Republican Plan GUTS Social Security | The Kyle Kulinski Show
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
- Support The Show On Patreon!:
/ seculartalk
Subscribe to Krystal Kyle & Friends On Substack!:
krystalkyleand...
Follow Kyle on Twitter:
/ kylekulinski
"The first time I ever really listened to Kyle Kulinski’s show was in the back of a cab last summer. The driver had his phone hooked up through the stereo and was pumping out an episode through the car speakers - loudly, as if looking to convert a captive audience.
“Do you like Kyle Kulinski?”
The driver, Ahmed, was a recent immigrant and apparently a die-hard fan of Secular Talk, the political talk show that Kulinski broadcasts on UA-cam. I told him, yes, in fact. I do like Kulinski, had come across his show several years ago, and, all things considered, he seemed pretty good.
“He understands what we’re up against,” Ahmed said. “Like Bernie.”
But I was surprised to hear Kulinski’s name mentioned in the same breath as Bernie Sanders, particularly with such adoration. Because what I did remember about Kulinski’s show struck me as mostly capital-P “progressive” takes on the news - the left wing of the Netroots crowd more than the democratic socialism Sanders has popularized.
It’s an impression that wasn’t entirely incorrect.
“I have no time for philosophical, airy bullshit,” Kulinski tells me from his home in Westchester, New York. “I don’t want to hear about Lenin. I don’t want to hear about Marx. I just want a super plainspoken, straightforward agenda with a straightforward way of selling it.”
With over 800,000 subscribers and nearly 670 million total views on UA-cam, selling a progressive agenda is clearly something Kulinski knows how to do - even Democracy Now, the long-standing flagship of progressive media, cannot match his reach on the platform. Chapo Trap House can certainly boast a wildly devoted fan base (and a not insignificant degree of media influence), but their audience is roughly half the size of Kulinski’s.
While Secular Talk might be more likely to be looped in with the progressive networks around Air America and Pacifica alums like Sam Seder than the more resolutely socialist world, Kulinski’s fiery rhetoric, razor-sharp class instincts, and knack for withering takedowns sets him apart from his peers. Judging by his rhetoric alone, he’s closer to a Eugene Debs than a Chris Hayes.
But unlike Hayes, Amy Goodman, or his friend Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks - who began airing Secular Talk on his web network seven years ago - the thirty-two-year-old Kulinski is virtually invisible in the mainstream media. Despite his enormous fan base, his show has never once been mentioned in the obligatory trend pieces on “the Millennial Left” pumped out by the prestige media. Nor has Kulinski’s name ever popped up at all in the New York Times, Vox, the New Yorker, New York Magazine, or the Washington Post, despite his leading role in cofounding Justice Democrats, the organization widely credited with sweeping Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the rest of “the Squad” to power.
Just last week, his Wikipedia page was deleted. The reason? “There is very simply no [reliable source] coverage of this person,” according to one moderator. In new media, he’s king - the Sean Hannity of the Berniecrat left. In old media, he’s nobody.
I suspect there are a few reasons for that. There is nothing “cool” about Kulinski’s show. (As a friend put it, “‘Welcome to Secular Talk’ sounds like something you’d hear on Egyptian radio.”) His no-nonsense social-democratic politics won’t get him much cred with the Full Communism crowd. He records his show not in Brooklyn or Los Angeles, but in a studio he built himself in his modest Westchester home. His hair is too groomed and his taste in clothes too preppy to qualify as “Dirtbag Left.” Nor has he ever attended an n+1 release party. “Not only have I not attended one,” he says, “I have no idea what that means.”
And yet he’s astonishingly plugged-in for a young man in the suburbs. Wondering how Sanders ended up on the Joe Rogan Experience? Kulinski, a frequent guest on Rogan’s wildly popular show, introduced them. “You make the most sense to me,” Rogan told Kulinski on a recent episode. “You’re a normal person.”
