McCain's plan for Social Security

[jensieblue]

I am curious, how do young people truly feel about McCain's plan to privatize social security. Understand, I will be 61 in a couple weeks. I approched retirement with multiple IRA's including Roth's, with guaranteed retirement benefits through my job and with Social Security. I am afraid that privitization will result in diminshed profits as the funds will greatly increase their charges coming as you know out of your profits. You know that the funds with strong returns and solid reccords, can and will, lock out new investors. I get the strong feeling that young working people do not understand the implications of this. Help me understand why youth would support this plan and candidate.
what is the logic? or is it simply a case of denial..I too can remember a time when I thought I would never get old and didn't need to worry about retirement...but either you die or you retire. I liked to plan for the positive and plan to live comfortably until I die. What's up ya'll?????

[TooFarTampa]

What plan exactly are you referring to? He doesn't appear to have a specific plan. (neither candidate really does.) If you are talking about what the DNC is saying is McCain's plan, then I don't think that's entirely fair.

I can see some degree of logic behind the idea that privatization will secure SS over the very long term, but I am still against it. First you have the big problem with actually paying out benefits for the decades after privatization is introduced. Then you have the fact that too many people will screw up their own accounts and end up worse off than they otherwise would be.

Also, my thought has always been that it would be an artificial way to lift stock prices across the board. I have never seen it discussed how that would benefit the economy. I would be interested in hearing more on what would happen to the big picture if the "rising tide lifted all boats."

[ronfrazer]

Here's a link to John McCain's website (http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/0b8e4db8-5b0c-459f-97ea-d7b542a78235.htm) where he talks about Social Security down at the bottom of the page.

[wrobert]

I am curious, how do young people truly feel about McCain's plan to privatize social security. Understand, I will be 61 in a couple weeks. I approched retirement with multiple IRA's including Roth's, with guaranteed retirement benefits through my job and with Social Security. I am afraid that privitization will result in diminshed profits as the funds will greatly increase their charges coming as you know out of your profits. You know that the funds with strong returns and solid reccords, can and will, lock out new investors. I get the strong feeling that young working people do not understand the implications of this. Help me understand why youth would support this plan and candidate.
what is the logic? or is it simply a case of denial..I too can remember a time when I thought I would never get old and didn't need to worry about retirement...but either you die or you retire. I liked to plan for the positive and plan to live comfortably until I die. What's up ya'll?????


What is the down side to making people in charge of their own destiny? A plan that guarantees current payments while putting together a program that actually allows people to build wealth that can be transferred from generation to generation. What happens now when you pay into a program for 50 years, retire, and drop dead the next day and never get your payments back?

[jensieblue]

For TooFarTampa...I don't think McCain has given a name or other ID to his plans for Social Security. I found that if I entered a search for McCain Social Security I was gicen a list of sites with coverage of his history and stand on this subject. You may want to try that and take a look st the incormation. Some of the sites were newspaper articles and many of the sites were specifically dedicated to issue research and coverage. Let me know what you think. I remind you, I don't have a horse in this race. I had the good fortune to begin personal investments while I was fairly young. I just think it is sad that so few people appear to see it comming.

[rancid]

What is the down side to making people in charge of their own destiny? A plan that guarantees current payments while putting together a program that actually allows people to build wealth that can be transferred from generation to generation. What happens now when you pay into a program for 50 years, retire, and drop dead the next day and never get your payments back?


One downside is that if everyone has the option to do what they please with their money, many will not invest much for retirement while others may invest unwisely and end up with no money. Fast forward 40 years and these folks will need some help unless we let them all live out their days in financial misery. If that happens then society will have to establish another safety net for these folks thereby starting another government program like SS.

[futurebeachbum]

One downside is that if everyone has the option to do what they please with their money, many will not invest much for retirement while others may invest unwisely and end up with no money. Fast forward 40 years and these folks will need some help unless we let them all live out their days in financial misery. If that happens then society will have to establish another safety net for these folks thereby starting another government program like SS.

