Republicans To Increase Social Security Payments

[fatpiggy]

Democrats are seething because they know putting money back into the pockets of honest Americans will secure votes for lifetimes.

The exact opposite of Democrats who stole from you via inflation.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Democrats are seething because they know putting money back into the pockets of honest Americans will secure votes for lifetimes.

The exact opposite of Democrats who stole from you via inflation.

View embedded media

Got any more details on this?

 

[johnhugh]

Things that won’t happen for $100, Alex

 

[fatpiggy]

Got any more details on this?

By eliminating fraud, of which there is an immense amount, there will be more money available for honest recipients.

This is a very simple concept that swing voters and some democrats understand.

I think Republicans are cementing votes for generations right now.

You should watch the Brett Baier interview in its entirety

 

[fatpiggy]

This is what democrats want.

This was Build Back Better. This is the massively inflationary bill that EVERY Democrat, spare Joe Manchin, voted for.

We hit RECORD inflation without this bill passing.

Democrats do not care about your dollars. They do not care about you. They care about continuing the grift off the taxpayer.

Republicans care about you and your dollars.

The revolution is here!v

 

[DW4_2016]

Republicans wasting more of our money on freebies for people who didn’t plan well.

And I thought this is why you guys hated libs? Odd.

 

[fatpiggy]

Republicans wasting more of our money on freebies for people who didn’t plan well.

And I thought this is why you guys hated libs? Odd.

What are you even rambling on about.

Democrats are mad because the cheese they have been stealing is getting taken away.

A financial revolution is here. There is no going back. All systems will be computerized going forward. The fraud just got 10 times harder.

Think about that! Democrats are mad that we made fraud harder. Actually, not all democrats are that dumb. Forgive me. The Far Left is mad. Because they were the ones stealing.

Even honest democrats want the fraud gone.


This is an easy way to separate democrats from the far left.

Republicans will make you wealthy!!

 

[scotchtiger]

Would prefer that they not raise SS payments and apply any savings to the debt.

Would also still like to see a minor increase in SS eligibility age phased in over time.

As we realize savings from any DOGE initiatives, we shouldn’t immediately look to spend the money. We’re running a massive deficit and have huge debt. Apply all savings to those issues.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

By eliminating fraud, of which there is an immense amount, there will be more money available for honest recipients.

This is a very simple concept that swing voters and some democrats understand.

I think Republicans are cementing votes for generations right now.

You should watch the Brett Baier interview in its entirety

So they would vote for increased payments? Have they reported any actual fraudulent payments? I know they're clearing the rolls, but haven't seen anyone arrested etc. Feels like they've just been clearing the rolls of names of people who aren't getting payments anyway. Having less fraud also doesn't increase payments at all, unless you just mean making the program more viable long term or something.

 

[fatpiggy]

So they would vote for increased payments? Have they reported any actual fraudulent payments? I know they're clearing the rolls, but haven't seen anyone arrested etc. Feels like they've just been clearing the rolls of names of people who aren't getting payments anyway. Having less fraud also doesn't increase payments at all, unless you just mean making the program more viable long term or something.

Yes they have found actual fraudulent payments.

I have no problem taking some of the savings from fraud and returning it to the American people. I also would like to pay down the debt as scotch stated.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

Yes they have found actual fraudulent payments.

Can you share? (for the record, I have no doubt there are instances of fraud in a system that makes millions of payments, great with rooting them out)

 

[scotchtiger]

We need to add a focus on SS disability too. There are a ton of people on SS disability who can work 40 hours per week, especially as so much has transitioned to virtual work and WFH.

 

[firegiver]

By eliminating fraud, of which there is an immense amount, there will be more money available for honest recipients.

This is a very simple concept that swing voters and some democrats understand.

I think Republicans are cementing votes for generations right now.

You should watch the Brett Baier interview in its entirety

Theres 1% mistake in SS according to the latest research. Ya'll are getting sold a bag of goods./

 

[Rahskie]

Can you share? (for the record, I have no doubt there are instances of fraud in a system that makes millions of payments, great with rooting them out)

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

 

[UrHuckleberry]

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

I am great with catching and eliminating fraud. Probably said that 10 times on here. Just want them to actually catch it, not just show screenshots of numbers and claim it was fraud. SSA had confirmed no one over the age of 119 was receiving SS checks at one point recently I believe, so people not being wiped from the rolls isn't fraud. Should be cleaned up, 100%. But isn't fraud.

 

[wrw311]

I'll never quite understand how Social Security is so highly supported by Conservatives. It's low hanging fruit to say "old people" and I don't think that's fair anyway. And I certainly understand the "I've paid into it" argument, so I'm not at all in disagreement.

