Trumps Presidency 2025

[gehringer_2]

13 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Unless they can find a way to pay back all the money they "borrowed" from the fund, there needs to be something done. Raising the age wouldn't be for older folks now, just for 20 to 30 year olds, 40 years in the future. But cuts may still need to be made, I have no answers. But just raising the income cap is kinda unfair unless they raise the monthly maximum benefit. And that would defeat the purpose.

There is no fund, there are only entries in a fictional account book. It's is a mechanical impossibility for the US government to 'save' money - the only thing it could ever do is buy it's own Fed Res bonds, and all that does practically is contract the money supply. If the SS 'trust fund' is empty, all that means is that the proceeds from current SS taxes are less than payments, and all that happens if the checks keep going out is that the Federal deficit goes up by that imbalance, and it would certainly be the end of world if the deficit funded SS payments instead of say - corporate tax cuts, or golden ballrooms or oil depletion allowances or F-35s. Just turrible!

The way it really works is that in years when SS took in more than it paid out, the Federal government spend the money out of the general fund and wrote an 'iou' to the SSA. No money gets 'saved'. Those IOUs are the mythical trust fund.

Edited 4 hours ago by gehringer_2

[1776]

How about the possibility of eliminating the COLA? Maybe phasing it out over a couple of years. There was no COLA prior to 1975. Or maybe, somewhat along the lines of means testing, the COLA would only apply to certain qualifiers.
 
 

 

[gehringer_2]

6 minutes ago, 1776 said:

How about the possibility of eliminating the COLA? Maybe phasing it out over a couple of years. There was no COLA prior to 1975. Or maybe, somewhat along the lines of means testing, the COLA would only apply to certain qualifiers.
 
 

 

or the mirror image of that - which would be to raise the contribution income limit and then index that to inflation. They've had to 'rescue' SS before - it's usually  done Chinese menu style - a little of this, a little of that - raise the eligibility ages a year across the board, raise FICA 0.5%, raise the FICA limit income some.

Edited 3 hours ago by gehringer_2

[chasfh]

25 minutes ago, Sports_Freak said:

Unless they can find a way to pay back all the money they "borrowed" from the fund, there needs to be something done. Raising the age wouldn't be for older folks now, just for 20 to 30 year olds, 40 years in the future. But cuts may still need to be made, I have no answers. But just raising the income cap is kinda unfair unless they raise the monthly maximum benefit. And that would defeat the purpose.

Raise the minimum age on the young kids but don't raise it on us. I like the way you think. 😉😁

I think raising the income cap is the perfect solution, and I don't care if it's unfair because it is supposed to be a wealth transfer program, not a government-run individual pension fund. I don't think it's any more unfair than funding unemployment insurance with workers' taxes. Raise the cap to a million dollars. That seems like it would go a long way toward cutting down the shortfall.

[Tiger337]

29 minutes ago, chasfh said:

Raise the minimum age on the young kids but don't raise it on us. I like the way you think. 😉😁

I think raising the income cap is the perfect solution, and I don't care if it's unfair because it is supposed to be a wealth transfer program, not a government-run individual pension fund. I don't think it's any more unfair than funding unemployment insurance with workers' taxes. Raise the cap to a million dollars. That seems like it would go a long way toward cutting down the shortfall.

Raising the cap seems like a no brainer to me.  I don't know if raising the edge is even a good idea for the economy.  You are forcing people who are possibly past their working prime to work longer while possibly making it more difficult for younger people to find work.  

Edited 3 hours ago by Tiger337

[Hongbit]

The only way that I see this administration caring about Social Security is if there’s a way to make billionaires more money while punishing any previous woke polices and owning libs while doing it.  

[gehringer_2]

29 minutes ago, Hongbit said:

The only way that I see this administration caring about Social Security is if there’s a way to make billionaires more money while punishing any previous woke polices and owning libs while doing it.  

I actually suspect there is a good deal of daylight between Trump and the hard core GOP on this. I think Trump wants to be thought of as benevolent to his people, and SS is part of that since so many white MAGAs are recipients. I don't think Trump ever thinks in Austrian School terms about SS being Hayak's 'Road to Serfdom' like a Paul Ryan, he's just not that ideological. Of course, that doesn't mean he won't be willing to support changes in tax or spending policy that are terribly destructive to everything else as part of his solution to 'save' SS.

Edited 2 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

16 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

I actually suspect there is a good deal of daylight between Trump and the hard core GOP on this. I think Trump wants to be thought of as benevolent to his people, and SS is part of that since so many white MAGAs are recipients. I don't think Trump ever thinks in Austrian School terms about SS being Hayak's 'Road to Serfdom' like a Paul Ryan, he's just not that ideological. Of course, that doesn't mean he won't be willing to support changes in tax or spending policy that are terribly destructive to everything else as part of his solution to 'save' SS.

Trump read this and thought you were talking about Salma Hayek!

I do agree there has always been a conflict for Trump about wanting to be loved and wanting to be king. That may save us in some ways and screw us in others.  

 

 

[gehringer_2]

9 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Trump read this and thought you were talking about Salma Hayek!

I do agree there has always been a conflict for Trump about wanting to be loved and wanting to be king. That may save us in some ways and screw us in others.  

 

 

the other worrisome thing is that if he does start failing more seriously, the terrible people he has gathered around him will be happy to maneuver him into some really bad policy moves if they can.

[CMRivdogs]

So she’s back to pimping again?

 

[CMRivdogs]

 

[mtutiger]

2 hours ago, gehringer_2 said:

I think Trump wants to be thought of as benevolent to his people, and SS is part of that since so many white MAGAs are recipients. 

I don't think Trump cares all that much about his supporters and just expects them to go along with whatever he ends up doing

[mtutiger]

Judge Boxowine is the ace in the hole lolol

Edited 33 minutes ago by mtutiger

[chasfh]

2 hours ago, Tiger337 said:

I do agree there has always been a conflict for Trump about wanting to be loved and wanting to be king.

He honestly, truly believes he can have both.