Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

blkbkrider t1_iu1rig0 wrote

Reply to comment by waterford1955_2 in Connecticut 5th District US House seat targeted by national GOP | fox61.com by lokitdwn

You forgot that is a democrat lie.

It's really eye opening that I get down votes for "affordable energy, secure borders, peace, Jobs, low inflation"

It lets us know where your head is at.

−8

waterford1955_2 t1_iu1sysx wrote

Guess you didn't see Rick Scott's plan for Social Security. And what McCarthy said about using the debt ceiling. Or what the Republican Study Committee said about Social Security. So no, not a lie. They're coming for it.

6

blkbkrider t1_iu1vut1 wrote

Would you mind sourcing that for me? I can't find it. I did find the most recent Republican study comittee report (guidlines really) here and it says nothing at all about those cuts you mentioned.

−1

waterford1955_2 t1_iu1xbb8 wrote

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/christianweller/2021/04/16/republican-senators-push-social-security-medicare-and-medicaid-cuts-after-supporting-ineffective-tax-cuts/amp/

https://www.americanprogressaction.org/article/maga-republicans-plan-to-force-social-security-and-medicare-cuts/

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/why-wont-republicans-rule-out-attacking-social-security-11666365617

https://coppercourier.com/story/6-times-republicans-suggested-or-outright-said-they-want-to-cut-social-security-and-medicare/

3

blkbkrider t1_iu22ot3 wrote

>They consequently take aim mainly at cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

This is pure speculation by Forbes in their 18 month old article. The cite zero sources.

The WAPO article is more of the same. Debt ceiling threats have been going on for as long as I can remember. They always cave. both sides, always. The fact is that spending does need to be cut and social security is one area I think both tribes can agree, is off the table. We could eliminate a few worthless departments and all associated staff as a start.

Another thing to think about is the fact that democrats have been using that particular scare tactic for a very long time. It has never come true and most people now recognize it for what it is. Bull shit.

This one's good

>It’s true that Social Security needs to be reformed before the Social Security Trust Fund—the amount of money in reserves—runs out, which is projected to happen around 2034 due to declining birth rates after the baby boom period. If this were to happen, it would mean seniors would only receive roughly 77% of the benefits they’re due to get after that date. But there are ways to address that problem, such as by raising the payroll tax rate.

While it does need reform, there is no "trust fund" and there never has been. It's an accounting gimmick stuffed with IOU's. The simple math is at the end...there are not enough workers in todays workforce to cover the benefits. SO...big tax hike coming to cover it or they just keep printing more money until the whole thing just collapses.

−1

waterford1955_2 t1_iu25fzz wrote

> It's an accounting gimmick stuffed with IOU's

You've just proved that you know nothing about the subject.

6

blkbkrider t1_iu26dzb wrote

You sure about that?

It's immaterial anyway.

2

waterford1955_2 t1_iu3yqx3 wrote

Those IOUs are Treasury Bonds. The most secure investment on the planet. Which is how it's been since the inception of the program.

So what do you think they mean when they say "entitlement reform"?

1

flatdanny t1_iu2axxz wrote

I dont speak for anyone else but my head is with the peaceful transfer of power after a lawful election.

1