continue to do so, and let those that don’t pursue their own IRAs or whatever. A lot of people will probably get hosed by such a wind-down, but better than hosing everyone and the country too.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:17pmThe only problen with that would be the folks who don’t pay into either and we wind up supporting them anyways when they retire.
Report Post »HKS
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:51pmHow about we try spending less to start. daaa.
Report Post »dablooz
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:51pmHow about just taking the 2005 budget and implementing it?
Report Post »booger71
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:48pmHey commission guys, how about just reducing spending, I know you guys are geniuses and all that, but just sayin’
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:54pmYes, exactly, why not reduce government instead?
The government never shrinks in size here. Never.
Report Post »snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 2:56pmAgreed, the solution is very simple what comes in as revenue must equal what goes out. Then you have a balanced budget. Simple, which is why they are not doing it, and just destroying our nation.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:01pmEliminate mortgage interest deduction? Is that equivelent to a tax hike on people making $250,000 or less? He won’t be happy until the elderly are eating dog food (more of them) and homeowners are strapped to the wall.
Report Post »tea ****** patriot
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:03pmYes,
Social security, and mortgage deductions don’t count as cutting spending.
We asked you to cut government and stop with the handouts.
But not our handouts…..
snowleopard3200 {mix art}
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:04pmHow about they adopt and actually carry out the following steps…
1. Cap off all salaries, and slash the current ones by 10%
2. Have them pay for their own insurances (even the senators and the represenatives)
3. Balanced budget each and every year.
4. Have a set portion of each years budget go to paying off the national debt (say 5-10%)
5. Dismantle all dead weight departments and unneeded offices effective in 30 days.
6. Reorganize the national tax code with a flat rate tax.
7. Bring our troops home from overseas, and start to close those bases down.
This would be a good position to start from, and the need to start is now, while the little window of time we have remains.
Report Post »DimmuBorgir
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:10pm@ TEABAGGIN
Not taking something from the citizen is not the same as a handout. Handouts are something that were never yours in the first place. Try again
Report Post »Aeric98
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:13pmagreed. cut spending . . . don’t milk us for more money.
Report Post »2dollarbill
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:16pmWhy does everyone talk about Social Security as handouts? I actually work for a living, and part of my pay (you know – the stuff some people WORK for) goes to pay into my Social Security account. It’s not a handout. It’s MY money! And if I live long enough I want it back! How about just CUTTING GOVERNMENT PAY and changing GOVERNMENT retirement benefits?
Report Post »tea ****** patriot
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:16pmExactly,
Those social security increases were thiers to begin with. Same as the deduction of interest on your house, government subsidized housing was ours to begin with.
Keep on tea ******
feedupandreadytotakeaction
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:18pmSo he is thinking of taking away the deductions for home interest. No surprise here as most of his supporters do not have homes so what does he have to lose…………. just another reason to get them all out in 2012!
Report Post »mimitweetin
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:18pmIsn’t cutting the deduction for our Mortgage interest the same as Raising Taxes? Yes, I agree, how about just cutting their spending?!?
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:22pm@TBP
Dude, you’re not a very good troll. Please, try to improve your game, it might help us take you seriously.
Reducing SS COLA is actually a great thing. That’s a government program.
Letting us keep more of our hard earned money is not a government program. It’s our money to begin with, not the government’s. Ergo, when they stop letting us keep a percentage of our own money, then that is not a reduction in government, that’s an increase in taxes.
This of course is basic economics, which I’m certain you must be familiar with at some level. This is why I believe that your ability to troll is being greatly hampered, as you’re not rising above even basic economic concepts.
1/10 I’m afraid. Good luck on improving. Or, and this is just a suggestion, you could try to not be so bitter towards people who don’t agree with you. Life is far too short to go through it mad at everybody.
Slainte.
Report Post »GhostOfJefferson
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:24pm@2dollarbill
I agree you should get every dime you had confiscated to pay for SS given back to you, plus a modest interest rate for lost time. That said, the average time to have your full investment paid back is about 3 years. After that, you are in fact receiving a handout, paid for by the labor of others, that you have not earned.
I’m sorry, but its true. Even with some modest interest, 5 years and you can no longer claim to not be taking a form of Senior Welfare.
Report Post »CultureWarriors
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:26pmYou think there was a shellacking Nov 2nd. Take away the mortgage deduction and there will be a complete house cleaning. Didn’t O promise no tax increases for us in the middle class? Oh that’s right, he’s a liar. Here’s what you guys in Washington need to do … listen carefully … it’s really, really simple… I’ll spell it big so you can read it …. S T O P S P E N D I N G !
http://www.youtube.com/culturewarriors
Report Post »Beckofile
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:26pmAnd when we talk about a balanced budget take it back to 2008 levels before the huge spending increases.
