English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

With "socialist" being the new spin word against Democrats, I have a hard time believing that many elderly people will vote Republican in fear of losing their social security checks.

This has been the main source of Republican votes my whole life and Hillary is making a giant stand for socialized healthcare while Republicans are moving toward privatization... which elderly people are wise to.

2007-07-21 11:48:49 · 16 answers · asked by rabble rouser 6 in Politics & Government Elections

Evidently - I asked this question in a forum that has very few of the people I am referring to... my great grandma doesn't have a computer but has never missed a vote since she's been allowed to.
She has never been turned down for care by social security but she has for insurance....

2007-07-21 12:17:19 · update #1

16 answers

Do you mean the FOR PROFIT Social Security plan the Republicans are trying to hoodwink America with?
Privatize = For Profit.Nothing else.And for profit with the amounts(humongous) will lead only to corruption,greed and theft - the Good Old American Corporate Way......

2007-07-21 15:19:24 · answer #1 · answered by Your Teeth or Mine? 5 · 1 0

From the beginning of Social Security the Republicans opposed the program. Do Republicans return there Social Security checks in protest to this New Deal Socialists Program?

2007-07-21 12:47:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Republicans do not seek to scare anyone on Social Security- they seek to offer younger workers another option. You do know that it wasnt devised to be a full retirement for people but a safety net right? You know that FDR promised the following
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
> Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
>
> 1.) That participation in the Program would be
> completely voluntary,
>
> 2.) That the participants would only have to pay
> 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
> incomes into the Program,
>
> 3.) That the money the participants elected to put
> into the Program would be deductible from
> their income for tax purposes each year,
>
> 4.) That the money the participants put into the
> independent "Trust Fund" rather than into the
> General operating fund, and therefore, would
> only be used to fund the Social Security
> Retirement Program, and no other
> Government program, and,
>
> 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees
> would never be taxed as income

And here is what happened over the years

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
> independent "Trust Fund" and put it into the
> General fund so that Congress could spend it?
> A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
> controlled House and Senate.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
> deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
>
> A: The Democratic Party.
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
> Security annuities????
> A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
> "tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the
> Senate, while he was Vice President of the US .
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving
> annuity payments to immigrants?
>
> This is MY FAVORITE:
>
> A: That's right! Jimmy Carter! And the Democratic Party of course!
> Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
> began to receive Social Security payments! The
> Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
> even though they never paid a dime into it!


People should be allowed to opt out and the democrats should stop scaring old people by telling them that they will lose benefits if we let younger people opt out a portion of their income. NO ONE is advocating complete privatization. Maybe we should charge a smaller amount like 1-2% on wages up to $300k or something to help subsidize it for those in need though. What do you think?

Oh and best would for everyone to stop doing things because the party wants it rather than because it is right

2007-07-21 11:58:49 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Just show them the Democrats plans

Some of us are old enough to remember when LBJ
led the congress to move SS from private funding into
the General Budget so they could borrow BILLIONS (unpaid)
to pay for the VietNam war

Then we extended benefits to new Citizens under Carter
who had never paid a dime into the system

and was it Clinton who started taxing SS benefits?

And you want Public Healthcare after seeing what the
gov-mint has done with Public Housing and AMTRAK?

oh my, you can fool some of the people most of the time

Phineas T was right

2007-07-21 12:00:31 · answer #4 · answered by tom4bucs 7 · 0 1

Social security is in deep financial trouble. Democrats started the program and have been screwing it up ever since WWII. Old people have a right to be scared. With a Democrat-controlled Congress doing nothing, the problem will get even bigger.
Promising to nationalize the health care system will not win the Presidency for anyone. Mrs. Clinton tried once and failed miserably.

2007-07-21 11:57:08 · answer #5 · answered by regerugged 7 · 3 1

Private enterprise always does it better than government.

There is not 1 thing the government does right.

Education is a joke
Colleges and universities are a joke
welfare is filled with fraud
borders are open
takes months to get a passport

BTW, the scaring with social security is offering private accounts to younger workers so they can pay into something and have a retirement. The current SS system is a ponzi scheme. See what Galveston County, TX has and you will see 2-3 times the return with 0 risk.

2007-07-21 11:53:38 · answer #6 · answered by GOPneedsarealconservative 4 · 4 2

Conservatives run the media. and each ingredient else. human beings go with money and conservatives have it. Many are apprehensive to admit that they hear. On youtube inspect " Bloodlines Illuminati" for the secret history of the international. together as human beings make investments faith in something they do no longer go with to verify that all of the religion they invested grew to become a waste. do no longer end believing. Hillary could be pres. and it will take the warmth temperature off the Rep. although the time table (conflict in Iran) may be the comparable. we could desire to have self assurance each ingredient our leaders let us know no count selection selection what. If no longer the terrorists could have won. If bill O says % up then i think of of you may desire to % up. i'm extremely sheep and that i'm going with a shepherd. Your shepherd is a wolf. No way % up. do you already know your credit mine is 666. in case to procure something to declare then you could desire to fill out this sort and shove it. grant Britney her youthful ones back Y'all.

2016-11-10 02:01:47 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It's the young, not the old, that should be scared about the demographic glide path that the current Social Security system is on.

2007-07-21 11:56:25 · answer #8 · answered by nileslad 6 · 2 0

You do not understand what will be different with socialized health care. End of life care is very different with socialized medicines. What does socialized medicine have to do with social security by the way?

2007-07-21 11:52:59 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Remember punk, it was our liberal Prez Bushy that tried to make an issue of SS from nowhere. He failed because the rest of us want something we've been paying into all of our working lives.
Ever work? Well. Did ya punk?

2007-07-21 12:21:52 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers