maybe the answer to this is that his retirement benefits are unsustainable.

maybe it is a good time to discuss cutting the pension and other benefits of these people.

How can they argue that these benefits should be reduced, without agreeing to reduce their own benefits?

Maybe someone should ask Mr. Hoyer about this.

Raise the cap end of story. Steny is a slimebucket.

If Mr. Hoyer could get his nose out of his lobbyists’ wallets, he might try crafting a defensive strategy to protect – and enhance – the necessary benefits provided by Social Security. He could “put on the table” lowering the retirement age, increasing benefits, phasing them out for high income retirees, taxing the top 5% of wage earners at higher rates, doing away with the absurd non-taxation of hedge fund profits, etc., etc., etc. (as the king of Siam was wont to say when dictating to his children’s governess).

I think these folks in the Senate, most of whom are beyond, at, or near the current retirement age, are so out of touch that they don’t realize what average 65 year old Americans go through.

These Senators have spectacular healthcare, a 2-4 day work week, extended paid vacations, huge salaries, and desk jobs. They don’t actually do much, as far as activity level. They’re spoiled, rotten little bitches who can’t think outside themselves for even a few minutes.

Fuck ‘em.

I’ll have to admit that I drink way too much and say some really stupid things when I’ve had too much, but this guy has out done me and I’m not sure he’s even drunk.

You’re being a sanctimonious purist! /s

“This is why Harry Reid is basically the only ally”

Bwahahahahaha…then you are truly f*cked if Harry Reid is the saviour!!

You already detailed the list I was going to enter here. Exactly.

Just ridiculous and pathetic to continue the Kabuki Show that one of the main things to consider is raising the retirement age to “save” Soc Sec.

Load of bull****. Eff Steny. He made sure he got his; his contituents can go pound rocks, clearly, as far as Hoyer is concerned.

Too obvious (on both points). I guess they’re terrified by anything that could be spun as a tax increase; never mind that it’s actually an insurance premium. Looks like kabuki to “shock doctrine” our “failing” SS funds into the greedy hands of the robber barons on Wall St.

Their sense of vast entitlement combined with their noxious condescension towards the “lower orders” is beyond the pale. Bunch of waste of time & money @ssholes.

“This is why Harry Reid is basically the only ally for those who don’t want to see Social Security benefits slashed in the next year or two.”

This is dumb beyond belief. “Reid” and “ally” do not belong in the same paragraph, let alone sentence.

Pelosi could have stopped this just like she could have allowed impeachment investigations go ahead way back in January 2007.

Fuck you, Pelosi and the rest of your moribund party.

He’s a progressive now cuz he has a D after his name. Same as Pelosi.

And they are both liberal too. Oh and add in Howard Dean to that list too. Bwhahahahahahahahhahaha.

His nose isn’t in the lobbyist’s wallets but just a bit lower to the center.

Y’all Motherfuckers Need Jesus.

With Harry Reid on our side, we can relax. He’s like a junkyard dog, and the Senate is his junkyard. Or something. :-(

Reid and Hoyer are the same person, two sides of the same Good Cop/Bad Cop kabuki coin.

Yes, good ol’ Steny is a pro at smiliing like a donut for the lobbyists.

Does that mean he eats rats?

Don’t forget all their international business deals gatekept by folks like their $70 Billion latinum-plated dic-tatr Mo’Barack.

Steny et al may see us as their donkeys, their rag pickers (performed by Lisa Gerrard and Brendan Perry aka “Dead Can Dance“) but that’s not who we really are. They don’t deserve the fat of the land.

Way to go, Steny ‘Ho.
The Democratic Party stands for nothing.
Would the last person leaving it please turn out the lights?

If that puts me in the same category as the shrill Glenn Greenwald or Paul Krugman, I’ll take it.

It does seem absurd that the millionaire Mr. Krugman, the billionaires Gates and Buffett, the millionaires all in the Senate and nearly so in the House (who also get generous retirement allowances on the public dime) can collect the same SS paycheck as a mid-level bureaucrat in charge of county land titles or metropolitan bus lines.

Hoyer is just another rich fuck determined to make sure that the rich are the only ones who benefit from this society.

The Social Security Act was intended to limit what were seen as dangers in the modern American life, including old age, poverty, unemployment, and the burdens of widows and fatherless children.

Keep Social Security alive.

The elite’s contempt for ordinary Americans is showing all over the place. It is humiliating and degrading.

I’m sure we both have longer lists of ways we subsidize the wealthy, which won’t be cut back, instead of using scarce taxpayer contributions to keep people off the streets and out of sick beds and the morgue.

Let’s face it, these cuts will kill people. It will do that directly, through care and services that will no longer be available, and indirectly, through considerable added stress and the multitude of poorer choices and poorer options that condition brings.

These government priorities, these explicit choices made by the haves, protect them at the expense of everyone else; it’s not about balancing budgets or any of the other homespun metaphors that are routinely used to disguise these actions.

It does seem absurd that the millionaire Mr. Krugman, the billionaires Gates and Buffett, the millionaires all in the Senate and nearly so in the House (who also get generous retirement allowances on the public dime) can collect the same SS paycheck as a mid-level bureaucrat in charge of county land titles or metropolitan bus lines.

The reason is, they pay in just like everybody else (theoritically) about 12% of the first $106K.

If you consider it an insurance policy dictated by the government, they get what’s coming to them when it’s their time.

If you consider it a savings plan for retirement dictated by the government, then they get what coming to them when it’s their time.

Ah The Shock Doctrine, if you have read the book it is all too clear.

I just hope it’s there for my mother. She reaches the required age in 2015. I’ve accepted that for my generation the retirement age will probably be 97. I’m not counting on it. Men in my family don’t live much past 60 anyway.

Raise the cap end of story.

I wouldn’t have a problem with that. In fact why not invert the cap.

Let everyone making $106k in for free, and tax everyone above that at 12% all the way up. And then means test at retirement. If you’ve made a million a year and paid in, you shouldn’t need to take any out of the system. You’ve made enough, as Obama said.

That table was just too crowded for anything like accountability, what with all that SS money on it…

Careful alan. That sounds librul.

WTF.

“Faced with a looming vote on a planned one-year extension of special powers authorized in the USA PATRIOT Act, the Obama White House did not object or propose reforms, as the president vowed to do as a candidate.

The Obama administration instead asked Congress to grant those powers for an additional three years.”

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/02/obama-seeks-longer-patriot-act-extension-republicans/

WTF.

We have to Win The Future.

I haven’t been able to believe what he is writing today!! WTF alan1tx saying those kind of librul tenements??? The sky is falling the sky is falling!!!!!!

Maybe he’s been drinking. Booze makes people happy, and happy people are usually fairly librul :)

Hahahahaha…..you really can’t make this stuff up!! I’m starting to think that all these Congress Critters, and major political people are not real people. Nopers. They are filmed in front of a live studio audience, and they get their paycheques from Universal Studios!!

From what I have read if you means test SS it becomes a welfare program in the end. If you just raise the cap to 250K problem solved. I think everyone who works should pay into the system IMHO.

It is in reality the worst reality show.

What does one expect when social programs include the extremely wealthy, but do not make them pay a similar percentage of their wages? Does one really think Nancy Pelosi, GW Bush, Darth Cheney, Al Gore, Bill Gates, etc, etc truly need a monthly retirement pension? That would be like giving these millionaires Unemployment funds when they are kicked out of office. Totally ludicrous.

There SHOULD be a reality show that follows some of these rich bastards around 24/7 without them knowing, just to see/hear what world they actually do live in.

If you are in Congress and you vote to enter into unnecessary military conflicts, your taxes should be increased enormously and social security denied when you retire. ;P

I call it FDL!

Heh, I agree. But it’s still welfare unless those paying in at the $250 level don’t get better bennies than min. wagers, the way it’s done now. So if you’re paying them more, how does that solve the problem?

Hahahaha….R Rep. Christopher Lee…married, resigned immediately just now…he posted a shirtless picture of himself on Craigsl*st. See…instant reality show.

Yes, I guess Kris, tahant and Beaver are right, that would be librul.

Turn Social Security into welfare and take away the little bit of dignity poor older folks have. I withdraw my suggestion, cause while they claim it’s librul, it’s stupid.

Make ya’ll fell better?

More great news!! Obama proposes to cut aid to the poor for heat!!
http://www.nationaljournal.com/whitehouse/exclusive-obama-to-cut-energy-assistance-for-the-poor-20110209

I don’t agree that it’s welfare, if you pay in less you get less. But the way it is now the higher income earners stop paying in at 106K. In reality if the cap is removed then it will be fair to all involved. This generation pays for the next one. IMHO

Obama is not just pissing me off, he’s scaring me.

I think that it’s time for America to wake up. All of the politicians make a pile of money and they got to Washington to play let’s pretend. Currently, the republicans are pretending that they haven’t been anti women’s rights by suggesting that they would cut funding for WIC. Excuse me but how can you insist that children be born into this world, then determine that they don’t need to be fed? I am sick of this – I think that it’s time that we show as much courage as the people of Egypt. Our government, in some ways, is every bit as oppressive. Roe v. Wade was decided. How is it that they think they can continue to hold Americans hostage. and what happened to the Republicans will to focus on ‘jobs’…what happened to that? They do think that Americans are stupid!