Seems to me that if they choose to end up with no money, society has no obligation to let them live out their lives in comfort. I thought we guaranteed life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not the attainment of happiness.

Eventually, people have to be responsible for themselves and their actions.

[wrobert]

One downside is that if everyone has the option to do what they please with their money, many will not invest much for retirement while others may invest unwisely and end up with no money. Fast forward 40 years and these folks will need some help unless we let them all live out their days in financial misery. If that happens then society will have to establish another safety net for these folks thereby starting another government program like SS.


What about doing a combination of guaranteed payments coupled with some variable amount that could be invested depending on your tolerance for risk?

I would hate to see someone live in financial misery, but if I plan for my future, and they do not, why is that on me? Maybe I sacrificed, as I do now to try to make sure I will have enough for the future, yet they travel Europe or some other nonsenses instead of saving. I guess I just do not get it. Please explain further as I am trying to understand.

[Margarita]

What about doing a combination of guaranteed payments coupled with some variable amount that could be invested depending on your tolerance for risk?

I would hate to see someone live in financial misery, but if I plan for my future, and they do not, why is that on me? Maybe I sacrificed, as I do now to try to make sure I will have enough for the future, yet they travel Europe or some other nonsenses instead of saving. I guess I just do not get it. Please explain further as I am trying to understand.

I would love to see social security privatized because I believe in personal responsibility and personal accountability. I trust in myself and my ability to plan for my future retirement needs more than I trust in government to do it for me.

[scooterbug44]

I would love to see social security privatized because I believe in personal responsibility and personal accountability. I trust in myself and my ability to plan for my future retirement needs more than I trust in government to do it for me.

Ditto, but most Americans aren't like that - just take a look at the mortgage mess!

The problem with making Social Security private is that we'll end up paying out $ to most people anyway through various social programs because they DIDN'T save. It's all well and good to say "make them pay the consequences" but realistically we'll end up footing the bill somehow - increased premiums, health care, gov't housing etc.

Most Americans aren't doing well with just paying their bills, let alone saving for the future. 6/10 Americans is in debt and you want them in charge of their own SS money?

[Margarita]

Ditto, but most Americans aren't like that - just take a look at the mortgage mess!

The problem with making Social Security private is that we'll end up paying out $ to most people anyway through various social programs because they DIDN'T save. It's all well and good to say "make them pay the consequences" but realistically we'll end up footing the bill somehow - increased premiums, health care, gov't housing etc.

Most Americans aren't doing well with just paying their bills, let alone saving for the future. 6/10 Americans is in debt and you want them in charge of their own SS money?

Yes, I want people in charge of their own money and I want them to take responsibility for their bad decisions and to reap the rewards of their good decisions.

[scooterbug44]

As do I!

But realistically, what are we going to if we privatize SS and they DON'T save? The burden will unfortunately be passed onto and severely affect those who WERE fiscally responsible.

For a comparable, people who DO have health insurance have much higher rates and costs because they are subsidizing those without insurance. My retirement dollars won't go as far when I'm subsiding all my peers who didn't save.

[beachmouse]

I would hate to see someone live in financial misery, but if I plan for my future, and they do not, why is that on me? Maybe I sacrificed, as I do now to try to make sure I will have enough for the future, yet they travel Europe or some other nonsenses instead of saving. I guess I just do not get it. Please explain further as I am trying to understand.

I see social security as a safety new for the lowest income workers who just aren't in a position to open up an IRA for themselves.

The people who I'm talking about, the ones who need social security the most, are hardly jetting off to Europe instead of putting retirement savings. They're trying to keep food on the table and gas in the tank and the big splurge of a vacation is driving up to Eufala every three years for the big family reunion, where they sleep on cousin Ed's floor while they're there because they can't afford to stay in a hotel.

We're a capitalist country. There are fundamentally going to be high wage earners and low wage earners, and not everyone gets to move into the high wage earner group in their lifetimes, no matter how hard they work. So why not make sure to take care of those who find themselves late in life who are unable to take care of themselves physically or financially?

