288
Trump Eyes Social Security Cuts By Slashing Payroll Tax
(www.commondreams.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
288 points (97.4% liked)
News
23388 readers
1571 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So, this is an unpopular opinion, but I kinda agree with this (how tf am I agreeing with that orange turd?).
I'm in my 40s and even at this stage I won't get next to nothing back for all the years I've been putting into social security because both democrats and republicans (mostly republicans) have been steadily taking money out of it in order to fund a multitude of government programs for decades.
Sure, this is not ideal, and the right course of action would be to lower out defense spending budget, and remove a whole lot of subsidies we give to industry that does not help us, but that would just stop the hemorrhaging of money in SS, but we would also need to calculate how much money was lost and replace 100% in one go in order to trully fix this issue.
Sorry bout the ramble, just woke up and on my phone.
Or rich people could pay slightly more and you could retire. Just saying.
1000% behind this. THIS is what I'm saying
If you never personally have to call firefighters because your home is never on fire, if you never have to use WIC, unemployment, etc., do you also think your taxes shouldn't go to fund them? Not funding a social safety net because you don't think you're going to personally get anything out of it is, I think, a very bad take.
I don't think like that at all. We need to fund ALL of these programs 100%, it just feels like we keep funding them by taking cuts of social security istead of other things that dont need to be funded (ie. Corn, Oil, etc.)
Wait your hot take is "yes I agree, cut my government pension fund so that my EMPLOYER doesn't have to pay more taxes"??
This isn't you getting more in your paycheck now. This is your employer not having to pay as much in taxes. They will almost definitely not give you that money.
Sure I mean, the stock market might go up a bit for a little while with this extra cash flow, but eventually those people who would rely on the government pension fund will need to draw money from SOMETHING. Then those market gains will crash.
In what way is this beneficial beyond "stock market will go up a couple more years"? Which, by the way, unless you already have close to enough to retire now, just makes it MORE expensive for you to buy.
No, my take is "it's in a coma and dying, so if we arent going to do the right thing to fix it, just go ahead and finish the job, pull the plug and burry it instead of just posing for your campaign pictures while you remove more organs from it"
Worst case as-is, social security can make 80% of its commitments. This is a huge deal for most people. Hopefully we’d at least have the sense to prioritize lower income that need it the most - there are millions of our elderly who depend on this to live and you want to throw it away out of pessimism?
Are you aware nothing can take funds from social security? It’s more like borrowing. As we approach the cliff, it’s actually the rest of the government that will suffer first, with nothing to borrow
Social security and medicare prevent huge numbers of people from falling into poverty at one of the most vulnerable points in their lives. Wanting to cut it because it doesn't help you is cruel. Just cruel.
SS is insurance that you will not run out of savings. How many million do you have? You are going to need several.