and guess what happens next.

is that everybody's in and everybody pays. Means testing will not save, or expand the program appreciably--but eliminating the cap or even better, applying it to all income, will.

*except by Democrats, apparently

logical answer. It wouldn't even have to be raised all that much.

The closest I can get to a 'reason' is that it would inconveniences the rich too much.

drawback.

...

Programs for the poor and easier to attack/get rid of. The smartest aspect of them is everyone has a piece of them.

to continue FEHBP because he was a two term POTUS, and HRC as his spouse AND was a 5+ year Senator, AND a 4 year SoS...

But any opportunity to display some hate for the Clintons and their financial status is an opportunity, I guess...

The Sanders are also millionaires, and they will also be eligible to continue to get health care via FEHBP after Bernie's retirement as a 5+ year career politician, and will not need to go on Medicare if they choose not to.

Most people who can afford to get more comprehensive insurance than Medicare do so.

Something like 1% of the populaton doesn't "need" social security. That's really not making a big dent in the social security programs.

Better to raise the cap on how much the rich pay in, would get a higher return.

in the future and it won't just be the wealthy that pay the price.

Whenever Paul Ryan's ilk have control of the Congress and White House again, do you believe they wouldn't be tempted to continually lower the means mark?

If Joe and Paul Ryan were so concerned by the richest 1% getting social security, then eliminate the cap so they continue to pay into the trust fund no matter how much money they make.

Gets the public on board with means testing for social security...step one on the road to killing it.

Why the hell can we not just raise the cap!!

Ohh right, the rich 1% would have to pay a tiny bit more in taxes and they would rather see us all dying in ditches by the side of the road than pay a little more in SS taxes!

This is a terrible position for any democrat to take, much less one running for POTUS.

of means testing.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

you know damn well there was more to what he said on CSPAN and it was aimed at the top 1%, taking it when they don't need it. Shrink it meant taking it from those at the top.

.... With Sanders supporters hoping no one will bother to read the entire article. I noticed the same thing in another thread. Here is the link.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128753535

Notice the OPs snip, and then look at my post #8 snip from the same article. Cheap hit job on good good Democrats.

on his opinion on that..

Link to tweet

a Ben Cohen who was a BS supporter.

from them through that prism.

Cheers.

Oh, btw,

I see you switched from Kamala Harris (who is my second choice unless Stacey Abrams joins the race but who (Abrams) I really hope goes for the GA Senate seat, as Perdue is a POS and we need the Seante back badly) to Biden. Was it over her comments about the women and Biden?

it verifies what I thought.

Actually switched to Biden to show support for him. we'll see how this all pans out.

Only thing I am sure of it will never be Bernie. I just hope his damage can be limited. Some of his supporters are truly on a scorched earth policy. They seem lately to be fixated on Joe and now Pete. It is madness.

and they are still on a scorched earth policy. The focus may change but the tactics remain consistent.

.... there are two ways to run a campaign. You can either run it with honor, or you can run it this way. You cannot be a presidential candidate and not know this is happening.

you run your campaign is the way you'd run the office.

Thank you

....and thank you for all you do.

I just feel that if people are making decisions and have beliefs based upon bad information, they're not only being dishonest to everyone else, they're being dishonest to themselves. I can usually tell when I hit home by the total lack of a response. That happens a lot.

Sirota is earning his sanders salary

Link to tweet

consulting" with the Sanders campaign on Feb. 20, and began official work in March. There have been several investigative articles that debunked the article in Atlantic, whose author misunderstood or misrepresented what he had been told by staff.

You can decide for yourself whether or not this is a smear, but I will say that its a pretty standard understanding on the left the social programs that benefit everyone are popular; social programs that are means tested are unpopular, and can be chipped away at or done away with entirely. Thus, any attempt at means testing is seen as a willingness to weaken the program. An alternative that progressive candidates have proposed is extending Social Security taxes to higher incomes.

Sirota has been working for sanders for a very long time

Link to tweet

I think not. Democrats said no before - which is good.

But now all of a sudden it's a bad bad thing to talk about Joe Biden's record!

What's with the double standards huh?

If vetting is good for every other person in the race, it's good for Joe too!

Lol.

But an essay from 1972? Oh by all means

So are his policies.

Not. Gonna. Happen.

Bernie has plenty of his own shit and he’s not even a democrat... shame on you

He's clearly got something to hide. Probably taking a page from trump here.

Bernie is vetted with glee on this board. Did you have a problem with that?

What makes Joe immune to the same treatment?