Much like Sanders himself, Kulinski’s show has a massive audience that just doesn’t compute with our media’s understanding of “what the kids want” or even “what the left-wing kids want.”
It’s probably for the best - the very woke and very WASP-ish decorum haunting much of the media world is nowhere to be found in Secular Talk. “Corporate Democrats over-focus on identity as a trick to divert you from the issues that unite us all - class issues,” he said on a recent episode.
Read More Here!:
jacobinmag.com...
#KyleKulinski #SecularTalk #news #politics #youtube #biden #economics #left #progressive #viral
Meanwhile they turn a blind eye to all the subsidies they give to corporations like Walmart and Amazon.
Who does? Grifters like Kyle?
They wanna talk about welfare queens, well there they are. The biggest welfare queens of them all.
It’s easy to hate the rich, it takes courage to hate the poor.
@@waltergrace565kyle covered those subsidies .....
@waltergrace565 Trickled down economics, right? Enough is enough, you, the rich and ultrarich, need to pay a fair share of taxes! This greed of yours is ruining our country. I don't know when but this whole system will fall soon! It's not sustainable!
My mom was only getting $1000 a month in Social Security but when they found out she was living rent free in her cousin’s guest house. They slashed it to $200 a month.
Her cousin ended up writing her bogus rent receipts so she could continue to get what she was owed.
When they saw that my mom was starting to get her retirement checks in, they sent her a letter that she now has to pay the government back for the money she received and already spent. This government is disgusting.
@@Radv13 and they wonder why so many people are homeless 🤦♀️
You’re right, this government IS disgusting!
SSI is General Fund Welfare, not Social Security.
It is not owed.
@@aolvaar8792
I’m talking about Social Security, which my mom spent her life paying into… So yeah it was OWED to her!
Of the $34 trillion US debt not one cent is from social security, in fact, this premium based retirement insurance program has a surplus for the next decade or so.
Correct, when republicans whine about balancing the budget they fail to say that SS isn't even part of the budget
Social Security is financed through a dedicated payroll tax. I mail a check OUT going to my socialism water service provider. I have to buy a postage stamp to use the socialism mail service. All outgoing mailbox money.
But passive income investors want INcoming unearned mailbox money.
Do you see the switch-a-roo from outgoing socialism mailbox money, to incoming communist mailbox money.
Republicans want everyone to think otherwise. They constantly lie about it saying it drives up the deficit.
But also making social security solvent is super easy. Just remove the tax cap.
My mom has paid 12% of her income, her whole life, and is 73 years old, and can't afford to retire. She hasn't taken a penny in her retirement mailbox money.
As someone who is disabled, I WILL NEVER understand how anybody with a disability could vote Republican.
de_bilitated
“I never thought it would affect ME!”
Basically how their minds work
Why should you get a check and me not. I lose hundreds of dollars each pay period to pay for others.
Humans are not inherently rational beings. That _anyone_ who isn't rich thanks to business or law, irrespective of other mostly meaningless demographics, votes red menace is inexplicable beyond never underestimating the human propensity to step on one's own dick.
Only the mentally disabled vote republican.
Remember, raising the retirement age is just another way to cut Social Security.
Remember, SSA contributions were raised in 1984.
The Silver tsunami in 2033.
My FRA is 66yrs and 6 months.
Remember it was 65.
I was 26 yrs old.
Boo Hoo
It’s frustrating (I’m sure it’s intentionally made that way) how congress is avoiding the obvious answer to ensure Social Security’s solvency. That is to eliminate the hard cap for contributions at the $160k annual income level and apply a progressive tax structure. That way you have millionaires and billionaires paying a proportionally adequate amount into social security as opposed paying the same amount as people making $160K/yr.
