What baffles me is why a TV news host who earns $2.9m a year would go to such lengths to avoid even mentioning a solution that’s been signed onto repeatedly by virtually every Democrat for decades?
I feel so frustrated that the Democratic Party seems so lame and inept regarding dissemination of facts like the cap on Social Security taxation--just one of many factual issues. Can we have reasonable hope that when the real campaigning for 2024 elections commences, they will crucify the Republican lies? This is a life-or-death situation. If they don't perform, we may fall to fascism in one year. Mr. President, this is your administration, and you bear responsibility for enlightening the American public. Please--show us your inner FDR!
NBC execs are in the maga cult, simple as that! Recall it is their network that gave media birth to this vile, amoral, convicted fraud!
Good article, Thom. Christie has to know better that this doesn't have to be an issue of raising peoples tax rates.......... just raise the cap so the wealthy will pay more in and our problems with SS and Medicare will be solved.
If you recall during the 2016 presidential debates Bernie Sanders asked Hillary Clinton three times if she would join him in raising the Social Security tax cap and she refused to answer. Pelosi has said that's not the answer, and Biden has refused to directly answer the question as well. This is a form of propaganda you reinforce on a regular basis. Just because some Democrats say something is a good idea doesn't mean they would ever seriously implement the policy if given the chance. But they do propose a lot of progressive stuff when they are certain it will never be passed. And for the record, most multimillion dollar celebrity "news" anchors lie and omit on a regular basis, whether it's MSNBC or Fox or the "free" TV networks.
As usual, the real problem with Social Security and Medicare and all the other government programs to help people live, is not lack of money, but lack of the political will to demand that all citizens pay their fair share. Tax hedge fund manager earnings as income, not capital gains, raise the Social Security income cap to reflect their proper level of contribution, eliminate the excessive tax loopholes that allow companies like Amazon to earn billions and yet pay no taxes (Biden has already approached this with the 15% minimum corporate tax) - we can have nice things and pay for them if we demand fairness..... If we succeed in turning back the tide of fascism in 2024 we can then go on to tackle the real problems we have in the time we may have left (if James Hansen is correct).....
This used to be my subject. As long as workers are paying payroll taxes, there will be money to pay at least some of the scheduled benefits. However, once the reserves are gone, the payouts will be less than the current benefit amounts. In 2034 when reserves are depleted, the apex of the bell shaped curve for baby boomers will be reached, and after that, the deficit will self correct. https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/static-data/published-reports/frusg/FRUSG_2022.pdf
Once upon a time, I had all the answers. There are 2 SS trust funds, a retirement fund and a disability fund. I would have attacked the slope of the increase that took the base line (x) to 2034, and thus the baby boomer population would decline in the out years.
I tried to address the problem not through taxation but by noblesse oblige. Too many "charities" don't help anybody whereas SS benefits more people than any other entity.
Here's a paper from 2011. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/senior_lawyers/publications/voice_of_experience/2011/winter/social-security-maybe-charity-should-begin-at-home/
Besides increasing the cap, can also extend the period of qualification. Most benefits are calculated on 35 yeas of substantial gainful activity to produce a primary insurance amount (PIA). The "primary insurance amount" (PIA) is the benefit (before rounding down to next lower whole dollar) a person would receive if he/she elects to begin receiving retirement benefits at his/her normal retirement age. At this age, the benefit is neither reduced for early retirement nor increased for delayed retirement. https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/piaformula.html#:~:text=The%20%22primary%20insurance%20amount%22%20(,nor%20increased%20for%20delayed%20retirement.
Incredible that we never hear anything about this simple and just application. I caught this when, as a new employer 50 years ago, saw the limits for Social Security and Medicare as well. All the hype about cutting benefits is hijacked like you say to influence the ignorant. You’re so right that this should be ingrained with everyone and why isn’t it? Like you say, the elite wealthy control everything. Thank you for spreading the truth.
The answer is that crass!
Three trillion was borrowed from the fund. These are held as securities and the Social Security administrator can request that money at any time. Neither Social Security nor Medicare is going broke anytime soon. We’re more likely to be bankrupted by making it private or by these Medicare “Advantage” plans (why private plans can use the word Medicare is beyond me). Can you imagine if the plans were private and the stock market dropped as it did under Bush 2? There would be wholesale devastation.
Also, Social Security is purchasing an annuity. We put in money, we’re promised a lifetime annuity. A taxpayer who earned near the maximum probably put in more than 200k in his/her lifetime. With even minimum investments, that money is worth at least 500k (I’m not in that field so this is layman talk). Payments made take close to 20 years to exhaust that money, and that’s with no additional interest. And many people pass away before collecting.