It just seems like more of a conservative position to not pay into SS and instead use the saved or invested money to retire on. I assume no one can ever run on a platform to eliminate it, but it has always fascinated me. My super conservative father used to complain having to pay into it, until he was old enough to start drawing from it. Unsurprisingly he was then a fan.

 

[SGTiger]

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

but... uh... that's different

 

[firegiver]

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

There are lots of private companies out there doing elderly care that are actively defrauding the medicare system. I know this first hand.

 

[fatpiggy]

We need to add a focus on SS disability too. There are a ton of people on SS disability who can work 40 hours per week, especially as so much has transitioned to virtual work and WFH.

My brother in law is special needs and on SSDI.

During Covid, Social Security sent him an extra $38,000 (he thought they were legitimate payments at the time). They unsuccessfully tried to claw it back. The system is very complicated.

There is a ton of waste, fraud, abuse and incompetence at the highest levels.

 

[scotchtiger]

I'll never quite understand how Social Security is so highly supported by Conservatives. It's low hanging fruit to say "old people" and I don't think that's fair anyway. And I certainly understand the "I've paid into it" argument, so I'm not at all in disagreement.

It just seems like more of a conservative position to not pay into SS and instead use the saved or invested money to retire on. I assume no one can ever run on a platform to eliminate it, but it has always fascinated me. My super conservative father used to complain having to pay into it, until he was old enough to start drawing from it. Unsurprisingly he was then a fan.

It’s a horrible system that robs people of financial independence. The ROI is dogshit. Even low wage earners would be faarrrrrrr better off if 12.5% of their earnings was forced into an individual investment account with moderate risk exposure. More money at retirement and a lump sum left that could be passed on to the next generation.

But I don’t see a way to unwind it at this point. Big government has permanently screwed us. And as a couple who both have paid the max in since our 20s, we damn well better get something in return.

 

[fatpiggy]

I'll never quite understand how Social Security is so highly supported by Conservatives. It's low hanging fruit to say "old people" and I don't think that's fair anyway. And I certainly understand the "I've paid into it" argument, so I'm not at all in disagreement.

It just seems like more of a conservative position to not pay into SS and instead use the saved or invested money to retire on. I assume no one can ever run on a platform to eliminate it, but it has always fascinated me. My super conservative father used to complain having to pay into it, until he was old enough to start drawing from it. Unsurprisingly he was then a fan.

Social Security is a giant ponzi scheme. It is what it is.

I am a fan of Social Security for the following reasons.

1) Republicans are for limited government, not NO governement.

I then ask myself is giving seniors a stipend to meet basic needs a governmental necessary?

2) I think there would be massive social unrest if we don't take care of our seniors.
3) Morally, it is unacceptable to leave an old person to die on the streets.
4) Many old people simply can not physically or mentally complete tasks required to earn a living wage.

To me we either have Social Security or you will have a massive senior homeless problem, quality of healthcare will go down as money intended to be spent on health will be spent on basic needs. Life expectancy will decrease.

An able bodied person has choices, most seniors do not.

I support the concept of Social Security, but am open to all ideas to make it better and more efficient. Changing ages, amounts, qualifications are all on the table.

 

[fatpiggy]

There are lots of private companies out there doing elderly care that are actively defrauding the medicare system. I know this first hand.

Agreed 100%

This SHOULD be a bi-partisan issue.

 

[fatpiggy]

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

I don't know what it says about a Government Accountability Office, when THERE WAS NO FVCKING ACCOUNTABILITY. ANYWHERE.

WTF happened? The taxpayer has been getting fleeced!

 

[dbjork6317]

How about the Government Accountability Office report showing that the Federal Government Loses an Estimated $233 Billion to $521 Billion Annually to Fraud. This is not all SS, but this report has come out over multiple years with NO ONE doing anything about it.

GAO Fraud Report

Wow with savings like that it would only take us 6,000 years to pay off the national debt

 

[fatpiggy]

Can you share? (for the record, I have no doubt there are instances of fraud in a system that makes millions of payments, great with rooting them out)

So you are asking me to waste my time to share something with you that you know exists?

 

[fatpiggy]

Wow with savings like that it would only take us 6,000 years to pay off the national debt

And therenin lies the problem.

You are just like a spouse who doesn;'t want to cut ANY spending. You don't want to cut the smallest fraud because "it's too small to matter".

It's ok to steal, as long as it's not over $900


Democratic morals

 

[UrHuckleberry]

So you are asking me to waste my time to share something with you that you know exists?

Was hoping you could share examples of fraud that DOGE have caught that are going to help keep it solvent and aren't the standard fraud that do already get caught yes.

 

[dbjork6317]

It’s a horrible system that robs people of financial independence. The ROI is dogshit. Even low wage earners would be faarrrrrrr better off if 12.5% of their earnings was forced into an individual investment account with moderate risk exposure. More money at retirement and a lump sum left that could be passed on to the next generation.