[jdarg]

I see social security as a safety new for the lowest income workers who just aren't in a position to open up an IRA for themselves.

The people who I'm talking about, the ones who need social security the most, are hardly jetting off to Europe instead of putting retirement savings. They're trying to keep food on the table and gas in the tank and the big splurge of a vacation is driving up to Eufala every three years for the big family reunion, where they sleep on cousin Ed's floor while they're there because they can't afford to stay in a hotel.

We're a capitalist country. There are fundamentally going to be high wage earners and low wage earners, and not everyone gets to move into the high wage earner group in their lifetimes, no matter how hard they work. So why not make sure to take care of those who find themselves late in life who are unable to take care of themselves physically or financially?


And don't forget our soldiers- most of our military families aren't money making/investing machines. You can add this to the list of insults military families face- the list being topped by abysmal healthcare options in and beyond service.:bang:

[TooFarTampa]

What about doing a combination of guaranteed payments coupled with some variable amount that could be invested depending on your tolerance for risk?


This is the way the system is supposed to work, only workers are expected to save that "variable amount" outside of the SS system. It has always been meant as a supplement and as a safety net, but one that is meant to be distributed as fairly as possible. In fact I think the system works reasonably well from a fairness standpoint, even if not everyone ends up getting as much out as they paid in, and some get more.

The problem of course is that as the boomers retire and payments fall on the backs of the GenXers, the system is going to be way out of whack, and we need a fair plan of working it out until the GenXers retire and the plentiful numbers of echo boomers are lined up behind us to shore it all back up again. :wave: (Though most GenXers are cynical and aren't counting on much of anything.)

Creating huge changes in the meantime that would require a high percentage of unprepared people to be in charge of their own safety net is just plain wrong, IMO. If any part of SS is privatized, it should be ENTIRELY voluntary, and even then I'm not so sure. There are too many people out there with huge egos who will mess it all up and have nothing to fall back on, and then what?

Making such a major change to this important safety net, just a decade or so after most companies began dropping their pension programs entirely is simply a bad idea. Too much has already changed in the way Americans retire. It may be a little while before the middle-class workers have a good handle on how they are expected to successfully retire without pensions.

As do I!

But realistically, what are we going to if we privatize SS and they DON'T save? The burden will unfortunately be passed onto and severely affect those who WERE fiscally responsible.


Exactly. Here I give the example of both my father, and my brother. My father is a "free spirit" who never saved much of anything. His "plan" was to work until he dies. Nobody, and I mean nobody, could persuade him that this was a bad idea. Now he is 75 and all I can say is thank goodness for Social Security. Two weeks ago he wrecked on a scooter, which he is driving because of the price of gas. :yikes: His practice is waning with the housing market (he's an architect, kind of a nutty one). If it weren't for Social Security he would be living with us. So once again, thank the good Lord and FDR for Social Security!!! He is OK, but limping around. Oh yes, and thanks for Medicare too! :wave:

Then there is my brother. He has severe adult ADHD. Has struggled all his life with it in fact. He refuses to take medication for it. The problem is he does not understand that his life could be so much better if he did. Even though everyone tells him he needs to do it, he won't. He hops from job to job, relationship to relationship, living on his emotions, no health insurance, no savings, late on rent, late on bills, has a collection on his record from an ER visit after he got into a fight ... you get the idea.

At the very least, something will be put aside for him by the system and he will get to collect it later, even if it isn't much. Meantime, I just pray he marries a fun loving yet sensible woman who is willing to force feed him Ritalin. :roll:

[scooterbug44]

Based on my informal polling, it's not just the low income folks who need a safety net.

Add in people who get screwed in a divorce within a decade of retirement and have to start over, people who lose their pensions through policy changes and mismanagement by corporations, people who lose their assets through legal judgments, people whose savings are affected by a death or severe injury, people w/ mental or physical impairments, children whose "child support" comes from a deceased parents SS fund.......

