GOP social security plan

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

Just a small step in the right direction of eliminating SS altogether.

Agreed. If you can't work as a 95 year old widowed grandmother, you should just kill yourself.

I have no problem with people providing financial assistance to a 95 year old widowed grandmother. I also have no problem with people planning for and saving up their own retirement so that they don't become old and poor. Just don't force people to do it. The use of force isn't the only solution.

We saw what happens with voluntary pension plans during the great depression. SS was literally created in response to that failure.

I'm sure there are compounds in North Idaho you can join if you want to skip out on taxes.

Whatever we saw in the great depression was something to learn from and correct in one way or another. As was the case so many times in history, politicians stepped in and used the power of government to correct the problem, rather than letting free people correct it themselves. So it's not really fair to say that free people would not have corrected it themselves given that the demand to do so never had a chance to manifest because of the implementation of Social Security.

Free people responded by creating around 30 state-level SS-like programs, but as the depression worsened, many programs ran dry. The nation wide program was created in response since it is less susceptible to micro-level economic declines.

I don't disagree that the federal system works better, but my original opinion is that free solutions can work better. We just need people to break the habit of immediately spending their time and resources on trying to get the government to solve a problem whenever something goes wrong, which has been happening for hundreds of years now.

And even if it doesn't work better on the specific outcome of providing a safety net for all people who need it, it works better on the specific outcome of morality, given that most people would agree that it is wrong to force harmless, innocent people to do things.

And when I say free people, I mean a solution that is voluntary-based, not a state or federal program that forces everyone to pay into it.

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

UWhuskytskeet said:

Fenderbender123 said:

Just a small step in the right direction of eliminating SS altogether.

Agreed. If you can't work as a 95 year old widowed grandmother, you should just kill yourself.

I have no problem with people providing financial assistance to a 95 year old widowed grandmother. I also have no problem with people planning for and saving up their own retirement so that they don't become old and poor. Just don't force people to do it. The use of force isn't the only solution.

We saw what happens with voluntary pension plans during the great depression. SS was literally created in response to that failure.

I'm sure there are compounds in North Idaho you can join if you want to skip out on taxes.

Whatever we saw in the great depression was something to learn from and correct in one way or another. As was the case so many times in history, politicians stepped in and used the power of government to correct the problem, rather than letting free people correct it themselves. So it's not really fair to say that free people would not have corrected it themselves given that the demand to do so never had a chance to manifest because of the implementation of Social Security.

Free people responded by creating around 30 state-level SS-like programs, but as the depression worsened, many programs ran dry. The nation wide program was created in response since it is less susceptible to micro-level economic declines.

I don't disagree that the federal system works better, but my original opinion is that free solutions can work better. We just need people to break the habit of immediately spending their time and resources on trying to get the government to solve a problem whenever something goes wrong, which has been happening for hundreds of years now.

And even if it doesn't work better on the specific outcome of providing a safety net for all people who need it, it works better on the specific outcome of morality, given that most people would agree that it is wrong to force harmless, innocent people to do things.

And when I say free people, I mean a solution that is voluntary-based, not a state or federal program that forces everyone to pay into it.

I think whatever modicum of morality that might be gained from the removal of a forced retirement account is completely dwarfed by the morality of providing essential basic income for society's most vulnerable people.

Mosster47 said:

The one thing about all of this that isn't brought up is the people in my age bracket. I am 33, I've been working since age 16. I have been working full time since age 18.

My grandparents and parents paid into Social Security for as long as I will. The fact that their early take age is 62 and mine will be between 65 and 67 is bullshit. If you pay in for 30 years you should get the same benefits as those before you.

I won't need the money at all, but I deserve to be able to use that money on hookers at 62 like my father and his father before him!