IT REALLY IS THAT FVCKING SIMPLE, PEOPLE! 🤷♂️
What's frustrating is Kyle thinking that throwing money at the problem is the only way to solve anything. If you remove the cap and add that extra 6.2 % to all incomes after 160K you will end up in a situation where someone in California making 200k a year will be paying 5% (if not more) of additional taxes than someone from Canada (even in Quebec province) and most likely more than someone living in a handful European states with much wider social safety nets. The progressive tax system on federal and state levels, plus Medicare, plus SSN taxes combined is already pretty close to what people pay in some European states. So maybe we should try to figure out how this money is spent first?
@tylerlansky1186 well, social security is not the problem. Cut that and most working people will never be able to afford to retire.
People who are ACTUALLY rich make all their money in long term capital gains, so they are not paying anything at all in social security or income tax. Gotta fix that too.
I want to ban social security.
@@SelectHawk Social security is important no doubt about it, but the system as it is rights now IS the problem. The demographics are changing, with retirees living longer, and younger people not having as many kids as before or at least having them later in life. So the payouts increase every year while contributions stay the same or potentially even decrease over time. The solutions to this problem won’t be as easy as Kyle says “throw more money at it”. They will have to either raise the retirement age, lower the payouts or figure out something with private retirement funds like some conservatives are proposing. None of the solutions will be popular with the people of any political view
As a millennial I already know everything I have paid toward social security I will never see. I am from Bolivia. We even have this in Bolivia. If they took this from Americans I would honestly cry for people
Who rely on this to survive.
nt, bolivani
It's never going to happen. History - it's a thing.
It's never going to happen. History - it's a thing.
@@waltergrace565 Watching you try to make an argument is like watching two pandas try to fuck.
Social Security should be banned
It feels like both parties are trying to lose as many voters as possible.
They always find a way to trick suckers. Not me though!
Marianne Williamson ‘24!
Exactly. The "vote blue no matter who" Karens are in full force, already.
Don't worry. That's what Kyle's here for - to run cover for them.
@@proudbrogressive315 so vote red?
But they have Trillions and Billions for wars and foreign aid
Good, I'd rather that than social security.
Shh. You can't say that out loud. You will hurt Raytheon's feelings.
@@krackalgleason4746 Why? I support Raython, I would increase military spending and cut social security.
You seem like a smart, well adjusted person. I’m confident you’re successful in your career and intrapersonal relationships.
@@nocucksinkekistan7321🤡🤡🤡
Kyle, my dude. Stop framing this as being for 'grandma and grandpa'. It's for ALL of us. We'll ALL be the recipients of this benefit one day.
You probably wouldn't understand because us younger generations know that we're probably not even going to get a penny of that social security
Social security should be banned, it's not for ALL OF US, you are LYING
@@nocucksinkekistan7321 No, you're lying.
@@tylerharris4392 Quit drinking the Kool-Aid. Republicans have been spreading that lie for generations, but younger Americans absolutely can benefit from Social Security. You'll have to fight for it, though.
@@lawsonj39 Social Security is forceful wealth redistribution.
Social Security doesn’t contribute to the deficit. If it is taking in a tax deficit, it redeems its treasuries to pay the beneficiaries. In fact, Social Security OWNS U.S. debt because it has used its surplus to purchase U.S. treasuries. It was banned from borrowing or adding to the deficit in 1983.
You lift the cap, it’s solvent until 2037. You gradually increase payroll tax for the next 15 years, it’s solvent for however much you decide to increase the tax.
Best solution: replace the payroll tax with a Wall Street transaction tax and high inheritance taxes on the wealthy.
Now that Mehdi Hasan lost his show and has little to lose, he should invite Johnson on a remaining episode and ask him all the questions we decent people have, with some added profanity to highlight the crucial points.
"Jesus wanted to help poor people. You say you are an ardent Bible guy, so why do you only want to _fuck_ the poor?"
I didn’t know about Mehdi’s show. It was the best thing going. So of course it gets cut. :/
Did you know that a senator who serves more than three terms can recieve their full retirement benefits at age 50?Maybe we should put that on the table for discussion !