[Mango]

While the occasional pulse of a conservative beat every now and then blips in my heart of free enterprise and capitalism, before the current administration gave me a stroke, the question is how does McCain plan on implementing a privatized SS system?

What will be the costs? I hear trillions of dollars thrown out there.
What about the funds already invested?
What kind of plan will be offered and what will be the costs to administer the plan? front load and back load fees?
What type of investments will be Americans be allowed to put their money in?
Will it be funds that only invest in US companies? and if that is the case, how do we prevent lobbies and government from extortion of citizens funds by manipulating the system?

The Social Security system is in essence a Ponzi scheme, for lack of a better word, which worked when you had higher birth rates contributing to the system. Now, with baby boomers all setting to retire who have paid into the system all their lives, by privatizing, what about the next group getting set to retire? If younger Americans are contributing to their own accounts, where do we plan to get the money to pay out benefits? What about the self employed who because of our failing economy can not make the maximum contribution?

Take a good look at the countries with privatized plans currently and one will see numerous problems with those, like Chile and Great Britain.

I'm all for finding a better solution, unfortunately McCain hasn't offered a solid one or workable plan. I don't even see one on his web site as of late. There was at one point, but it seems to be gone. What was there, was all of 3 lines devoting to privatization. Hardly a plan.

While Obama's plan may not be the perfect solution, it is a plan at least for the time being.

Until economists and a good working model of privatization is further evaluated and solutions offered that make sense, I am not for stringing those out to dry who will need SS and have paid into the system.

[Cheering472]

Based on my informal polling, it's not just the low income folks who need a safety net.

Add in people who get screwed in a divorce within a decade of retirement and have to start over, people who lose their pensions through policy changes and mismanagement by corporations, people who lose their assets through legal judgments, people whose savings are affected by a death or severe injury, people w/ mental or physical impairments, children whose "child support" comes from a deceased parents SS fund.......

True. The reality is you can work very hard and with luck you may one day be rich. Hard work is touted as being the end all, be all, for financial success. Scooterbug's right, there are alot of factors that can offset that hard work and put people in financial peril. If they haven't befallen you, consider yourselves lucky.

I've worked hard, been lucky, and I've got enough money saved. But I'd not be able to sleep nights thinking my little old neighbor had to rummage through the trash because she didn't "work hard" or invested poorly and therefore was on her own. Compassion doesn't cost that much people.

[goodwitch58]

. Compassion doesn't cost that much people.

Thank you for posting this. It is the idea that I have been trying to pull out of my brain: compassion doesn't cost that much--especially to people who have so much.

[jdarg]

Thank you for posting this. It is the idea that I have been trying to pull out of my brain: compassion doesn't cost that much--especially to people who have so much.


I was just thinking the same thing! I was trying to figure out why so many of the comments on this thread made me so uncomfortable and sad.

I think there is a balance somewhere between "all about me" and "giving it all away". I hope one day we can find that balance.

[goodwitch58]

I was just thinking the same thing! I was trying to figure out why so many of the comments on this thread made me so uncomfortable and sad.

I think there is a balance somewhere between "all about me" and "giving it all away". I hope one day we can find that balance.

Yeah, me too. I just wish that more people would come from an abundant mindset: there really is enough--instead of a "not enough" mindset. I was brought up to believe that the more we gave, then the more we got in return--it seems somewhere along the line, many people have decided that there is only such much and I must get (and keep) mine. It is sad.

[scooterbug44]

At least w/ Social Security people are working and paying into a program, then getting money back. I don't know anyone who "lives large" on SS payments but there are many who depend on it after a lifetime of working and paying ionto the system.

It isn't that the system is broken, it's that the government F'ed with it!

