64 Comments

The Christian Nationalists in the GOP believe that God made them wealthy because they are righteous and others can burn in hell because they are sinful. If someone ends up eating cat food in old age, they feel that person deserves it. Besides being hateful, nonsensical and bad for the economy, it’s a shame that these folks don’t understand the religion they are hiding behind.

Expand full comment

This is how the GQP rolls, everything for the wealthy, nothing for ordinary people. Killing Social Security is an immensely unpopular idea, but the GQP wants to do this. Social Security can be fixed by removing the income cap.

Expand full comment

“If we really want to talk about the debt and spending, it’s the entitlements programs.”

Yes, exactly. We need to talk about those huge tax cuts to the entitled morbidly rich.

Social Security and Medicare are hugely popular. They used to be known as the “third rail”.

Is the RFP (republican fascist party) mis-reading the room?

We will see.

Expand full comment

I worked as a claims rep at SSA from 7/65-11/99 &.you are right on with this report. The ultra right is tenacious & funded to the max, always has been. Gotta stand up to them, constantly.

Expand full comment

"Reagan’s commission made [Social Security] benefits taxable for the first time."

Reagan cuts taxes for the rich and adds taxes to everybody else.

Expand full comment

Read the entire article. And join SOCIAL SECURITY WORKS

Expand full comment

And yet older MAGA Republicans vote for the people who want to destroy their current or planned retirement benefits. Perhaps the only way to reach them is by laying out exactly what they will lose under these proposals. If they finally get it that they are in the same boat as the ethnic minorities, gays, immigrants, etc. that are being trashed then maybe some of them will wake up. It will be hard, but appealing to their logic doesn't work. So self-interest may, at least for those who will listen. (And if that works then ask how their Medicare and VA benefits are different from socialized medicine.)

Expand full comment

We need to just go ahead and let them make their evil plans. When enacted and the impoverished cult members start taking one penny in cuts, they will become Democrats.

When the poor get money from the government, the money is spent in America. When the rich get tax breaks from the government, most of it is infested overseas or put in offshore Banks and not reinvested in America. The only way the economic plan the right has of working, is slavery. Even then it won't last very long. The floggings will continue until all the poor are dead. This must be why the right hates birth control! That wasn't around during the dark ages which they want to go back to.

Expand full comment

There are two Social Security trust funds and the Republicans tried to put the disability fund into default. Here's a peer reviewed paper published a few years ago. Save the Social Security Disability Trust Fund! and Reduce SSI Exposure to the General Fund, 36 J. Nat’l Ass’n Admin. L. Judiciary 142 (2016) https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/naalj/vol36/iss1/4/

In an effort to try to save the fund, I advocate using charitable deductions to reduce the "curve" of the date of pending default. I've been told, even by some former commissioners, that it saved the fund millions, but my attempts to get the Biden administration to publicize it have been frustrated.

Donate:

https://www.ssa.gov/agency/donations.html#:~:text=Make%20out%20a%20check%20or,Survivors%20Insurance%20Trust%20Fund%3B%20or

December 01, 2011 FINANCIAL PLANNING

Social Security—Maybe Charity Should Begin at Home

By Daniel F. Solomon

For most of its history, Social Security was a terrific bargain: our parents and grandparents most probably received significantly more benefits than they paid into the Social Security Trust Fund. The trust fund comprises the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) and Disability Insurance (DI) Trust Funds (OASDI, collectively).

In most cases, because our family units could rely on these benefits, they were able to enjoy enough financial independence to send people like us to school so that we could become lawyers—productive and, in some cases, wealthy, members of society. For 75 years, the Social Security Trust Fund has helped enable American soci- ety to achieve far beyond the aspirations of its founders, ultimately providing more than subsistence to retirees by also protecting widows, orphans, and disabled people. The dignity provided to needy beneficiaries surely far outweighs the economic value of the funds.

However, financial experts have long predicted a future insolvency of the funds. A majority of Americans have invested in the funds, recognize their social utility, and do not want to burden their heirs. Although there have been legislative attempts to “fix” the system, there is no consensus how to do it. The Congressional Research Service reported:

For example, for workers who earned average wages and retired in 1980 at age 65, it took 2.8 years to recover the value of the retirement portion of the combined employee and employer shares of their Social Security taxes plus interest. For their counterparts who retired at age 65 in 2002, it will take 16.9 years. For those retiring in 2020, it will take 20.9 years.

Geoffrey Kollmann and Dawn Nuschler, “Social Security Reform” (October 2002).

The National Commission on Social Security Reform (informally known as the “Greenspan Commission” after its chairman) was appointed by the Congress and President Ronald Reagan in 1981 in response to a short-term financing crisis that Social Security faced at that time. Estimates were that the OASI Trust Fund would run out of money possibly as early as August 1983. Congress rendered a compromise that extended the retirement age from 65 to 67, through a deal that raised payroll taxes and trimmed benefits enough to keep Social Security solvent. See Jackie Calmes, “Political Memo: The Bipartisan Panel: Did It Really Work?” New York Times, January 18, 2010. However, the legislation addressed only the immediate problem and did not address the long-term viability of the fund. See also Rudolph G. Penner, “The Greenspan Commission and the Social Security Reforms of 1983,” in Triumphs and Tragedies of the Modern Presidency, David Abshire, Editor. Washington: Center for the Study of the Presidency, pp. 129–31.

The George W. Bush administration commission deliberated on the issue and then called for a transition to a combination of a government-funded program and personal accounts (“individual” or “private accounts”) through partial privatization of the system.