They need 20 years of service by age 50
A senator's term is 6 years at two years into their fourth term they would be at 20 years of service.Yes,I did the math.I hope people remember in 1983 Regan raised the age of full retirement for 65 to 67 now Republicans want to raise the age 67 to 70 for full social security
benefits but they will get another pay raise after they cut total earned benefits again of people who payed into the system all their lives !They certainly know how to serve themselves !!
@@richardswift3859 I was just clarifying for the general public because they have no idea what a term is for a Senator.
Reform it? Like adding another $1,000 A month on my check?
Ain't happenin captain
@@juanwilliams3423 harry understands the dynamic. You don't say to the GOP, "Please don't cut our earned benefits!" You say to them, "We're expanding SS and Medicare, not cutting it." Play on offense, not defense. Take the kick; don't defer.
What about back pay hmmm?
@roberthogue7312 it was raised during the pandemic we are 103 trillion in debt that's an inconvenient truth everyone has to bare pain
As far as I'm concerned they better slash the defense budget by 70% and increase the corporate tax to 90% before they take a dime away from Social Security
SAME.
Disabled people need social security
Am... am I the only one paying attention? This has been their open agenda since REAGAN.
It’ll get cut, and there’s nothing you can do to stop it.
Fund SS buy taking it away from the Israel aid budget
If I were any Democrat running against a Republican or a Corporatocracy Democrat supporting this, I would NEVER shut up about this to the voters.
Democrats should run on this and see the GOP get voted out.
Spoiler: Democrats also support eliminating Social Security, but pretend otherwise to get votes. They'll be very happy to see Republicans do the dirty work and then run on that next election and do NOTHING if elected.
Very well said
Lauren Boebert is looking at Mike Johnson in the thumbnail like she wants to take him to see Beetlejuice
"There is nothing to prevent the Federal Government from printing as much money as it wants and giving it to someone, the problem is are the Goods and Services available which those funds would be used to purchase. The Cash is there which is nice, but it has to be in balance with the resources to purchase." ~Alan Greenspan Under Oath refuting Paul Ryan's attempts to Justify privatizing Social Security.
Funny how congress people never talk about cutting their own retirement.
Or send their own sons and daughters to the wars they spend billions of taxpayer money on.
They keep talking about "REFORMING" Social Security so that the conversation doesn't turn to "ENHANCING" Social Security. For instance, life expectancy is lowering, so should the retirement age.
I'm tired of people lying calling themselves Christians while willfully doing wrong to others. Where is the Christian love and generosity while bootlicking and serving the wealthy. Right, they are wealthy aren't they? Vote these liars out of office.
I bet you could buy every elderly person in the country a brand new Mercedes-Benz with just the money the Pentagon can’t account for, and next year that figure will be higher.
Nope, you could not. It's crazy how bad socialists are at basic math. The entire military budget is just 2K per person. Just for retirees, that would be 13K per person.
Oh, and btw, 44% of the military budget is paying soldiers and veterans, including their own retirement accounts, so if you believe 'only 38% of their budget is accounted for,' someone is blatantly lying to you in a way that can be casually proven wrong at a quick glance.
The amount of the *budget* that the pentagon can not account for is less than 1%, which puts it ahead of every other program. Food stamps can only account for 82%, for example, and Social Security despite literally only being a 'give old people money' budget somehow can only account for 79% of their budget.
To be fair the Pentagon has a much easier time of it, because they're literally just paying people directly who they have plenty of identification papers on (soldiers, veterans, the most robust and tracked contracting system in history), and buying goods directly, so they quite literally have all of the receipts. Social Security, on the other hand, is often literally throwing money into a black pit of state budgets who do all kinds of weird complicated things between that and actually giving it to people.
The audit the Pentagon keeps 'failing' is of their *assets,* which is kind of obvious when you realize they're literally being asked to account for WW1 battleships. The overwhelming majority of the missing 'assets' are things that have been retired decades to sometimes even centuries ago, that no one bothered to write down the disposal of in enough detail to be able to prove via documentation today.