[Margarita]

This is an article from the AARP web site which outlines what McCain and Obama intend to do about reforming social security. Neither candidate has outlined in great detail how their plan would work so this article speaks in general terms.

http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourmoney/socialsecurity/articles/candidates_tackle.html

[Mango]

This is an article from the AARP web site which outlines what McCain and Obama intend to do about reforming social security. Neither candidate has outlined in great detail how their plan would work so this article speaks in general terms.

http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourmoney/socialsecurity/articles/candidates_tackle.html

This is how I see it. It's an important issue, but let's get our economy back on track. keep government from dipping into the fund, get our budget out of deficit, we have stagnant wages, create jobs, educate people for the next tech/industrial revolution, and the piddly amount paid in by the higher bracket will come back in spades. Capitalists believe one needs to spend money to make money. I think we need to stop looking at Obama's current plan as welfare. I also feel that once we clean house, he will not be adverse to alternative ideas.

[scooterbug44]

Interesting article!

I like the idea that people can opt to have a private one and if not, it goes into the SS fund.

Since part of my concern is that people aren't very on top of their financial/retirement planning I am guessing few would opt to do that - similar to the number of people who are currently planning for it.

[Margarita]

Interesting article!

I like the idea that people can opt to have a private one and if not, it goes into the SS fund.
Since part of my concern is that people aren't very on top of their financial/retirement planning I am guessing few would opt to do that - similar to the number of people who are currently planning for it.

I like this too idea also. In my opinion the social security debate is not about who is more compassionate. I think that we can all agree that there is a problem and that it needs to be fixed - we just disagree on the best way to do it. I do believe that some form of privatization is best and that Obama's plan, if implemented as laid out in the article, is just another form of welfare which will be shouldered by those nasty rich people.

[Cheering472]

Sadly it was fixed once before. If Bush and company had left it alone, it wouldn't be an issue now. But then he had to make up the shortage caused by his overspending and his nice tax cuts.

Reagan took care of Social Security's upcoming deficit in the 80's by making us all pay higher taxes to cover the impending shortage caused by the boomers. We've paid higher taxes since then, the shortage was corrected and there was a surplus in SS when Clinton left office. (Remember people making fun of Gore for wanting to put those funds in a "lock box"?)

Instead that large surplus was used in the general fund by the current adminstration. Your hard earned tax money was diverted to pay for war. Halliburton worked hard you know so they certainly deserved to be paid those outlandish contracts. That money the hard working people paid into SS is gone. Hmmm sounds like misappropriation of funds. If I did this in my business I'd go to jail.

[30ashopper]

While Obama's plan may not be the perfect solution, it is a plan at least for the time being.



Obama's plan is pretty straight forward, raise the payroll tax. How does this solve anything? Currently any surplus lands in the general account and is spent on other things. Raising the tax will generate more revenue which will... just be spent on other things. I don't see how anyone could miss the 'slight of hand' in his "plan".

[Mango]

Obama's plan is pretty straight forward, raise the payroll tax. How does this solve anything? Currently any surplus lands in the general account and is spent on other things. Raising the tax will generate more revenue which will... just be spent on other things. I don't see how anyone could miss the 'slight of hand' in his "plan".

Surplus? :lol:

[goodwitch58]

Obama's plan is pretty straight forward, raise the payroll tax. How does this solve anything? Currently any surplus lands in the general account and is spent on other things. Raising the tax will generate more revenue which will... just be spent on other things. I don't see how anyone could miss the 'slight of hand' in his "plan".

Surplus? You might want to check that calculator again!:idontno:

[Miss Kitty]

Would you say I am not compassionate because I wish the gov't to get their act together and quit wasting the money they already take from taxpayers before they take more? If you found out a charity you gave money to was fradulant or wasteful, would you want to continue to give them money? :idontno: Help me here, I don't get the leap from not wanting to give hard earned money away to not being compassionate! That really stung!