Oh alan1tx
╔══╗─╔═════╦══╗
║──║─║──║──║──║
║──║─║──║──║──║
║──╚═╣──║──║──╚═╗
║────║─────║────║
╚════╩═════╩════╝
!!

You are correct.

Let me add, that those who pay in less get a higher percentage of their working earnings than those who pay in more, even with the $106k cap.

Which I don’t have a problem with.

I also don’t have a problem with raising the cap. Let’s just be honest and say to make up any baby boomer shortfalls, the rich are going to pay a little more and the poor are going to get a little more.

You don’t have to call it welfare, that’s the way it works now.

Well if he’s intentionally throwing the next election, one has to wonder just what the kabuki Washington crowd has planned for a new President. Obviously either this man only wants one term, or the next election has already been finalized.

I think the only appropriate response to these sorts of suggestions is to “negotiate” in the other direction. Oh, you think people should work till they’re 70? Let’s change it to 60, with a medicare buy-in at 55. You want more? Okay then, 55 and Medicare at 45. Less competition for jobs and better healthcare for when we need it.

Agreed, the reason that I am hesitant about using words like “welfare” or “entitlements” is because that it how the narrative gets spun. It is hard for some people to distinguish and that is how they get duped. IMHO

Also, it’s time to starting putting the I back in SSI – Social Security INSURANCE, as in, I pay premiums for years, decades even, and then down the line assuming I’m still alive I get the return on my investment.

Nothing even remotely welfarey about it, though as we all know the goal of the “let’s go back to letting poor people die” crowd is to shift the language of social security insurance from something that you’ve bought to something that you’re being given (i.e., an entitlement), whether you “deserve” it or not.

You’re assuming Team Obama knows how or cares to negotiate. The president’s pattern of giving up on core issues before negotiations begin more often demonstrates the adage that when you sit down at the poker table, look around, and don’t know who the sucker is, it’s you.

Oh, I don’t think he’s been suckered one bit. I think he wants to be the guy who finally realized the corporatists’ dream of undoing the last bits of FDR’s program. I think they want to keep working class people paying into the system and then legalize the theft of those funds to spend on whatever the hell they feel like, minimizing any return they might eventually have to pay off to the investor. Much as the Reagan-era criminals looted pension funds and dismantled stable companies, these triangulating bastards are happy to preside over the dismantling of the social safety net in the name of corporate profits. Let them eat cat food.

“phasing them out for high income retirees” is not the Krugman position – nor mine, as it converts a paid for insurance benefit we all get into a welfare payment that would be cut to zero in 10 years by the GOP because who gives a damn about the poor.

In any case, the retirement age increase as life spans increase is required because the math says to do otherwise will bankrupt the system – but it should be accompanied by the end of the cap of wages used for taxes and the wages used for benefits – indeed doing both will allow the 2% payroll tax cut to continue forever with the system showing a slight improvement in its finances.

However if Obama pushes job losing Nafta trade with Korea, pretend stimulus via tax cuts that do not work, regulation cuts that kill American jobs in favor of lower worker wages/safety/environmental care and tax law that results in more jobs “out-sourced”, the resulting poor increase in the GDP year by year will cause the Social Security projections to demand further change (lower benefits) by the end of Obama’s second term.

Meanwhile Florida is looking at police pensions and concluding that there must be state law that forbids retirement before age 60 for any public employee. The only question seems to be can they make it the rule for current employees (the answer is yes they can – any org can stop pension accruals and switch employees to a new deal – they only must pay out the “current” to date accruals at whatever early age that is in the contract).

Social Security gets a negative return. I would be better off if I could put that money in a hole in the backyard. Raising the age makes the return worse. In a more perfect world I would be able to just put the money in an annuity.

We went from preemptive attack of other countries to preemptive surrender of all that was in the New Deal.

With the continuation of illegal spying, rendition and torture, lack of support for financial reform and the passage of the Bob Dole health bill, it was becoming very hard to tell the difference between the Repubs and the Dems. If Hoyer, Obama and the rest of the Blue Dogs do not defend Social Security and Medicare then the only difference between the two corporatist parties is the speed at dismantling the US safety net. I don’t think strategically it is feasible to primary Obama. We should start now organizing to primary House and Senate members, who are now positioning themselves to be forced to make the cuts. The Dem party is dead. It was eaten from within by the conservadem party.

nonsense – insurance is a protection against old age – do you buy term life insurance when you get married so as to protect the wife and kids against financial woe if you die – and then calculate a “lousy zero rate of return” if you live – and a great rate of return if you die?

