Reply
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
224
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

224 Views
Message 21 of 74

@ManicProgressivewrote:

Why does that matter so much?  What's wrong with its being a little bit of both?  If modifcation keeps more seniors out of poverty, that's a good thing.


It already is a "little bit of both" due to the computation of the benefit and where the bend points line up.  It is already tilted to those with lower lifetime earnings.

 

Imthink you and others here should figure up what a person's annual contribution would be at even today's rates for income of $ 250,000 or $ 400,000 per year and don't forget to add in the matched by employer.  Yes, paying this annually for their working career but NOT getting a benefit would definitely hurt their bottom line and standard of living.

 

Now what would happen if this same high earner became disabled in their 40's or 50's - still no added benefit for their high contributions.

 

Who is to say how much is too much?  Higher income retirees already pay tax on their SS benefit - which I might add goes back into the Trust Fund to help keep it afloat - this, in addition to the bend point benefit computation, helps out those who are low income seniors.

 


* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
224
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
221
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

221 Views
Message 22 of 74

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

@ManicProgressivewrote:

 

 

Public pensions are more valuable than private pensions. Public pensions for law enforcement, for example, only require 20 years of service rather than the typical 30 years of service.  Public pensions have much richer spousal and dependent benefits.  

 

 


But of course military and law enforcement careers are by nature more hazardous than most industrial jobs where safety is paramount.  While they might encourage safety, they do put one in performing hazard duties.

 

I'm not ashamed of how I earned my pension from the government as those of us earned them honorably.  I didn't ask any to do so in my place, even volunteering from the beginning and for duty in combat areas.  

 

Is it that liberals are suggesting that one not serve in the military or in law enforcement?  It appears so, either that or they are jealous that we made a deal, keeping our part of the bargain and the government is keeping theirs.

 

 


Why do you say liberals  say one should not serve in the Armed Forces. You call me a liberal and I served. I resent your stupid implication. As people tell their children: Grow up. By the way the one you should be directing your comment at is Trump. He dodged the draft and never served in the Armed Forces.

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
221
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
222
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

222 Views
Message 23 of 74

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

@ManicProgressivewrote:

 

 

Public pensions are more valuable than private pensions. Public pensions for law enforcement, for example, only require 20 years of service rather than the typical 30 years of service.  Public pensions have much richer spousal and dependent benefits.  

 

 


But of course military and law enforcement careers are by nature more hazardous than most industrial jobs where safety is paramount.  While they might encourage safety, they do put one in performing hazard duties.

 

I'm not ashamed of how I earned my pension from the government as those of us earned them honorably.  I didn't ask any to do so in my place, even volunteering from the beginning and for duty in combat areas.  

 

Is it that liberals are suggesting that one not serve in the military or in law enforcement?  It appears so, either that or they are jealous that we made a deal, keeping our part of the bargain and the government is keeping theirs.

 

 


The statistics - numbers - backed by facts say otherwise.

 

Dying for a Paycheck: These Jobs Are More Dangerous Than Military Service 

 

The 25 most dangerous jobs in America

 

 

44>dolt45
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
222
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
238
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

238 Views
Message 24 of 74

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

@ManicProgressivewrote:

 

 

Public pensions are more valuable than private pensions. Public pensions for law enforcement, for example, only require 20 years of service rather than the typical 30 years of service.  Public pensions have much richer spousal and dependent benefits.  

 

 


But of course military and law enforcement careers are by nature more hazardous than most industrial jobs where safety is paramount.  While they might encourage safety, they do put one in performing hazard duties.

 

I'm not ashamed of how I earned my pension from the government as those of us earned them honorably.  I didn't ask any to do so in my place, even volunteering from the beginning and for duty in combat areas.  

 

Is it that liberals are suggesting that one not serve in the military or in law enforcement?  It appears so, either that or they are jealous that we made a deal, keeping our part of the bargain and the government is keeping theirs.

 

 


Nobody is expecting you to be ashamed of anything.   Or that people shouldn't serve in law enforcement.     Nobody is jealous.   

 

What liberals would like is that people understand that we are all interdependent.  Nobody stands alone in this country.   You can't.  That ended when we switched to a pay check-driven, urban nation.   And since we are all interdependent, have a little empathy for those who haven't fared as well as you have. 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
238
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
240
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

240 Views
Message 25 of 74

@ManicProgressivewrote:

 

 

Public pensions are more valuable than private pensions. Public pensions for law enforcement, for example, only require 20 years of service rather than the typical 30 years of service.  Public pensions have much richer spousal and dependent benefits.  

 

 


But of course military and law enforcement careers are by nature more hazardous than most industrial jobs where safety is paramount.  While they might encourage safety, they do put one in performing hazard duties.

 

I'm not ashamed of how I earned my pension from the government as those of us earned them honorably.  I didn't ask any to do so in my place, even volunteering from the beginning and for duty in combat areas.  

 

Is it that liberals are suggesting that one not serve in the military or in law enforcement?  It appears so, either that or they are jealous that we made a deal, keeping our part of the bargain and the government is keeping theirs.