[Bdarg]

Whenever the topic of social security comes around I have a few points and questions that I usually ponder:




The last statistic I saw on social security was that within 3 years of retirement a person has recouped all moneys paid into the system.
Currently between the employee and the employer, or the self-employed, they must pay ss tax on the first $102,000. No income over $102,000 is taxed. (http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/cbb.html). ( It is my understanding that Obama's plan calls for raising of the ceiling above the $102,000 mark; not increasing the percentage.)
If privatization were to take place, then what would keep people incapable of proper investing from being victimized? As we have recently witnessed there were plenty of loan companies out there laying in wait for the unsuspecting home buyers.
It was not that long ago that the glorified corporate raiders of the 80's were stealing the corporate booty in the form of "cash", a.k.a. pension funds, only to leave the tax payers to pick up the tab.
Where would all these investment dollars go?
Wall Street has been taking in the 401K money as fast as it can and redistributing it in the form of corporate bonuses for a quarter of a century or so. Now that baby boomers are starting to pull their money back out at increasing rates, what will happen to the market?
What happens if Wall Street crashes again?
The questions that really give me that pit of the stomach feel are:
Who kicks grandma out in the snow when her rent money runs out and there is no societal safety net?
What happens when grandma is starving?
Who retrieves the body when she dies of exposure in her own home?
How will we look at our societal selves when that starts happening?
When we look at a rising stock market and college educated people with good incomes it is nice to think about the investment utopia; where money grows on trees for those that are thrifty. The reality is that less than 75% of Americans graduated from high school. Less than half of those went to college, less than half of those graduated with an Associates or Bachelors degree of any kind.
With multiple college degrees I find the idea of investing daunting to say the least. How would the 25% of our population that dropped out of high school feel?


I do not think that all of these questions have to have answers; I just think that most if not all have to be considered. For any societal safety net there will be abuse. No system will be perfect. For right now, I like to think of that 2.9% of my check each week as a contribution to making America the greatest compassionate civil society on the planet.

[Miss Kitty]

Thanks again, bdarg. I will go back and reread your points, I am not sure about getting all the SS money back in three years. The whole privatization of SS scares me, too. IMO, it might look good on paper, but to not have any safety nets is irresponsible and ultimately, cruel. What I hear some people saying is the person that invests their SS monies and comes up short for retirement is just, well screwed. Sorry, that doesn't work for me. The most important thing bdarg said is we as Americans need to invest in our fellow man. I couldn't agree more as a former teacher and the mother of a social worker. It all boils down to that single word...education. I am not talking about a college degree for everyone, but somehow we must look at the Head Starts, etc, and see where the system breaks down. I am sick and tired of seeing money thrown at a problem. It is a crime to not help lift up people living in the poverty cycle. I just don't think there is a true accountability of our gov't on this issue.

For the record, I am NOT against giving our tax dollars to the gov't, I AM worried about what they do with it.

[goodwitch58]

What I hear some people saying is the person that invests their SS monies and comes up short for retirement is just, well screwed. Sorry, that doesn't work for me. The most important thing bdarg said is we as Americans need to invest in our fellow man.

Kitty: it doesn't work for me either, and that is the where the" sad feeling of no compassion for our fellow citizens" came from for me. I certainly don't want to to fund programs that don't work and I believe government must be held accountable.

However, if there is a person who needs help, then I believe I have an obligation to give that help to the extent that I am able. It is more important to me to have the world view of lending a helping hand first; then, working to fix the problem in the system. The child who is hungry or the single mom who lost her job and the veteran who can't get health care...are not the problem. We need to lift them up first; then, work to right the problems in the government IMO.

My answer has always been to become actively involved in fixing the problem--while at the same time lending a hand to those less fortunate. These days, though, I hear all to often "well, their pain is not my problem", and I think that is a sad commentary on our way of life.

My former boss, Senator Bob Graham , has launched a program at the University of Florida to teach people about civic responsibility. He is putting a huge effort and lots of funding into it because he was distressed at the lack of civic awareness he saw in our society today.

