News flash,this is baked into the Trump,Ryan,McConnel game plan. BTW,this is one of the Heritage foundations big list items. Koch Brothers have been pushing this for decades,complete repeal of any and all FDR programs.

unfortunately everyone else is going to suffer

I usually don't engage but she set me off.

Besides saying Martin Luther King would be ashamed of how "racial" Obama made everything (this is what made me see red) she actually had the nerve to say she voted for Trump because Obama "messed with social security"

What the ever loving fuck???

I honestly thought she was some straggler who jumped on my friend's post that was public. Turns out she's known the guy all his life and "loves him like a son" - the guy and his husband have an adorable 3 year old daughter they adopted. Yeah she "loves" him alright.

They ain't Facebook friends anymore.

I unloaded with both barrels.

they'll believe anything they are told. Anything.

AND I'm sure they'll blame Obama because we all know reality is not their friend.

Could be interesting if I get introduced. Lol

My niece's husband is a racist Ted Cruz fan. I dumped him real quick on facebook. Seeing him at family stuff is interesting but he never said anything.

I just don't want that kind of stuff in my life anymore.

If the repugs actually did this, they would never ... never win another national election in the history of the universe.

And with the kind of majority that would give us, we could reinstate the benefits and do whatever we would like ... forever.

There may be some cuts, cuts in the rate of growth, future benefits, and no COLAs ... but to think that some 50% reduction in current benefits is about to happen is foolish, it won't happen because the backlash would be so dramatic and instant it would shock the entire world.

Because their will be.

The next national election is less than two years away, somehow dumbass is going to take over the whole nation and throw out the constitution in less than two years?

Uhhh ... no. Not going to happen, can not happen, will not happen.

some huge emergency-- they can find some way. I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss this.

Just like after 9/11 ... the next election was postponed.

Uhh .. no it was not.

Just like during WWII, elections were cancelled all over the place.

Uhh .. no they were not.

To cancel elections in the US would require military troops on the ground like after Katrina.

Uhh .. that did not happen.

There will be no elections cancelled, no one on any side wants elections to be cancelled. People have been saying this stupid shit during every administration. When dimson was in office people were saying that some event would lead dumbya to cancel the elections. The right has been saying Obama would do this, and are now saying he is trying to get the election nullified to remain in power.

It has never happened, it can not happen, and it will not happen.

and I don't trust him or his lunatic cabinet or the GOP in congress.

I'm not saying cancelling elections WILL happen, but please stop saying it CAN'T happen.

Either you vote for the dictator or go to prison.

Or with your money

And there are enough racist White people to keep the Republican party around.

You think that Florida is going to vote repug if SS benefits are cut by 50% because they are racists?

Right ...

And Ohio?

Sure ...

These swing states are always close and somehow cutting SS by 50% would make them vote repug because, well ... racism.

Get real.

People vote their pocketbook and draconian cuts like suggested in the OP would destroy whomever enacted them. Forever. The twits would have to dismantle the party and rename it ...

Never try to use logic to figure out what they will do.

Go back to the early days of the housing collapse when they tried to blame it banks being forced to loan to Black people for the collapse.

They really aren't that stupid. I wish they were.

after that, everyone will just accept that Trumpland is the new normal and those who speak out will be "dealt with" in a manner appropriate to whatever the new normal may be

They will attempt to continue to suppress voters and turnout, they will manipulate and collude to get the results they want.

Of this, there is no doubt.

But there will be elections.

there absolutely will be elections, even if only for show and convincing us that we still have some national traditions
and even if they are only show elections, they will be celebrated in a very convincing manner by the press who will do their best to assure us that nothing has changed, all is as it should be, democracy working just fine for everyone all the time boyz

as you say, of this there is no doubt

what i doubt is that the Republicans will "never win another national election" if they torch SSI and Medicare
i think they can and they will

it may not be as straight forward as everyone seems to think.