 

 


“Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”. . . FDR
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
240
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
239
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

239 Views
Message 26 of 74

@GailL1wrote:

@mandm84wrote:

 . . . .  to preserve and strengthen Social Security and Medicare by calling them " Socialists or Takers " because they suggest raising the FICA Cap , etc.

 

Those same Senior's and Disabled worked hard and paid their share of Taxes while able to . . . . We are all in this together and I call it Gratitude and having each other's backs !


That it's NOT what we are saying -

Raise the cap but give a benefit to those who are paying more into the system.

Add more bend points if necessary to keep the maximum benefit from going through the roof - but give a benefit for those paying in more.

That is the way the program was designed to work - those who pay into the system get a benefit.

 

Do you not think that it should be done that way ?

If people have to pay into the program yet receive no benefit from their massive contribution, the program becomes another welfare program, not an insurance program.

 

 


Why does that matter so much?  What's wrong with its being a little bit of both?  If modifcation keeps more seniors out of poverty, that's a good thing.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
239
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
225
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

225 Views
Message 27 of 74

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

@mandm84wrote:

 

If you're fortunate enough to have a Public Pension , congratulations , but don't label those fighting to preserve and strengthen Social Security and Medicare - Socialist Liberal's.

We are all in this together thanks to all of our Taxpayer's.


One isn't necessarily fortunate to have a pension of any sort.  One works for it.  As for as Social Security one has to pay into it via FICA taxes.  With Medicare one has to pay monthly premiums for Part B coverage especially and one pays medicare taxes also. 

 

 


You were fortunate enough to be able to get a job that offers a pension.  Not everyone is.  And not everyone can stay at one job long enough to earn a pension.   

 

You can be both fortunate and hard working.  But there are many people out there who are hard working and NOT fortunate.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
225
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
220
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

220 Views
Message 28 of 74

@TxGrandpa2wrote:

@ManicProgressivewrote:

 

Public pensions are worth more than double that of private pensions, and most government employees have pensions. 


I have to disagree.  My younger brother is a retired IT professional and his retirement is about the same as I am drawing in six months.  As far as pensions can be withdrawn from under our feet, any lawmaker would be crazy to suggest that.  Do you realize how many retirees would vote them out in a New York minute?  No, the way they approach it is to lower benefits for future retirees like the military did last year.  They lowered military retirement by 10% for future retirees and put them on a Thrift Savings Program, but grandfathered those on active duty at the end of 2017.

 

They actually did recruits a favor because if they get out at any time before retirement, they would withdraw their savings.

 

So where do you get the idea that taxpayers are upset over government pensions? 


The data is out there.  Anecdotal experience is way too small to be representative. 

 

Public pensions are more valuable than private pensions. Public pensions for law enforcement, for example, only require 20 years of service rather than the typical 30 years of service.  Public pensions have much richer spousal and dependent benefits.  

 

 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
220
Views
Highlighted
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
221
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

221 Views
Message 29 of 74

@mandm84wrote:

 . . . .  to preserve and strengthen Social Security and Medicare by calling them " Socialists or Takers " because they suggest raising the FICA Cap , etc.

 

Those same Senior's and Disabled worked hard and paid their share of Taxes while able to . . . . We are all in this together and I call it Gratitude and having each other's backs !


That it's NOT what we are saying -

Raise the cap but give a benefit to those who are paying more into the system.

Add more bend points if necessary to keep the maximum benefit from going through the roof - but give a benefit for those paying in more.

That is the way the program was designed to work - those who pay into the system get a benefit.

 

Do you not think that it should be done that way ?

If people have to pay into the program yet receive no benefit from their massive contribution, the program becomes another welfare program, not an insurance program.

 

 


* * * * It's Always Something . . . Roseanne Roseannadanna
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
221
Views
Highlighted
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
231
Views

Re: TO PRESERVE SOCIAL SECURITY

231 Views
Message 30 of 74

@mandm84wrote:

 

 Gov't Pension


It is apparent that you expect those working for the government to not have any deferred compensation such as retirement plans.  If you have such a problem with those drawing pensions, then why didn't you better plan when entering the work force?

 

It was the retirement plan that enticed me to make the military career,  even though it meant being subject to  hazardous assignments, being separated from family for long periods of time, etc.  You had the same option as I did.  There are those who opted for higher compensation and benefits with industry rather than government service.

 

You might consider that if not for dedicated individuals who has served in government over the years there would be no continuity to pass on experienced employees. 

 

I detect jealously towards those who made a career in government and are now enjoying the fruits of their service.  I have no regret.

 

 


“Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”. . . FDR
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
231
Views
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Users
Announcements

AARP Coronavirus Call-in Event

AARP will host a weekly, live Coronavirus Information Tele-Town Hall on Thursdays at 1 pm (ET). Learn more on AARP's Coronavirus Tele-Town Hall page and join us each week for the latest information.

Calling is toll-free. During the 90-minute live event, government experts will answer your questions and address health concerns related to COVID-19.