Also note, there is no such thing as failing this style of audit. It is only an information gathering audit, and only has 'you have everything square, we're pretty sure you have everything square, we have no idea if you have everything square.' They are just, for the most part, trying to figure out what the military *should* have and what they *should* need to account for. The fact that major warships that were decommissioned and scrapped more than a lifetime ago are still on the list of things they need to account for should tell you all you need to know about how serious it is at this stage.
Oh, and BTW, *the Pentagon is not at all responsible for the audit 'failing' anyway.* The Government has gutted the auditing agency, reducing staff from more than 18,000 to less than 2,000, which is just so happens to be when the Pentagon started 'failing' the audit. *They have not even finished processing documents the Pentagon provided in the first audit 6 years ago,* so for all we know the Pentagon actually did reach 90%+, but the auditors just never bothered to finish processing the documents.
Imagine if you will the government launches an audit into your finances, literally makes it illegal for you to participate yourself, and assigns one guy for thirty minutes to glance at what they send in, then decades you've failed the audit because he was only able to see proof of 30% of your assets from a total you're supposed to be able to account for that includes things you 'should have' inherited from all 16 your great grandparents, including things like their horse and buggy, and all of the cars your grandparents every bought, ignoring outright if those things have any real chance of still existing let alone being your assets.
as someone who works with the homeless in social services, so much of our population consists of aging baby boomers who are too old and disabled to work and have lived paycheck to paycheck most of their lives. Now they can only get by on SSI and it's only like $1000 per month usually. In California. Where do you know in CA where you can rent an apartment and buy food for $1000 per month? SSI needs to keep up with cost of living or we'll have even more elderly homeless people in America
Here's an idea. Since the Social Security Department can actually manage an audit, have them audit the DoD.
Now you're thinking.
Cut it for all your rich friends that DONT NEED IT....
Cutting Social security would be the Ultimate Boomer move, Kicking off the ladder for future generations one last time.
They need to raise the age to 70 once they are all 70.
Lol
Imagine all the residents in psych wards, hospice and nursing homes being homeless because their SSI and Medicare can't pay for their services. 😂
ITS OUR DAM MONEY!
Have you been shopping around for hiking shoes Kyle lol 😅
I have been hearing this threat for the last 50 years !!!!!! 😂😂😂
Same with Roe vs. Wade! BELIEVE THEM! They will do it! Deja Vu!
Meanwhile, the Pentagon budget goes BBBrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
These Fascist Theocracists are plain ghouls.
There is only one modification they should make- end the cap on contributions to SS by the wealthy. Middle and lower class people are required to contribute from 100% of their income, while the more wealthy and super rich only have to be taxed for this up to $174K.
While we're at it, lets employ the policy the most successful societies have: a maximum wage. How much do you need in a year, $5,000,000? $7,000,000? After that, they are taxed at 100%. (And it can be argued that that excessive wealth is generated by the working citizens.) In those societies, the wealth of the country is shared, and it's possible to have universal health care, paid family leave, food security- and on and on.
What we need to do is cut the Pentagon and make it a Square, that way we could save about 20% of the defense budget and fund Social Security.
They plan to do this on average twice a year.
Take a look at all the $ not paid to workers for the sake of shareholder dividends and executive pay. That's all $ owed to workers. Then enact a wealth tax of 50% on any total assets over $10 million. Nobody got to >$10 million without ripping off workers - by definition.
👴 alright everyone, how do we make the social security trust fund solvant?
👩💼 raise the retirement age?
👨💼 cut benefits?
😐 remove the contribution limit?
😡😐
🏢🪟💥
I love this so much 🤣
The federal government creates the laws that approve its money-creation process. Being Monetarily Sovereign, the federal government can create any money-related laws it wishes, which is why no federal agency can run short of dollars unless the federal government wants it to run short.