Josh Marshall isn't above posting scare headlines.
As he wrote: more shortly.

verification before getting excited about this. Looks too much like a false news story with little detail. Anyone know more?

here's another, albeit overlapping source--
http://www.motherjones.com/contributor/2016/12/republicans-want-to-cut-social-security

Once it's a welfare program instead of an insurance program, it makes it easier to cut.
That's one of the reasons the cap should be eliminated, instead of payments dropped. And if you need to pay the wealthy folk a little more when it comes time for them to pull out their SSI, that still won't be an issue. SSI returns are guaranteed. The wealthy investor-types can then dump whatever they get a month to gamble on the stock market once they get it.

My deceased FIL typically averaged over $400K a year as an insurance company executive and retired AF general before he officially retired - for over 25 years. He was all for getting rid of the Social Security cap. He said "If you make enough that your 401K return, retirement investments or company stock options are going to allow you to retire in comfort and ease at 62, you certainly make enough to pay more a year in Social Security taxes with very little pain to your pocketbook to ensure that money will be there - without paying any fees to get to it - every month when you retire."
If the cap would be eliminated, he estimated he would pay the equivalent of a year's Greens fees at one (maybe two, if he got a big bonus) of his favorite golf courses.

There's nothing wrong with Social Security that eliminating the cap won't fix.

Haele

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/gop-plan-major-social-security-cuts

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/gop-plan-major-social-security-cuts

Not amending, adding additional info. There will be still more later. Still calling it a huge cut.

https://www.ssa.gov/oact/solvency/SJohnson_20161208.pdf

Here is the document if anyone speaks that language.

had not blocked Obama's infrastructure/jobs proposals? More people working/more SS and Medicare contributions, right? They would have had to back off from keeping Obama from succeeding during his presidency, but they wouldn't be trying to cut SS and Medicare now that they have control.

I suppose the argument would be that even if both programs were well-funded, they would try to wipe them off the face of the Earth as they were Democratic programs. If this concept is true, then the Democrats in both houses should hit them where the truth hurts, as both Democrats and Republicans will be pointing the finger at them for cutting off their life-support and causing many deaths in the process. When taking away the support they've paid into all their lives is suddenly removed, party affiliation doesn't mean a thing. It's the food on the table and medical help when needed that they are concentrating on. We can become pit bulls when we have to and I for one will be right along with the pack.

Wasn't it Ryan who took advantage of the SS benefits when his father died? Short memory, eh Ryan?

Are they hoping for mass suicide? Living in homeless camps? Do they think the poor will simply disappear? I guess they live in such a cocaine induced stupor, counting their money all the way to the bank, they just don't give a $hit.

what the situations are most common and drugs and alcohol play a big role in this population. He advocates for these people, seeing to it that state budget cuts don't hurt the homeless but RW attitudes blaming the homeless for their circumstances. Mercifully, CT and especially New Haven are strongly blue.

BTW, there are homeless people who are members of the commission and their advice and counsel are invaluable to my husband and the other members of the commission.

I wish your husband much success in his work, btw

and lacking in moralsl Of course, I am sure that some of these finger pointers prolly have had
medical conditions and pain requiring opiods and have gotten hooked. And that they are a drain on the economy and they should be required to pick up trash to earn their keep.

There is a big debate whether he said bigly or big league. Bigly has sort of stuck in some circles.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-37483869

this scare nonsense. The problem is, if you start getting people used to 50% cut talk, a 25% actual cut looks like a win for the good guys. "Hey, they were going for 50 % and we got them down to only taking 25%." That goes for the Trump = Hitler talk. You end up with, "Well, at least he didn't turn out to be as bad as Hitler." That's then a good thing - not as bad as Hitler.

Well Said. You have made a very important point.

But - then the rich bastards wouldn't get their HUGE tax cut. That's why this won't happen.

Some seniors have savings. Us, not so much.

I am scared to death. I am not ABLE to work so what do I do when I lose everything?

The shit will hit the fan. What? Lock us all up?