Report Post »Polwatcher
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:32pmI love how these geniuses set their priorities on who to screw first. Somehow the overpaid federal employees are never included. They need to start at the bottom line, get rid of all non essential departments and employees, and then cut the rest across the board with no tax increases.
Report Post »AntiCommie
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:33pmThis politically correct welfare system could be easily fixed if they would just review the laws at SSA.gov. Everyone that pays into the system has an account (on paper). Simply make one payout per account, instead of paying to ex-wives (unlimited number), wives, adopted kids, and the list goes on. Say there are 2 ex-wives and one current wife and these three women have not paid into the SS and the guy draws $1500 per month – all three of the women will receive $750 per month EACH and when he croaks, all three women will receive $1500 per month EACH – that’s $2250 overpayment while he’s alive and $4500 overpayment after he dies – plus all the other people drawing on his account – before and after death.
Like with any other retirement plan, if you want your wife to continue getting your benefits after you die, then you take a reduced amount. All financial settlements should be made in divorce court.
The same goes for Medicare. “Means testing” is stealing from those who were responsible and saved for retirement.
Report Post »GUERRILLAGUITAR
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:37pm@*********,
Deducting home mortgage interest means homeowners keep more of THEIR money. NOT a handout.
Re: Social Security. Look up “Ponzi Scheme” sometime.
We pay into Social Security. Therefore, NOT a handout. It was sold to the American people as an “investment” by FD (socialist) R. LBJ and his fellow ‘RATS started raiding it for their own little spending plots. If it had never been raided, there would be FAR higher pay-outs to the investors right now; far higher even than the pitiful COLAs each year. Frankly, the government should just give it ALL back to US and let US use it as we see fit. Nevertheless, the government giving OUR money back to us IS NOT a “handout.”
Report Post »BetterDays
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:38pm2dollarbill:
Report Post »Then take ONLY what you put in, nothing more nothing less. No interest, you could have fought to invest for yourself all along, but you CHOSE to take the “extras” the government would “add” to you piddlin little imput, thats taking a “handout” by ANY measure.
I don’t care one bit for SSI, and will not collect it even if it somehow survives (I’m 50 and BROKE), but I will not leach off my nor your children and grand children! I’ll WORK untill I die to this flesh. no big deal.
SSI used to be for widows and orphans only, perhaps it should go back to this if it won’t go away.
Lastly, Reduce the size of government peroid. Be rid of NEEDLESS agencies (Federal reserve, DOE, HUD, Fanny and Freddie, Consumer protection, no more “czars”, set strict pay limits at 30,000-60,000 dollars for every federal employee no matter the “level”, enforce immigration laws, repeal healthcare and financuial reform, and most off all make it a FELONY to be a federal employee and to be socialist/communist.) once and for all!
firstHat
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 3:58pmNope. If we hope to survive there can be no sacred cows!!!
While I do NOT think we should look to pull back money meant to go to those retiring in the next five years, I do think we MUST think about pulling back SSI. The money just isn’t there. It was a ponzie scheme from the start. I remember my mother telling me this back when I was in my twenties that it would be broke by now. She was only a few years off.
WE NEED TO GET REAL. Look we need to cut EVERYWHERE. I’m all for raising the retirement age for those ten years or so out. We need to wean ourselves off of programs like Medicare and SSI.
Having said that, the changes that need to be made to SSI will need to be slow enough so that it is not going to bail us out of the short term. So YES, I agree with the rest of you that we also much look elsewhere!
Report Post »sawman
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:01pmLet’s just go ahead and make it equitable for the citizens of this country.
Report Post »Make “ALL” government employees subject to the same salaries as the enlisted military services.
Get rid of the attractive salaries and expense accounts.
Make the government jobs positions of service, and not careers.
It’s ridiculous for a “servant” to make more than the employers (us).
As long as Congress is allowed to vote themselves pay raises, and government unions to set their own paychecks, we are in trouble.