I am optimistic that through education more young people will come to understand how being actively involved in our government will lead to a more productive and more compassionate society. Perhaps we can start with emphasizing how important it is to vote!:bang:

Whether we realize it or not, we are all in this together and what affects one of us, will ultimately affect all of us. American can do better than what we've done for the last few years. It will take all of us to make it happen though. As bdarg said, we must invest in each other.

[Miss Kitty]

Thank you, goodwitch. I try and not paint with a broad brush all the "republicans and democrats". We all have our stereotypes in place and those are not helpful in understanding where your fellow American is coming from. I am so ready for a third party. I think. ;-)

[TooFarTampa]

bdarg, excellent post, although I want to point out that the payroll tax rate is 6.2 percent. I believe companies are responsible for matching that amount as part of the cost of doing business, so the effective rate is 12.4 percent.

Without running the numbers I would guess that anyone who puts that amount away from the beginning of their career would generate a better nest egg than anything the government would end up providing them -- unless you live well into your 80s or 90s. (but I have not seen any studies on this.)

However, I agree with most people here that it is a necessary program and on the whole, generally as fairly distributed as possible.

For the record, I am NOT against giving our tax dollars to the gov't, I AM worried about what they do with it.

I view income tax and its uses as entirely separate from the SS program. The main abuse of the SS system appears to be our failure to set the surpluses aside or plan appropriately for something everyone knew was coming. How I miss Al Gore and his lockbox. :(

[goodwitch58]

Thank you, goodwitch. I try and not paint with a broad brush all the "republicans and democrats". We all have our stereotypes in place and those are not helpful in understanding where your fellow American is coming from. I am so ready for a third party. I think. ;-)

I think many people share that desire...,

[Rita]

My former boss, Senator Bob Graham , has launched a program at the University of Florida to teach people about civic responsibility. He is putting a huge effort and lots of funding into it because he was distressed at the lack of civic awareness he saw in our society today.

.
:clap:...I hope this catches on elsewhere around the country. Leadership like Graham's is something I can envision Obama being very good at also by encouraging and promoting ideas like this within communities.



.

[goodwitch58]

:clap:...I hope this catches on elsewhere around the country. Leadership like Graham's is something I can envision Obama being very good at also by encouraging and promoting ideas like this within communities.



.

We are optimistic that it will. Lots of great people working hard on it.

[Cheering472]

Would you say I am not compassionate because I wish the gov't to get their act together and quit wasting the money they already take from taxpayers before they take more? If you found out a charity you gave money to was fradulant or wasteful, would you want to continue to give them money? :idontno: Help me here, I don't get the leap from not wanting to give hard earned money away to not being compassionate! That really stung!

Kitty the concern for compassion was not in regards to paying taxes. It wasn't about government spending other than the fact that the government mismanaged our SS surplus. Just like you, I have no compassion towards our gov't and have no desire to give them more. The call for compassion was in response to the early posts in the thread and their tone. The thinking of "I got mine", "let them eat cake" with no regard to circumstances that may disadvantage a whole group of elderly people shows a lack of compassion. These were not your comments and not your way of thinking. Anyone who raised a daughter like sarafunn doesn't lack in compassion. :wub:

PS Sorry, it took me forever to get this post completed.(dang work) I see alot of other posts that popped up before I actually finished mine, sorry if it seems repetitive. Carry on sweet chick. By the way bdarg rocks!!

[Miss Kitty]

Per Mr. K...yes, we are capped at $102,000 a year. No, we will NEVER get that SS money back in three years OR as long as we live. The people getting what they paid in back in three years are the ones that worked very little or paid in very little. That's all the time he had to explain his view...he was off to the sand mine to work. :wave:

[30ashopper]

Surplus? :lol:

So we're agreed, raising the payroll tax doesn't solve the problem?

[Bob]

medicare/medicaid/lack of coverage for millions makes this issue seem relatively minor

[30ashopper]

medicare/medicaid/lack of coverage for millions makes this issue seem relatively minor

Neither candidate has the right solution for healthcare, you really shouldn't take that under consideration when you vote. Both will do more damage than good.