That stupidity belongs on Fox – not FDL.

As for the insurance company annuity alternative – there can be no insurance company alternative – an annuity covers just one part of the program – and annuities that have no cash value before payout begins were unpopular and indeed are illegal today – add the disability and survivor benefits, and the inflation protection that no company will give you, and you have an option that does not and can not exist.

LOL – cute – but still not on point

I bet you feel the progressive tax system with higher rates for those with more, is welfare – a giving to the lesser folk?

So a progressive benefit formula in the Social Security Insurance benefit calculation, giving a higher percentage of average wage to the lower paid, is welfare?

Indeed everything should be means tested except bailouts to banks and contracts to corporations and indeed any money going to the rich – right?

The amusing thing is the fact that the rich talk about a flat tax – but only with an eye on how they can move the source of income off shore and convert us to “income made in the US only system” from our current “world wide income with credit for tax paid in other countries”. Indeed Clinton was the last president to enforce IRS Code 482 on the allocation of income to this country – Bush was and now Obama is into pleasing the rich and corporate and letting silly assumption based accounting demonstrations “prove” that no income was made in the US.

Right. We need to make DEMANDS. No dialogue or defensive talk, rather, in-your-face offense. Demand our lives, livelihood and quality of life. What we expect? Everything. Whose fault is this mess? Theirs. Who needs to make things right? They do. Ridiculous that they, in small numbers, put us on the defensive.

Haven’t we learned from the forfeiture of the public option by these same asses? What kind of country have we become that we would allow such treatment of our own people? Our elders, our children, our communities and all who reside..while real crooks are freely enriched at our expense. We owe these men little respect. We owe the corporations nothing. Now, we owe the Democrats nothing. No money, no way. We need to deny them. Just say no. Keep government the hell out of our life savings.

And we haven’t learned from our history? No taxation without representation put a stop to similar events where power tried to burden, enslave the citizens.

Hope I’m not too late to answer, if so, we’ll meet again.

So a progressive benefit formula in the Social Security Insurance benefit calculation, giving a higher percentage of average wage to the lower paid, is welfare?

This is not my idea. The system was intentionally set up this way. They taxed everybody about the same for lower salaries. This year up to $106k.

I agree, %106k is not a lower salary, but because of this everyone (at retirement) collects between $2000 and $3000 monthly, or whatever. My poor uncle will get $2000 to live on, and Bill Gates will get $3000.

That makes it not exactly welfare. Everyone puts in some, everyone is eligible for som

What Rand Paul has said is that if you take people under 55 and raise the retirement age by one month per year before they retire, so in 36 years you move the retirement age three years for people retiring then, you fix almost all the problem with Social Security. I think he’s going to have to also have some means testing at the very top to completely fix it, but he’s introducing his bill in a week or so and it will completely fix social security for 75 years, through the demographic issue, and then we can worry about something else instead.

Kay?

Kay.

P.S. He also just said he’s going to force a debate and amendments on the Patriot Act in the Senate. I’m very happy with him, tonight.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSDBswx90Cs&feature=player_embedded

can we set a maximum age for being in Congress, like say 50 years old?
Or should we try to get their pay and pension benefits tied to SS so if SS recipients don’t get a cost of living adjustment, Congress doesn’t get a raise or an increase in their (probably very generous) retirement bennies.

(I’d like to see candidates required to have spent a year working for hourly pay, or, at least, 6 months at minimum wage, before they can run for any office. It has to be a real job, too, not one created by family or friends just to qualify them.)

Much easier: raise the fscking income cap to at least $250,000. Better yet, raise it to $500,000, and maybe we could lower the FICA rate as well.

Rand Paul’s idea is just another way to have people die before they can collect for all the years they’ve paid into SS. (Which he probably isn’t aware of.)

if I work until I’m 67, I’ll get $1300 a month from SS. That’s the most I’ll get….
Please cite your sources for that $2000 to $3000 amount, or I’ll assume it’s another lie to make people think SS is overly generous.

I pay pretty close attention to the annual report on my Social Security summary I receive every year. The only way I hit $2K per month is hold off on collecting until I hit 70.

If I start collecting at 62 (four years away) I’ll receive $1,313 per month. If I wait until 66 (my full benefits age), I’ll get $1,700 and some change.

So no, “everyone” does NOT collect between $2000 and $3000 per month (other than in your fantasies)

Are you then saying that the SS program is not VIABLE? Price DI that only pays 6 months after job loss and that small of a payment and you will see that it is also a bad deal. SS was set up poorly and one can easily do better.