But I don’t see a way to unwind it at this point. Big government has permanently screwed us. And as a couple who both have paid the max in since our 20s, we damn well better get something in return.

You are getting something in return - namely millions of Americans not living in abject poverty. I can’t imagine an additional 30 million or so people just having no money would be a very good thing.

And I say this as someone who agrees SS needs a major overhaul if not being eliminated outright in favor of more beneficial programs.

 

[wrw311]

Social Security is a giant ponzi scheme. It is what it is.

I am a fan of Social Security for the following reasons.

1) Republicans are for limited government, not NO governement.

I then ask myself is giving seniors a stipend to meet basic needs a governmental necessary?

2) I think there would be massive social unrest if we don't take care of our seniors.
3) Morally, it is unacceptable to leave an old person to die on the streets.
4) Many old people simply can not physically or mentally complete tasks required to earn a living wage.

To me we either have Social Security or you will have a massive senior homeless problem, quality of healthcare will go down as money intended to be spent on health will be spent on basic needs. Life expectancy will decrease.

An able bodied person has choices, most seniors do not.

I support the concept of Social Security, but am open to all ideas to make it better and more efficient. Changing ages, amounts, qualifications are all on the table.

Totally fair and valid, appreciate those thoughts and perspective.

I won't lie tho that I see my parents getting checks, and both are very well settled financially. I guess I wish that money would go to other elderly that are less fortunate and those that do actually fit your 4 bullet points. Or if my parents ever do reach a time in life that they are less able, fortunately my brother and I can step in to assist. I certainly understand there are some elderly that do not have families to support them, so frankly I'd rather the social services go towards supporting them more.
This is just talking out loud of course, I don't know how a system could feasibly me put together to cover the variables. Overall I'm fine with social services, I want elderly to be supported in the same way I want younger folks facing hardship to be supported.

 

[dbjork6317]

And therenin lies the problem.

You are just like a spouse who doesn;'t want to cut ANY spending. You don't want to cut the smallest fraud because "it's too small to matter".

It's ok to steal, as long as it's not over $900


Democratic morals

No, i’m down to cut fraud, but 2 things:

1) it should be acknowledged how infinitesimal $500B is in relation to our actual budget or especially debt, and to say that it could be used to pay down the national debt is disingenuous.

2) Just The interest payments on the debt being added by making the TCJA permanent would be around $800B, with the vast majority of those benefits going to the wealthy or to corporations.

So to be clear: you’re completely ok with the richest man in the world going through the government and eliminating various projects, firing thousands of mostly middle class Americans, and putting programs that benefit millions of Americans who legitimately need them at risk so we can save $500B in fraud and somehow also ok with the government spending $300B more than the amount of said fraud just so the aforementioned richest man in the world can pay less in taxes?

There’s an awful lot of evidence that 40 years of trickle down economics has done significant damage to our economy, but sure, let’s make some fraud that equates to .016% of our national debt the priority.

 

[scotchtiger]

You are getting something in return - namely millions of Americans not living in abject poverty. I can’t imagine an additional 30 million or so people just having no money would be a very good thing.

And I say this as someone who agrees SS needs a major overhaul if not being eliminated outright in favor of more beneficial programs.

if 30 million people have no money outside of Social Security, they have done an absolutely horrible job planning for themselves.

But still, we can keep the program going while ensuring that the largest contributors to the system receive some direct financial return on their investment, as shitty as it is compared to alternatives.

 

[MTTiger19]

It’s a horrible system that robs people of financial independence. The ROI is dogshit. Even low wage earners would be faarrrrrrr better off if 12.5% of their earnings was forced into an individual investment account with moderate risk exposure. More money at retirement and a lump sum left that could be passed on to the next generation.

But I don’t see a way to unwind it at this point. Big government has permanently screwed us. And as a couple who both have paid the max in since our 20s, we damn well better get something in return.

This is the answer and I’m sure when SSI and SSDI the assumption was that citizens wouldn’t take advantage of it, which is stupidity. I pay an unbelievable amount into SS and there’s no way I’ll get even a fraction of it back if any by the time I’m 65. If I was allowed to invest that money I think that would be better or even making some type of 401k for citizens to put a portion of their check in. I’m all for the greater good until it becomes abuse, there’s plenty of abuse going on here but it’s so entwined in our society there’s no way to eliminate it. Raise the age, lower the taxes required, revamp the disability portion as that’s the most wasteful and easiest to rip off, give people an alternative to SS. I would much prefer a government mandated 401k type plan that took say 10% of my check and put it in T-bonds or something that matured in conjunction with my retirement. That’s a fair and equitable system.