President Barack Obama reportedly strongly opposes privatization or raising the retirement age but supports raising the cap on the payroll tax ($106,800 in 2009) to help fund the program. He has appointed a National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, which is to report and offer another fix.

Current estimates predict that payroll taxes will only cover 78% of the scheduled payout amounts after 2037. This declines to 75% by 2084. 2010 OASDI Trust- ees Report, Figure II.D2, www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/2010/ trTOC.html.

Although the congressional plan was to ensure solvency through Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax, there is a private means to help: to also consider the humanitarian and charitable nature of the Social Security Administration (SSA), which has been possible since a legislative fix in 1972. Before then, bequests naming Social Security or a trust fund as a beneficiary could not be accepted, which caused problems in administration of some estates. Money gifts or bequests may be accepted for deposit by the managing trustee of the OASI and DI funds. Section 170(c)(l) of the Internal Revenue Code lists the U.S. government among the educational or charitable organizations to which donations are acceptable. Gifts must be unconditional, except that the donor may designate to which fund the gift should be donated. If no fund is designated, the gift is credited to the OASI Trust Fund.

However, SSA has not publicized its charitable persona. Although the agency has received some gifts and bequests, they have been insignificant and not given consideration in a possible fix. The concept has been so unimportant to the experts that the Annual Statistical Supplement to the Social Security Bulletin does not specify how much the administration has received in gifts and bequests. Total revenue from gifts to the trust funds has been quite small. From 1974 to 1979 the most received in any one year was $91,949.88. During that period, the average annual amount was only $39,847. In 1980, almost two-thirds of the gifts were less than $100. The median gift size was $50. One person, for example, donated $13.11. She arrived at that amount by applying 5.85% (the employee tax rate then in effect) to her benefit amount and donated it to help “‘shore up’ the sagging, dwindling Social Security fund.” However, the 2010 Social Security Trustees Report lists them as about $98,000 (www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/2010/III_ cyoper.html#2). Compared to many other charities, this is a paltry amount.

Apparently, SSA has never done a feasibility study nor marketing research to determine how an aggressive campaign could raise funds to support Social Security, or how gifts and bequests could reduce the current estimates of impending doom. According to some estimates total deductions taken for all charities next year would be $413.5 billion. Estimates for fiscal year 2011 are that SSA will spend $730 billion. That amount is already covered through “contributions” (taxes), but it is reasonable that charitable contributions to the trust fund could significantly lessen taxpayer exposure for impending doom, if not return the fund to solvency.

As lawyers, we have the capacity to remind our families, our clients, and the public at large that there is a way to contribute to help endow future generations in the pursuit of the same kind of social stability that Social Security provided to our parents and grandparents.

Expand full comment

The old Middle Ages Nobility believed they were blessed by God, and had earned their wealth by being virtuous. The poor, therefore, deserved to suffer for poverty due to their lack of virtue. Republicans now believe the same.

Expand full comment
founding

I live in France and I really don't understand what the hell is going on in the heads of these charlatans. Do they hate the American people so much or is this some kind of way to enrich themselves? To allow starvation is a crime against humanity especially in the 'supposed' richest nation in the world. I really having a hard time with this and the thought of many older people like me, without safety and assurance is insane.

Break down the doors.

Expand full comment
Nov 28, 2023·edited Nov 28, 2023

Wealthy folks are just as stupid and scared as anybody else, maybe more so because of how the financial industry and GOP propagandizes them. Big banks, however are NOT stupid or scared. They are crooked as hell and if we don't reign them in, they will own everybody and not just congress.

Expand full comment

Social Security is vital. MAGA Mikey is truly frightening, but so are the rest of his maggot brothers and sisters. The maggot party aka The Republicans.

Expand full comment

We can hope that public reaction will be akin to the reaction to the SCOTUS repeal of Roe v. Wade; however, we can't wait until SS is repealed. The defunding of SS administration is the frog in the boiling water metaphor, and complete privatization will be the death of the frog. Now is the time to turn off the stove. The problem is the knobs are also being (have been?) removed.

Expand full comment

As you say Thom, we are the only nation in the developed world that does not provide national healthcare plans nor good education benefits. Then why do us taxpayers fund money yearly to some of these nations. Specifically Israel in the billions? Could you address the hypocrisy? Thanks for all you do Thom and were missing you on the radio but do enjoy Jeff and hoping to hear news with my dad today from Jeff and Jo on your program.

Expand full comment

Two years after boot camp at Great Lakes Naval Training Center, I had to endure something even worse - Aviation OCS run by Marine Drill Instructors. Whenever we were standing in lines, we would be asked to recite (nark) things we were told to memorize. One was the Officer Honor Code: "I will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate among us those who do." That seemed like a rather straightforward honorable way to live, and most of us have followed it into our retirement years.

In contrast to honorable people, we have the 2023 House Republicans in Congress. The GOP history in the House this year has been to lie, to cheat, to steal, and to tolerate it among their ilk. They could not even bring themselves to eject a pathological liar, cheater, and thief named George Santos. Their anti-gay transmania, anti-abortion, anti-social security, anti-medicare, anti-Obamacare, anti-military promotions, anti-staffing of the IRS to collect evaded taxes, and even anti their own Speaker of the House posture has made this likely the most unproductive Congress in history. Worse, after these programs deteriorated due to GOP policies, they blame it all on Democrats. There is no honor in the Republican Congress. They are all scoundrels.

Because these legislators are elected by US citizens, their majority surely seems to imply that the majority of Americans no longer have any honor and are willing to lie, cheats, and steal. I am frustrated as to how to turn this around. How do we restore honor among the dishonorable?

Expand full comment