Biden's America

[RedDenver]

Just now, sho said:

and longer life expectancy

Life expectancy has actually gone down the last few years and is lower than most of the rest of the developed world.

[sho]

6 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Life expectancy has actually gone down the last few years and is lower than most of the rest of the developed world.

Yes and no...they way I am understanding it, and correct me if wrong, but life expectancy for the baby boomers is higher than the Gen Z group.   Meaning those that are at or nearing the retirement age will be living longer than anticipated when their SS was calculated, and we now have a smaller workforce to pay into SS to help fund it, and that group isn't anticipated to live as long nor work long enough.

 

So yes, we are starting to see a decline in life expectancy, but it's not for the group that will be needing it in near future, and we are underperforming in a lot of areas in comparison to the rest of the developed world.

[BigRedBuster]

10 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

Life expectancy has actually gone down the last few years and is lower than most of the rest of the developed world.

That's because of the pandemic killing more seniors than anything. 

 

If we're brutally honest, the pandemic actually helped social security.

[Archy1221]

17 minutes ago, sho said:

it's a sad reality that both parties need to address and the general populace needs to understand.  We need true leadership that can guide us, not ones bought by lobbyists.  

 

With a shrinking work force as the baby boomers retire, and longer life expectancy, it's putting a squeeze on both ends of Social Security.   Not enough payers and too many recipients living longer than anticipated.   There will need to be a change, collecting more, raising the retirement age, controlling health costs are all things that need to be addressed and find a happy medium.   Whether I like it or not, the sad reality is, there needs to be a change.  

 

Cutting it, IMO, is not the way to go.  Problem is how do we fund more when so many that are funding SS currently are living paycheck to paycheck?   To me it seems clear we need a multi-tiered plan.   IMO, step one, review corporate earnings and develop a tax system where corporations can still make healthy profits but also be incentivized to pay a living wage.  Step two, we need to have a government that isn't in it to exploit the people for their own wealth and power and do a much better job of fiscal planning for both the now and the future for all citizens, not just those in higher tax brackets.   Part of which should be no current politician or immediate family member holding shares in stock and re-adjust their pension/benefit plans.  This only incentivizes them to look after their best interest.   Re-prioritize how federal money is spent.   More should be put in infrastructure, education, and healthcare, shifting some of the resources away from private military machine.  Thirdly, we need to look at and develop a way to control lobbyists.   Lobbyists/corporations have too much say in federal laws and regulations and prioritize their best interests over everything else.

One thing not mentioned in this is how do you grow the investment potential of the money that is already in the system and waiting to be paid out.   The return on investment of the money being taken in is less than desired.  Doing some changes you talk about could be fine or great, but at the same time let’s grow the value of the money already being put in while we’re at it. 

[RedDenver]

2 minutes ago, sho said:

Yes and no...they way I am understanding it, and correct me if wrong, but life expectancy for the baby boomers is higher than the Gen Z group.   Meaning those that are at or nearing the retirement age will be living longer than anticipated when their SS was calculated, and we now have a smaller workforce to pay into SS to help fund it, and that group isn't anticipated to live as long nor work long enough.

I was just making an aside, although I think even the Baby Boomer life expectancy is down now from what it was a few years ago.

 

However, the difference in the size of the generations isn't as dramatic as it is often portrayed. As of 2021 there are actually more Millenials than Baby Boomers.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/797321/us-population-by-generation/

[sho]

Interesting @RedDenverI've read/heard so many times that we are closing in on an available workforce cliff.   Now, you've given me homework to actually see how dire it may or may not be.

[sho]

14 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

One thing not mentioned in this is how do you grow the investment potential of the money that is already in the system and waiting to be paid out.   The return on investment of the money being out in is less than desired.  Doing some changes you talk about could be fine or great, but at the same time let’s grow the value of the money already being put in while we’re at it. 

It wasn't meant to be all encompassing.   Maximizing what we have currently needs to be done as well.   Also, not sure where I fall on this currently, but I have wondered if everyone who pays into SS, *should* collect SS payments.   For instance, using Bill Gates as an example.   He's paid in the maximum he can for a lot of years, but when he retires, he won't need to collect it.  Unless I'm mistaken, he will still get it.   I can, and have argued, we should view it as car insurance, you pay into it to cover a car accident, but if you don't get a car accident, you don't get that money back.   So, you pay into SS and if you have a net worth, and a monthly income over $X (some realistic threshold) you do not get paid out SS.   My parents as another example, between their retirement pension plans they get roughly 5-6K/month.   They do not need their SS, but they still get it.  I go back and forth on if they should or should that go to someone else who needs that money more.