 

[scotchtiger]

This is the answer and I’m sure when SSI and SSDI the assumption was that citizens wouldn’t take advantage of it, which is stupidity. I pay an unbelievable amount into SS and there’s no way I’ll get even a fraction of it back if any by the time I’m 65. If I was allowed to invest that money I think that would be better or even making some type of 401k for citizens to put a portion of their check in. I’m all for the greater good until it becomes abuse, there’s plenty of abuse going on here but it’s so entwined in our society there’s no way to eliminate it. Raise the age, lower the taxes required, revamp the disability portion as that’s the most wasteful and easiest to rip off, give people an alternative to SS. I would much prefer a government mandated 401k type plan that took say 10% of my check and put it in T-bonds or something that matured in conjunction with my retirement. That’s a fair and equitable system.

The max contribution for a married couple this year is $43,673, which is what we will pay. That’s absurd for a program with dogshit ROI plus a political party that would gladly means test us out of receiving a direct benefit for it.

 

[andyp74]

What are you even rambling on about.

Democrats are mad because the cheese they have been stealing is getting taken away.

A financial revolution is here. There is no going back. All systems will be computerized going forward. The fraud just got 10 times harder.

Think about that! Democrats are mad that we made fraud harder. Actually, not all democrats are that dumb. Forgive me. The Far Left is mad. Because they were the ones stealing.

Even honest democrats want the fraud gone.


This is an easy way to separate democrats from the far left.

Republicans will make you wealthy!!

Please keep politics out ofthis site. Create your on site. I want to talk Clemson sports on this site. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican you will not solve this issue on this page.

 

[scotchtiger]

Please keep politics out ofthis site. Create your on site. I want to talk Clemson sports on this site. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican you will not solve this issue on this page.

Have you checked out the name of this message board?

"House Of Politics & Off-Topics"

 

[fatpiggy]

Was hoping you could share examples of fraud that DOGE have caught that are going to help keep it solvent and aren't the standard fraud that do already get caught yes.

So there are different levels of fraud in your book? Standard fraud verse some other type of fraud? Fraud is fraud. And if you don't understand that the system is ripe with fraud and incompetence then you are being willfully ignorant.

I posted how my brother in law recieved $38,000 from the SSA incorrectly. That is first hand evidence of at a minimum waste and incompetence. If he has that exposure, imagine the people trying to intentionally deceive?

If you really want to see it, there is a website at DOGE.com. It's real. Much of it is fraud. Much of it is waste. And much of it is incompetence.

Don't pretend like it doesn't exist. You are better than that, you have been arguing in good faith.

 

[fatpiggy]

Please keep politics out ofthis site. Create your on site. I want to talk Clemson sports on this site. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican you will not solve this issue on this page.

The name of the board is politics. I don't ever post in the sports thread out of respect to Ard. He asked us to keep political content here and we do. I don't like my speech being censored, so i don't post on the west zone.

Get lost loser.

 

[dbjork6317]

if 30 million people have no money outside of Social Security, they have done an absolutely horrible job planning for themselves.

But still, we can keep the program going while ensuring that the largest contributors to the system receive some direct financial return on their investment, as shitty as it is compared to alternatives.

Oh yeah, I agree. But that’s the reality for where we are. Any change to SS would have to be implemented very gradually.

 

[UrHuckleberry]

So there are different levels of fraud in your book? Standard fraud verse some other type of fraud? Fraud is fraud. And if you don't understand that the system is ripe with fraud and incompetence then you are being willfully ignorant.

I posted how my brother in law recieved $38,000 from the SSA incorrectly. That is first hand evidence of at a minimum waste and incompetence. If he has that exposure, imagine the people trying to intentionally deceive?

If you really want to see it, there is a website at DOGE.com. It's real. Much of it is fraud. Much of it is waste. And much of it is incompetence.

Don't pretend like it doesn't exist. You are better than that, you have been arguing in good faith.

You are arguing there is enough to increase payments. I am saying it does exist because people are sh!tty, but not enough that Republican's would vote to increase payments. That is all. The thread was started because you said dems were upset because Rep's were putting more money in people's pockets.

 

[fatpiggy]

You are arguing there is enough to increase payments. I am saying it does exist because people are sh!tty, but not enough that Republican's would vote to increase payments. That is all. The thread was started because you said dems were upset because Rep's were putting more money in people's pockets.

It seems like democrats are upset with DOGE, when there is a high chance that the savings they produce will increase the strength of the program and, Elon predicts, could be used to increase payments. Whether that is done or not is probably not up to Elon, but I'm sure he has some say in the situation.

The point remains, there is plenty of waste, fraud, and abuse in many of the government agencies. By pretending like there is no fraud or asking for proof, it just comes off as disingenuous. Democrats will benefit from the savings just as republicans will. The ONLY people hurt by snuffing this stuff out is the fraudsters. This should be an America vs Fraudsters thing and not a Republican vs Democrat thing. I just don't understand the hate. And, as evidenced by poll numbers, most Americans don't either.