The US needs these plans for people to survive. It’s not all about the wealthy. And they’re not entitlements.
Tom, you seem to think that media makes mistakes. By and large, it's not on our side, but on the side of its obscenely rich owners.
Mr. Hartman. It took me some years to finally realize that the oligarchs who own and run this country decided long ago to create two Americas. One for them and one for"us." In this regard they are much like the Aristocrats in Europe from the end of the roman Empire to the advent of the brief period brought on by The Enlightenment. That brief period is coming to an end. The Junkers in Germany stand out especially as an example of this type of historic trend. It is no surprise that the next stage in the American Oligarchs' plan is Fascism.
Can't the public take some control of the "public airwaves"? and have a multitude of open debates from now until the election? It's natural that donors would quash a privately funded discussion that would hurt them financially. That's not rocket science.
I am disgusted not even the so called "liberal" media follows through or asks really incisive questions, But I know the answer.
It is the way that the media is run.
First there is the board of directors, who sit on other board of directors, including parent corporations of the company on which they sit. They are paid handsomely to ensure that the company on which they sit as a board member, maximize profits (return on invesstment), They hire executives like CEO, CFO, COO, to maximize profits.
The CEO's, etc hire persons, journalists, hosts, producers who instinctively know on which side their toast is buttered. And TV Hosts sit there with ear buds connected to the producers and editors which instruct them what so say, not to say or emphasize. Check your favorite talking head, next time for ear buds, and if not ear buds they have a monitor in front of them, even telling them what to say, nor say, or rolling as script for them to read.
If they don't follow instructions they get chastised, if they stray too far outside the lines, they get the fate of Tiffany Cross and Keith Olbermann, never, ever tell the truth, nevr ever embarrass the hand that feeds you
I am sickened I don't much watch TV, but later in the day or evening when nothing else to do, I watch recorded shows, and then only some (I am not all interested in the likes of Andrew Mitchell, for instance.
But I can't help notice that regardless of the host or anchor be it Chris Hayes or Maddow, that they never really cover important subjects, like Health Care and Corruption, nor do they ask follow up questions. Not because they are oblivious (well maybe that) but because they know just how far to color outside the lines. Especially those corporations and lobbyists who advertise, like the carbon cabal, PhRMA and AHIP (Association of health insurance providers) that is why your TV watching is polluted by the constant lies of "Medicare (dis)Advantage adds.
The CEO and his downstream sock puppets, know better than to bite the hand that feeds them.
Raising the FICA cap to One Million dollars would provide a lot of revenue. I would like to hear more about what's going on with that. Also, ashamed to say I did not know about Wells Fargo managing the Social Security Fund. First off, how much that is costing the fund and secondly, why is there still a shortfall when the fund is being managed by a professional money management entity? Maybe I'm the only person who missed that info. When did that happen? Let me guess - not Trump, the Republican regime before him. So W Bush and his boys?
I'm not surprised the question was muffed. Just like the "Nightly News" the coverage is usually superficial.
Why did NBC go along with GOP lies about social security?
I can't believe I have to say this, truly, but if not me, who? The reason profitable news media decide to report on or omit from anything is because they hold the sacred responsibility to make sure money happens. If money doesn't happen how could they bother saying or not saying anything at all? It's not efficient use of talk if no money happens. What would be the point?
I've heard of people without the money yearning for an entitlement called truth and a unicorn named context. I'm stunned. They can't be for real, but I bet they are. I bet they sure are. We're a selfishly discontent society, throwing fits at having our money go to people who lack the ability to actually earn money. These misentertainment news folks are obviously struggling, OK? They're willing to publicly debase themselves on a daily basis - all for the noble aspiration to make money happen big for themselves and for those struggling above them to make money happen even bigger yet. Can you or I say the same, with a straight face? Probably not, if we're being honest, and honestly I doubt we are.
For their sacrifices and for the greater good of the spirit of charity, I am belligerently unashamed to stand up for what is Right here. We cannot IN GOOD CONSCIENCE steal $9,932.40 PER YEAR from people who, armed only with courage and great wealth, have taken a vow to use their one and only life for the vanity of self and a zealous devotion to make money happen real big always. And not just for themselves - no, no ,no - they're passing it up to those above them who struggle even harder to have the bigger money happen hugely. We should all learn a little something from this. A little something called philanthropy.
We're talking about a mere 1% of the population that needs our support. That's not a lot to ask, if you're in the mood to ask, and if you ask me. Nobody, and I'm serious here, no one is going to get all the money if we don't set aside our daily needs and give. How else will this endangered minority survive if we don't make the money happen for them? It should be viewed as an honor to lift them up by our bootstraps, not a topic for a witty gripe over a fine meal of expired canned ham.