[Archy1221]

36 minutes ago, sho said:

It wasn't meant to be all encompassing.   Maximizing what we have currently needs to be done as well.   Also, not sure where I fall on this currently, but I have wondered if everyone who pays into SS, *should* collect SS payments.   For instance, using Bill Gates as an example.   He's paid in the maximum he can for a lot of years, but when he retires, he won't need to collect it.  Unless I'm mistaken, he will still get it.   I can, and have argued, we should view it as car insurance, you pay into it to cover a car accident, but if you don't get a car accident, you don't get that money back.   So, you pay into SS and if you have a net worth, and a monthly income over $X (some realistic threshold) you do not get paid out SS.   My parents as another example, between their retirement pension plans they get roughly 5-6K/month.   They do not need their SS, but they still get it.  I go back and forth on if they should or should that go to someone else who needs that money more.

I’ve thought some about this also, though I definitely wouldn’t use your parents situation as an example imo.   I don’t think that’s a high enough income to not give them the benefit they have paid decades into the system for.   
 

I do see some rational for means testing at the $20k a month level or higher.  Really spitballing that number or how it would even work but your main point really is valid.  Does a Bill Gates or even a person worth $20 million need to collect SS.  

[sho]

Just now, Archy1221 said:

I’ve thought some about this also, though I definitely wouldn’t use your parents situation as an example imo.   I don’t think that’s a high enough income to not give them the benefit they have paid decades into the system for.   
 

I do see some rational for means testing at the $20k a month level or higher.  Really spitballing that number or how it would even work but your main point really is valid.  Does a Bill Gates or even a person worth $20 million need to collect SS.  

 

I use my parents as an example because I know their bills.  If they had mortgage or rent to pay, or had car payments, maybe a different story.   They are making roughly 700% more than their expenses before factoring their SS income.   They are more than comfortable.   Others on that same income level could struggle significantly.  Don't know if the cap should be X income of X% more than your expenses.

[Archy1221]

8 minutes ago, sho said:

 

I use my parents as an example because I know their bills.  If they had mortgage or rent to pay, or had car payments, maybe a different story.   They are making roughly 700% more than their expenses before factoring their SS income.   They are more than comfortable.   Others on that same income level could struggle significantly.  Don't know if the cap should be X income of X% more than your expenses.

I think the hard part of doing it with expenses is you just incentivize people to buy stuff on credit instead of paying cash so they could get the SS income that way if otherwise they didn’t qualify.   Just something to think about. 

[Archy1221]

rob Walgreens CVS or Walmart no worries, just don’t make certain memes or it’s possible 10yrs for you in Joe’s America. 

[Scarlet]

Shocked that MAGA would be supporting an antisemite and then paint it that in Biden's America that antisemite is being sentenced to 10 years for "only posting a meme".  He was convicted by a jury of his peers for election interference.  

 

Quote

Prosecutors told jurors during the trial that Mackey urged supporters of then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to “vote” via text message or social media, knowing that those endorsements were not legally valid votes.

 

At about the same time, prosecutors said, he was sending tweets suggesting that it was important to limit “black turnout” at voting booths. One tweet he sent showed a photo of a Black woman with a Clinton campaign sign, encouraging people to “avoid the line” and “vote from home,” court papers said.

 

Using social media pitches, one image encouraging phony votes utilized a font similar to one used by the Clinton campaign in authentic ads, prosecutors said. Others tried to mimic Clinton’s ads in other ways, they added.

By Election Day in 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or something similar to a text number that was spread by multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by Mackey and co-conspirators, prosecutors said.

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/31/far-right-influencer-convicted-in-voter-suppression-scheme-00090042

 

Here's the handy work of the individual convicted of election interference that MAGA is parading around as a victim.  

 

[commando]

5 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

Shocked that MAGA would be supporting an antisemite and then paint it that in Biden's America that antisemite is being sentenced to 10 years for "only posting a meme".  He was convicted by a jury of his peers for election interference.  

 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/31/far-right-influencer-convicted-in-voter-suppression-scheme-00090042

 

Here's the handy work of the individual convicted of election interference that MAGA is parading around as a victim.  

 

i would take a guess who posted something portraying him as a "victim".   but we all know it wouldn't be a fair guess as it's only 1 here who would do that.

[Archy1221]

17 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

Shocked that MAGA would be supporting an antisemite and then paint it that in Biden's America that antisemite is being sentenced to 10 years for "only posting a meme".  He was convicted by a jury of his peers for election interference.  

 

 

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/31/far-right-influencer-convicted-in-voter-suppression-scheme-00090042

 

Here's the handy work of the individual convicted of election interference that MAGA is parading around as a victim.  

 

Election interference like this 

 

or do Biden Bro’s only believe in prosecuting a certain political point of view.   
 

BTW….if you are so stupid that you get fooled into thinking you can vote by text, you really may not deserve your franchise 

 

 

[suh_fan93]