Federal agencies are not supported by federal taxes; they are supported by federal money creation.
@@steved2667 that comes with the very important caveat that taxes *destroy* money at the end of its life cycle. At least in the MMT conception you’re going with. That balance between creation and destruction is important as it prevents the money supply from getting too large.
A country has a finite amount of value in its economy, and money is supposed to represent that value. If there is more money than value, then the money becomes less valuable to match real life: inflation. Monetary policy tries to trick this natural order into spurring growth, due to liquidity needs and so on and so forth. But that still causes inflation, so there is a limit to how much a country can overprint. Which is why countries need to collect taxes instead of just print money for everything.
Go ahead and cut it, but be prepared to return every cent to every person who has paid into it that never collected back on it. Don't tread on me boomers.
Whos going to make them do it? The American citizen ? 😂😂🤣🤣They are too busy watching NFL Football
@@MrORANGEMAN1966 Football season isn't year around, ends around January 6th or so not counting the Superbowl. Lol
@@brandonwilliams5613damn that explains Jan 6th for me now
Aaannnddd this is why I’m voting for Biden.
I don’t care if he shows up in the hoverchair Pike had on “Star Trek”, he’s better than the Republican fascists running against him.
Marianne Williamson is a much better choice, and won’t be on her deathbed in the next few years
Hilarious. As if this is ever going to happen. Might wanna bring it to your psychiatrist and therapist though. Really hash it out and get them to up your ssri script.
@@waltergrace565Ive taken C*aps that are wittier than you, heres some glue champ the windows over there.
Biden is the same as Trump. Trump just says mean words
@@waltergrace565 waltuh
For us the Holocaust never stopped...
It just slowed down to the point where it became invisible to those not effected by such things... Thank God I'm going to die today...
One of my favorite quotes by this person (The Deadly One)
"These are NOT entitlements (Social security, Medicare) , they are EARNED BENEFITS, paid for by MANDATORY WITHHOLDING from a persons wages over the years. REMOVE the cap, and make the withholding apply to ALL income. AND, most important, Congress needs to REPAY what it "borrowed" over the years, with interest, and take no more from these funds. THEN there would be no NEED to reduce the BENEFITS people have already paid for."
The wealth of every person is built on the fabric of those who ern less than 100K a year. Police,, teachers, construction worker etc. It is pure greed NOT to fully support Social security,
Let’s keep this 3rd rail electrified people
At this rate I will never be able to retire. Work till I die.
Work will set you free!
based republicans
Cut the military budget in half!
Whoa . . . . at 82, you had me going there for a moment: )>
. . . depending on the ilk of the reporter:
And the Medicare Hospital Insurance Fund could have only enough money to pay full benefits until 2031.
As Johnson settles in as speaker, it's not clear whether he'll try to make cuts to these services or reform them, which would make it harder for some Americans to receive their benefits.
Will Mike Johnson try to cut Social Security?
Johnson hasn't publicly supported cuts to Social Security as House speaker. But the Louisiana Republican has called for the creation of a bipartisan commission to address America's trillions of dollars of debt.
The push comes after Johnson served as the chair of the conservative Republican Study Committee from 2019 to 2021. During his tenure, the committee released a budget plan that urged Congress to adopt changes for Medicare and Social Security.
The goal, according to the plan, was “long-term solvency” for the program. But it also included cuts to Medicare and Social Security.
That doesn't mean Johnson will target the benefits. As speaker, Johnson represents all House Republicans, from the most moderate to the most . . . . . . . .
I guess not enough of us died off during cvid
They're working very hard to lose the election. SMH 😔 but 😏 lmao 😂😂😂😂😂
There is no way cutting SS should affect the national debt. The SS fund is supposed to be an entirely different pile of money.
When someone has a low SSA retirement, they can get SSI (General Welfare Fund)
That adds to the debt.