Me too. I am old and I am starting taking to the streets this Saturday. With a bike helmet and
An asthma inhaler and in great shape for running. I have nothing to loose. No job to fear for.

http://www.democraticleader.gov/newsroom/12916/

Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement after the Republican Chairman of the Social Security Subcommittee of Ways and Means, Chairman Sam Johnson, introduced legislation late yesterday that would inflict deep cuts in Social Security benefits:

“Apparently nothing upsets House Republicans like the idea of hard-working people getting to enjoy a secure and dignified retirement. While Speaker Ryan sharpens his knives for Medicare, Chairman Johnson’s bill is an alarming sign that Republicans are greedily eying devastating cuts to Americans’ Social Security benefits as well.

“Cutting Social Security would have devastating consequences for Americans’ retirement security. At a time when Americans are more anxious about their retirement than ever, the top Republican on the Social Security Subcommittee is rolling out legislation that cuts benefits by more than a third, raises the retirement age from 67 to 69, cuts seniors’ cost of living adjustments, and targets benefits for the families of disabled and retired workers.

“Slashing Social Security and ending Medicare are absolutely not what the American people voted for in November. Democrats will not stand by while Republicans dismantle the promise of a healthy and dignified retirement for working people in America.”

Only big change I see is stopping dependent/surviving children age 15 to 18 from getting SS if they are dropouts.

Other changes that would cause gradual small reductions are eliminating COLA's for higher income recipients, changing benefit formula to reduce benefits so a person has to be 69 to get "full" benefits instead of the current phase in occurring of 66-67 for full benefits.

But another provision reduces taxation of SS and eventual elimination of taxation of SS, so that provision actually increases income, esp for higher income recipients.

Overall this plan whittles away at SS gradually, similar to the SS changes enacted under Reagan where benefit formulas, age for full benefits, and Cola's were all adjusted to pay people slightly less and less over time.

In the aggregate, the changes are enough to propel more than a few soon-to-be retirees and even 40- and 50-somethings off their duffs and into the streets, including myself.

I don't think I'm alone in believing that SS and Medicare are the final straws, after suffering years of falling wages/cutbacks/outsourcing and other rightwing corruption and greed. There is no doubt they are coming for both programs, so time will tell if I'm right.

Those currently in their 60's and 70's get less than their parents drew considering what they paid in to the system, due to past changes in benefit calculations and the phased in Reagan SS reductions, while those in next generation will get even less, and those in the subsequent generations even less if this plan goes through.

Noticeably lacking is any raise in the wage ceiling for SS tax deductions, so there will be no increase in SS revenues which would have extended the Trust fund solvency without having to make all the reductions in benefits being proposed.

his Social Security and Medicare to get rid of gay people.
So, don't even try to use common sense, logic of especially intelligence on Trump supporters. You would probably be better off speaking Russian.

bullshit from a jerk.

There's a mile of difference between saying something like that and actually doing it.

I bet he would change his stupid tune fast if he really had to give up SS and Medicare just to "get rid of gay people".

Throw shit out and watch for any pushback.
There should be pushback on ANY cuts. This fund has been paid into by workers. If those asshole stewards looted it, then they need to put the money back and not from other cuts to social programs.
The boomers were expected. It wasn't as if they didn't know that there would be a large group of retirees. They made no adjustments and kicked the can down the road.

Well the can may have landed here. It needs to be shoved up their asses.

But we need the evidence of intent.

Meanwhile, I am going to go snow shoeing and sip some scotch.

That I don't pay into SS. I feel for those that do. Frump will try to cut it. No doubt.

I do wonder if Trump or governor Katshit will try to take our pension though.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/republican-bill-social-security-cuts?utm_content=bufferb8601&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

A key House Republican on the issue of Social Security introduced a bill Thursday that would impose major cuts to the program. The bill, the Social Security Reform Act of 2016, was introduced by Rep. Sam Johnson (R-TX), the chair of the House Ways and Means subcommittee on Social Security.