It is sad that Sirota is incapable of telling the truth

Link to tweet

Sirota LIES.

Bernie Sanders Just Hired His Twitter Attack Dog

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/sanders-promised-civility-hired-twitter-attack-dog/585259/

From a Bogus Website to Bernie Sanders's Inner Circle

https://www.democraticunderground.com/128736485

Why was David Sirota kneecapping our nominee on the eve of the election?



https://www.democraticunderground.com/128734324

I thought his team had a hate hardon for HRC. Turns out that the team has one for every democrat running for president. Go figure.

Last edited Fri Apr 5, 2019, 03:36 AM - Edit history (2)

cleaning up my messes!

I appreciate it.. I saw Ben Cohen's name and I just thought of Ice Cream.

Unending, confusing paperwork pushed on recipients. And its not just your income,
its your resources/assets. What's countable income and what isn't. Which resources
are exempt and which aren't. It will be just like Medicaid. The Rethugs will have a
field day on "welfare fraud" enforcement. The only ones to benefit will be the
bureaucrats and lawyers. I am not a Sanders supporter and not attacking Biden.

I don't get why Democrats are so into means testing. Just giving things to everyone is probably cheaper once you throw away all of the accounting bullshit.

...

minimum wage, tuition-free state university, and the codification of Roe v Wade into state law? That Andrew Cuomo is a "centrist figure despised by progressives"? Not here in New York.

As for Ryan Cooper (the un-earther of the "troubling" Biden video), he appears to have a few easily unearthed issues of his own. Here's the bio photo of the very privileged Mr. Cooper from his personal website.



Cooper was called out about this photo last year when he was running around unearthing "troubling" o̶p̶p̶o̶ ̶ "information" about Kamala Harris.

Shane Ryan and Ryan Cooper are not merely typical; they're prototypical. I would hesitate to take anything either of them has to say seriously.

Caveat lector

I might agree with taxing more incremental wage income to fund it.

The whole thread is pointless. SS will have to be addressed, and the proposed solutions will have to be some sort of compromise.

To take one quote from the past and use it in a smear campaign is indicative of the problem we face in this country.

I think the Social Security works.

Its almost insulting to all of us who worked long and hard all our lives to be able to make ends meet.

to build up candidates, but no more. There is no reason to bring old shit up over and over about Biden . Sen Sanders has a record too and maybe it is time to examine it.

first to go negative. While I don't support Biden, I will long before I support Sanders. I don't talk about my reasons either, but it might come to that.

Advocating means testing Social Security is a very bad idea.

And I’m sorry, but have you been reading DU? It’s called vetting. Or is vetting only for one candidate?

and has been ever since the forces of Darkness started advocating for it immediately after SS was formed.

While this poll is old, I find it interesting in light of this discussion (see https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/01/31/americans-want-to-raise-payroll-taxes-and-social-security-benefits/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f823522e71fe)

Democrats must not agree to engage in "entitlement reform" with Republicans." Social Security works!

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=&w=1484

Social Security is designed as a "progressive" social insurance system, which means it replaces a greater part of average monthly pay for lower-income workers than for higher-income workers.

Thus, those paying two, three or four times the average social security tax, receive proportionately less in benefits. That's not a bad thing in my mind, it's just a fact. Also, Social Security Benefits are taxable to those who make significant income from other sources.




?itok=Rd5cfQfl

https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/57666/311016-how-progressive-is-social-security-and-why-.pdf

by eliminating social security benefits for the wealthy, as they already receive less benefit from what they pay into the trust fund.

Social Security's strength is that it pays everyone regardless of income something so it's much more difficult for Paul Ryan and the Republicans to attack.

I refer you to my post#4 up-thread.

Is it really that much of a stretch to just say -- "Sorry, if you are making more than $200,000 in retirement, you won't get your $35,000 from Social Security for the good of the system. If your nest egg eveporates, SS will be there for you."

If you do, it will not solve all the problems facing SS. It helps, but will not solve the deficit because you are taking in more, but also paying out more. Again, it helps, for sure.

Personally, I'd prefer a surcharge for people above the cap -- say 3% or so -- which is less than the 14+% percentage point Social Security tax increase; and, then, a general income tax increase to be used toward healthcare, education, food stamps, deficit reduction, etc.

Rich people live longer and they should not benefit from the cap.

just in the opposite direction with that stupid cap.

Either raise the cap OR if people are making seriously high wages then use reduce the cost.

Just because someone might use something the wrong way doesn't make it wrong in and of itself.