@@aolvaar8792 Google: 'does SSI add to the debt?' and have fun.
No, it does not.
Social Security does not add one cent to the federal deficit! It's a stand alone program.
When someone has a low SSA retirement, they can get SSI (General Welfare Fund)
That adds to the debt.
@@aolvaar8792 It is a very low percentage of total Social Security payout and enormously eclipsed by out of control military budget spending. The military budget is the real problem. It should be cut in half. It's bigger than the next 10 countries combined.
@@jaygold4467
Your comment: Social Security does not add one cent to the federal deficit!
SSA by its rules allows Federal deficit to occur through SSI (General Welfare Fund).
I was pointing out the methodology of how deficit occurs.
High-income earners are not your personal ATMs.
Why not? We’re theirs
Because he wants to make Grandma rely on the church to live. It's what they've always done. To keep folks "religious" out of necessity not out of actual believe.
It's also so when Donald Trump gets re-elected, he can introduce his ''tent cities'' for the homeless population, the people that he refers to as ''vermin''. Cutting Social Security would be an excellent way to increase the homeless population, and fill the tent cities with more vermin.
@@bettyriley7295 They will just start camps, and it'll be sold as "charity" by some religious asshole that makes money of it, via both state subsidies and getting the homeless to pay for their own "charity".
R they even gunna give a refund to all the taxes we pay for Medicare and social security as they cut it??????? Like WTF
they just don't want to pay taxes on it
They are able to do what they want to do since Grandma and Grandpa VOTE for them to do that damage to themselves. How ironic 🤔
I saw Boebert doing this. It went as you might expect.
How much do you want to bet...that 61% of the Pentagon's budget goes directly into somebody's pocket. I'm not saying whose pocket, just somebody's pocket.
This is logical. Clearly the richest people need that money more than disabled seniors
Social Security should be phased out for younger Americans. 45 and younger should not be required to contribute. No one should be dependent on Social Security in their retirement. The money taxed by Social security would provide a higher return if invested in a total market fund
Just don’t charge me taxes and let me liquidate what I contributed.
exactly why I continue to save for retirement since 18
One other trick they keep trying to pull is to say, " we're not going to touch benes for current SS recipients. It's only for future generations; those under 40." It's all rubbish. Just raise the payroll cap.
I Do Not Understand How Soc sec is Self Payments by The American People so how could it be a drain on the deficit??
A “trust fund” implies a secure source of funding. However, a federal trust fund is simply an accounting mechanism used to track inflows and outflows for specific programs.
In private-sector trust funds, receipts are deposited and assets are held and invested by trustees on behalf of the stated beneficiaries.
In federal trust funds, the federal government does not set aside the receipts or invest them in private assets.
Rather, the receipts are recorded as accounting credits in the trust funds, and then combined with other receipts that the Treasury collects and spends.
Further, the federal government owns the accounts and can, by changing the law, unilaterally alter the purposes of the accounts and raise or lower collections and expenditures.
Minchin and Matt Romney
Meanwhile more and more people are ending up homeless, I'm sure forcing even more veterans and disabled people on the streets will help...
Just pay me in a lump sum all the Social Security taxes I've paid for forty-five years plus interest.
Unless you're in the top 12% of earners you will receive far less than you will just being on Social Security. Sit down and do the math some day. You'll be surprised how little you've actually payed, and how much Social Security actually pays.
You will be even more disappointed in how much 'interest' you've earned.
@@ASDeckard
I think it's a good system and hope it will continue.
What I'm saying is if they want to do away with Social Security then I want everything I've paid in, rather than get nothing.
I dont understand why do they hate social security so much ?
The Republicans love to lose 😂😂😂😂
And I love to see them lose.
@@brantleyerik They do not understand having unpopular views and pushing them on the public does not make you win lol
I mean... with the sort of flagrant Collaboration that the Dems call "solutions", it's not like they have to win to get their shit through...