It would, among other things, gradually raise the retirement age from 67 to 69 on Americans 49 or younger at the present. It would change the formula that determines the size of a retiree's initial payments. And it would switch the program to a less generous formula for raising payments according to cost of living increases.

Big picture, the most concerning element for many experts is that its approach to make the program more solvent rest entirely on cuts, and does not raise revenues for the Social Security Trust Fund, as some bipartisan proposals have. Across the political spectrum, solutions for long term solvency range from cuts only approaches like Johnson's bill to plans that achieve 75 year solvency by raising the current income cap on social security taxes.

(snip)

A letter from the Social Security Administration's Chief Actuary gives a more concrete picture of what the legislation would like if implemented. On the low end of the scale, for retirees who have been in the workforce the longest, a 65-year-old who made an average of $12,280 (according to an established formula called AIME) after being in the workforce for 30 years would see his benefits increase by 9 percent when he retired in 2030, as compared to the current law. A 65-year-old retiree at the earning level who was only in the workforce for 20 years would see 19 percent decrease, however, in 2030. That cut would be 32 percent, if the 65-year-old was retiring in 2050.

Up the earning scale, the reductions continue. A 65-year-old middle-income earner, someone who earned an average of $49,121 after 44 years in the workforce, would see a reduction in her benefits of 11 percent when she retired in 2030, compared to the current law. The amount of reduction would increase the longer she stayed on the rolls: when she was 75 years old, for instance, the reduction would be 14 percent compared to current law, and 16 percent when she was 85 years old.

And the cuts get more severe the later a middle-income earner is retiring. If a 65-year-old at that earning level retired in 2050, her benefits would be 17 percent less than current law. By the time that retiree was 75 years old, they would be 19 percent less, and when she was 85, 22 percent less.

(end snip)

Now I know lots of GOP voters and each and every single one of them is living a pretty good life in retirement cashing their Social Security, complaining there is no yearly increase and they will use every last thing Medicare affords them and will push the envelope for benefits that might not be covered. So they vote GOP. WHY? GOP has opposed these programs since the day they were suggested and I remember my father a farmer not being included until LBJ's time -- and to be honest my parents would not have enjoyed their retirement at all or most likely couldn't afford TO retire. My mother never worked outside the home but when my father died her modest SS was bumped up to his rate and at 96 she has been able to live on her own not lavishly but in comfort without her children supporting her, putting her in a home but instead living in her own apartment. In a way I want GOP to at least try and perhaps the media will actually report facts and wake enough of these idiots up.

When do I get every penny I have paid into the system back...WITH I N T E R E S T!???

When will I get to stop paying in, since I will never get to stop working???



We will need a class action suit against the government suing for lost deductions.

F U C K all of them!

And a lot of them rely on social security to survive. They f'ed themselves and everyone else.

Link?

GOP introduces plan to massively cut Social Security
Yahoo Finance Ethan Wolff-Mann December 9, 2016

On Thursday, Rep. Sam Johnson, a Republican from Texas and chair of the Ways and Means Committee, introduced legislation to significantly cut Social Security.

The bill introduced by Johnson, who is also the chair of the Social Security subcommittee, slashes benefits, adds means testing, and would raise the retirement age from 67 to 69.

For most workers, the bill would cut Social Security benefits substantially. As Michael Linden, associate director for tax and budget policy at Center for American Progress, pointed out on Twitter, a letter from Social Security’s Office of the Actuary calculated workers making around $50,000 would see checks shrink by between 11% and 35%.

Nearly every income bracket would see a reduction, save for the very bottom. People making around $12,280 in 2016 who have worked for 30 years would see an increase of around 20%. But young people making the same amount would be hit hard by the changes. If they had 14 years of work experience by 2016, they would see their benefits cut in half.

The plan would also cut entirely cost of living adjustments (COLA) for retirees earning above $85,000.

If nothing happens, Social Security will start to lose its ability to pay benefits in full in the 2030s. However, Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo notes that by 2090 it will still be paying at 74%.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/gop-introduces-plan-to-massively-cut-social-security-222200857.html

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028348385