Cutting programs should start at the TOP, and work down to the citizenry. Top heavy businesses cut the top first. Cutting the bottom first is suicide to a business. A top heavy truck will teeter until it is turned over if it’s not loaded properly. Government’s solution is to remove the heaviness of the wheels. It can’t turn over if it has no wheels.
tierrah
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:43pm@2dollar: You’re exactly right! I’ve paid into SS for over 50 years and that was my retirement plan … it’s too late for me to start over if they privatize the program, so what do I do? I’m too old and infirm to get a job, even if one were available. I’m collecting MY money plus that matched by my employer (thank you employers!) that the government demanded from me for over 50 years! I feel sorry for the younger generation who will never receive any payback for all the SS taxes they are now paying. Trust me, if you never held a blue collar job, as in my case – always minimum wages – it is most difficult to survive in today’s market with the SS benefit I receive. I hear they are wanting to eliminate the cost of living adjustment for SS recipients. I’d be okay with that if all the government employees would also have to forgo any adjustment for cost of living. Last year they denied senior citizens this adjustment; but Congress voted to give themselves a 3% raise for the same. I have always been a mild mannered person, but now I want to throw punches in the faces of those in Washington!!!! God help us, we are in the hands of very greedy and self serving people.
Report Post »walkwithme1966
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:43pmExactly where would you like them to cut? Just curious!! http://maboulette.wordpress.com
Report Post »voodoo donut
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 4:54pmUh, “Tea ******’” (Hey, if the shoe fits and all that.)
“We asked you to cut government and stop with the handouts.
But not our handouts…..”
Typical liberal. A TAX BREAK IS NOT A “HANDOUT”. Is this a difficult concept or something? As much as you lefties want to push the meme that all money really belongs to the government, most people understand THAT’S NOT HOW IT WORKS IN OUR SOCIETY.
Yes, I’m shouting. I am SO sick of you people trying to shape opinion so dishonestly. What utter horse hockey.
Report Post »VTSickFreak
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 5:32pmI am a manager in a Fortune 500 company that ranks in the top 20 today. Ten years ago my company was on it’s death bed. Tough decisions needed to be made. My Executives knew that spending had to be cut drastically before the ship could be righted. The cuts were deep and they were painful. However, a decade later I am proud to report that my company is at the top of it’s game. We are leading our industry in innovation, we’re maximizing market share and our revenue, profit and stock value it at an all time high. Oh yeah, after shedding 30% of our workforce we now have more employees than we had before the early 90′s layoffs. That’s LEADERSHIP. What we have in Washington is a bunch of wussies. They don‘t have the balls to do what’s tough but necessary in the short term in order to realize long term gains. CUT THE SPENDING!
Report Post »mnandke
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 6:02pmThey do, they reduce the size of government spending to 21% of GDP. Didn’t you read the slideshow proposal?
Report Post »VTSickFreak
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 6:36pm21% is not a drastic cut. It’s simply a start. They need to get serious.
Report Post »EP46
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 7:23pmAbsolutely right. They do not know the meaning of the words“cut spending”….but did you catch this………REDUCE the cost-of-living for social security….how do you reduce ZERO..there has been a zero cost-of-living increase for retirees and disabled people on social security since obama took office. Another gold star for government math !
Report Post »ratposion
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 9:49pmAgreed, always going after the American people this is what the state governments does as well. Never true cuts in government they always want to screw the American people. CUT government size and stop spending aholes
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on November 10, 2010 at 9:49pm2dollarbill… I agree.. what makes it alright for the government to not only take that money from our checks but it’s MATCHED with funds for the our employer.. Even the Republicans are talking about changing it so those 50 down have a different type of retirement.. so if you went to work at 20 and have been paying into the system for 30 all that money just VANISHES ?? PLUS everyone who has been paying into MEDICARE since it started WHERE is that money for us?? As it is when you go to collect medicare you have to pay $100 out of your SS check towards it.. so if you prepaid for both SS and medicare for 40 years.. double that amount.. if you wait for full retirement which would be 67 and you live another 10 years average that would mean they collect.. use and abuse 40 years worth of money and you get paid back 10.. our Politicians work 4 years pay in NOTHING to SS and get a nice pension and FREE HEALTHCARE.. for LIFE.. It‘s NOT the workers who are getting a HANDOUT it’s the POLITICIANS and YES it’s time people and that includes those on this and other comment boards quit calling those that are FORCED to pay into SS as getting handouts.. It’s people who are getting this money and NEVER worked and Politicians who are getting Public money without paying into the system that are getting the HANDOUTS….
Report Post »staythecourse
Posted on November 11, 2010 at 8:13amMeanwhile, ms. clinton announces that we just transferred 150 mllion dollars to the pallestineans to “help them pay off their debt” and pay for their security. She states we are doing this because their economy is growing! Never mind that we don’t have the money!… and that we have a debt in the trillions… but we are going to pay off their debt. Transfer of us wealth is underway. She says this bring to total for this year an amount of $600 million dollars we have given them.
Report Post »