And Iam not surprised at all
Wow! Does this party not have grandparents on SS?
its the bulk of their party. gramma n grandpa are to focused on thinking woke college campuses are making everyone gay to realize they are being robbed blind by the repub politicians they vote for.
This wicked gov. is corrupt., but how do we fix this grifting operation..? How do we eliminate Citizen United..?
This sponser is the shit
It's not the governments money, long time workers have paid into this for their entire life. Its the workers money. When government officials retire they leave with millions. I'd love to see them manage on SS payments
this will hurt the economy. less stuff will be sold.
The problem is capitalism.
Hilarious.
Social security base start pay should be no less than $2,400. per month.
Here's a line to use when talking about the Pentagon's budget: "If you can't account for it, you don't need it!"
Remember Kyle said: You are objectively wrong if you like fall and you should be ashamed of yourself...
Any chance of cutting the military budget that has failed 5 audits and is missing $2trillion..🤔
economic violence justifies real violence
If I did and deficit is so damn bad why don't they cut the military budget which is 10 times more destructive and harmful to every Nation across the planet.
It's a trojan horse if the Trojan Horse had: "Greeks hiding inside with weapons" written on it... and of course they still let it in the city
You have no $ for SS but you do have 100 Billion for Israel????
In addition to raising the cap on the payroll tax, you could also increase the contribution employers make to that tax. Right now it's 1:1. Make it so employers contribute 1.2:1 (for starters). Prices would go up slightly, but it would reinforce the role SS plays in ensuring some of the $ in the economy goes to providing a secure retirement for workers.
I love how you think increasing labor costs by 20% will only raise prices 'slightly.' Labor costs are upwards of 80% of costs in the US economy, because everything else has been made so efficient, and every industry it's getting better and better every year. To be clear this is arguably a good thing (that labor is the only section of costs that isn't becoming hyper efficient), because making labor costs more efficient is literally just saying pay workers less, and making it less efficient is saying pay workers more, but as this ratio skews more and more towards labor it means you can effectively say labor costs *are* the price of goods, so any increase in labor expense *is* an increase in prices.
Now think about it, really dig here: if you increase labor costs *without increasing worker pay* by arbitrarily taxing business for having the audacity to pay their workers more.... At best you are just driving up prices without effecting pay, and at worse you've added yet another pressure for employers to pay their workers less, while also driving up product costs.
That doesn't sound very smart for some reason. Maybe you should sit down and do the math some day.
@ASDeckard increasing the employer's contribution to 1.2 from 1.0 results in a 1.25% increase in labor costs. The fact that I have to explain that to you shows you haven't thought this thru. Please do so, then respond.
Remember also there is a primary and you can all still get rid of some Centrist Democrats while maintaining a Democrat in the seats, and bring us closer to systemic change for the better. Medicare for All♥️
Social Security will be sold on Wall St.
You assume that my grandmother is a person worthy of concern but here's the thing, I know my grandmother...and she is not.🤔
Honestly, I don’t want to keep paying into SS. When I finally get payments from it during retirement , the purchasing power will be way less than now. I’d rather have that money now and invest.
Ok gut #SocialSecurity,,,,,,,,,,, Fine pay me now what I have put in. Pay me my $100000 dollars now.
Well, it won't pass the senate or bidens desk. I'd imagine the house will go back democratic controlled this time.
Trump doesn't like the idea of cutting social security. Even the head of the Trump Crime Family realises there are some issues you don't mess with.
Are they going to give back contributions?
That's not how paying taxes work.
@@ASDeckard What are you even saying - do you want the benefit gutted or not?
Reform= get rid of.
If they cut social security would that mean that we won’t be expected to pay the 12%? Can someone please explain to me ?
Yea, and your workplace wouldn't need to match it (meaning you effectively are paying 24% if you measure from the expense your employer needs to pay to employ you), so you could in theory expect some amount of pay raise as well, it depends on how greedy your employer is though, of course..