You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Economy
Social Security Solvency: Lindsey Graham Thinks Seniors May ‘Have to' Take Less Money
2022-06-17
[GO Banking Rates] In a June 13 Fox Nation debate, Sen. Lindsey Graham said seniors may have to “take a little less” and “pay a little more in” when debating Social Security solvency, reports Knewz via MSN. Graham made the comments while debating Sen. Bernie Sanders during a “Senate Project” debate.

“Let’s do something like Ted Kennedy would do: get Republicans and Democrats to find a way — like the Gang of Six, the Simpson-Bowles plan. Senator Sanders: bring your Social Security plan to the floor. All it does is raise taxes. To get out of this mess, people like me are going to have to take a little less and pay a little more in. We’re going to have to adjust the age one more time like Ronald Reagan and Tip — Tip O’Neil did. There is a bipartisan way forward. You describe problems, but your answer is always the government — it’s always socialism,” Graham said.

The estimated average Social Security retirement benefit in 2022 is $1,658 a month, announced the Social Security Administration. While this is a $93 increase from the year before, benefits only cover a portion of seniors’ living expenses. For his part, Sanders admitted that Social Security “does have a solvency issue,” but that his proposal — also backed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren — would extend solvency for 75 years while increasing benefits for recipients by $2,400 per year. Sanders’ proposal would ostensibly fund this expansion of Social Security via a tax on high-earning households, per CNBC.
Posted by:Besoeker

#25  GOP, and that slob gentleman from South Carolina in particular, are simply out of touch.
Posted by: DooDahMan   2022-06-17 21:42  

#24  Everything is turning up roses for the GOP so this idiot decides to piss on their most solid voting block.

If Democrats had dirt on him I don't think he'd act any differently.
Posted by: ruprecht   2022-06-17 21:38  

#23  Just FYI - make sure your "Fiduciary" is an actual Fiduciary. They need to have your interests vs commissions and payouts
Posted by: Frank G   2022-06-17 19:49  

#22  Got good service at Social Security office today. Was handled by a 40 year old white guy- didn’t know the government employed any of those anymore.
Doubt I will get any S.S. benefits in 2 years when I was planning to sign up.
Posted by: Glenmore    2022-06-17 14:56  

#21  You still have to pay Medicare out of your social security benefits. I had to get a job to suppliment my social security and now have to pay income tax on 85% of my social security as well as paying social security, medicare, and income tax on my paycheck. We don't have a government, we have an organization that takes money.
Posted by: Deacon Blues   2022-06-17 14:52  

#20  So how about LESS DC spending instead?

Of course that's the obvious answer but don't count on Lindsey Graham to admit it. He'd rather keep sending billions, trillions, to places like Afghanistan and Ukraine.

Ultimately, Social Security should be phased out and replaced with something like a 401k with as little government involvement as possible. Oh, and this 401k should be strictly voluntary. You can contribute as much or as little as you want or you can opt out of it altogether. You are responsible for yourself. The folks who administer a 401k have a fiduciary responsibility to you, unlike Big Brother who is never responsible for anything.

Social Security is socialism. It is Big Brother at his very worst. He doesn't trust you with your own money and, besides, he wants it for his own nefarious purposes. So he takes your money with a flimsy promise to repay you when you get old, which is whatever his definition of old is. And if you croak one day after you reach that age, well, too bad. Your wife may keep receiving partial payments until she croaks but you cannot pass that money to your children. People who talk about how great Franklin Roosevelt was make me sick because, forget about Biden or any of the others, Roosevelt was the worst president ever.
Posted by: Abu Uluque   2022-06-17 12:47  

#19  It was always the gummint's money. They just pretended to let you believe you had earned it.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-06-17 11:57  

#18  
#9 He will be primared out of office with that statement
Posted by: DarthVader 2022-06-17 08:04

...From your lips to Ol' Strom's ears, Brother. It's a pity Graham isn't running this year, because I would truly love to vote against him.

Mike
Posted by: Mike Kozlowski   2022-06-17 11:54  

#17  Social Security is a pyramid/Ponzi scheme, but the only difference is that you can actually quit a Ponzi scheme...not so with Social Security.
Posted by: DooDahMan   2022-06-17 10:58  

#16  Go with both CB. You did good, probably better than the remaining 97 percent. There really is no such thing as a bad retirement annuity, civilian or military, regardless of the amount.
Posted by: Besoeker   2022-06-17 10:48  

#15  #14 get a medicare advantage plan (MA), not a medicare advantage prescription drug plan (MA PD) with a part B give back, if you don’t need the prescription coverage, since you get it from the VA.
Posted by: Beavis   2022-06-17 10:44  

#14  FWIW just started drawing social security at 64. Amazed the system was still solvent. Due military damage full medical coverage from the VA. At 65 I must sign up for Medicare A (free) and B (premium required). If I declined part B (due existing full coverage from the VA) then I forfeit my social security benefits. What a racket!
Posted by: Cloluck Bourbon1058   2022-06-17 10:35  

#13  I got a fundraising letter from the RNC; it has Lindsey's name on it. Opened it up, read the letter, laughed, then I threw it in the trash.
Posted by: Raj   2022-06-17 09:08  

#12  The abject filth and nonsense that comes out of these politicians' gobs.

Graham is one reason (of several) why I'd never donate one thin dime to the GOP.
Posted by: DooDahMan   2022-06-17 08:40  

#11  ^ We should be so lucky...
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-06-17 08:10  

#10  So Lindsay is fixin’ to take a drive in an Oldsmobile????
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2022-06-17 08:10  

#9  He will be primared out of office with that statement
Posted by: DarthVader   2022-06-17 08:04  

#8  Lindsey, I might have politely listened to what you had to say.

But then you said “Let’s do something like Ted Kennedy would do".
Posted by: Mullah Richard   2022-06-17 07:28  

#7  As long as SCROTUS is at least 7-2 conservative, it won't happen, even with Roberts riding the fence. Any move to grab retirement funds not under the gummint's control would be injoined immediately because there would be no unwinding it later if gummint lost in court.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-06-17 07:14  

#6  And there is a huge steaming pile of 401K and IRA savings which can be used to further fund Social Security.
Politicians have been drooling over those for decades...
Posted by: CrazyFool   2022-06-17 07:09  

#5   The politicians are ready to break that "promise" now that those generations of voters are about to die off. Time to make new promises to new generations of rubes.

With inflation pointing to a potential Social Security COLA increase of over 6 percent, nice time to redraw eligibility criteria.

'Needs based' is the key. 'The rich' (anyone making over $50,000 per year) will not be eligible for full benefits. See income offset at table 4b.

[sarc off, but not by much]
Posted by: Besoeker   2022-06-17 07:02  

#4  It's all BS. Social Security was justified before SCOTUS as a tax. The 'tax' accounting was finally merged in the 1960s under Johnson and the Democrats. 'It' is a game of three card monte as much as all the governments bookkeeping. As long as they have a printing press, it won't run out of money. Whether that 'money' is worth anything is another matter.
Posted by: Procopius2k   2022-06-17 06:37  

#3  The establishment is trying to feed the Social Security Ponzi scheme with immigration (legal and illegal). Scaring Seniors with a loss of $$$$ is part of the plan to get support for the establishment Dreamers and open border policies.
Posted by: Airandee   2022-06-17 05:58  

#2  The politicians are ready to break that "promise" now that those generations of voters are about to die off. Time to make new promises to new generations of rubes.
Posted by: M. Murcek   2022-06-17 05:50  

#1  

HEY! DC DUMB$hits, retirees are barely making ends meet now.

Want to see the number of Bankruptcies sky rocket?
Want to see businesses and Financial institutions lose a few $100 BILLION quickly?


So how about LESS DC spending instead?
Posted by: NN2N1   2022-06-17 05:16  

00:00