201
submitted 1 year ago by tintory@lemm.ee to c/politics@lemmy.world
all 13 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] LastYearsPumpkin@feddit.ch 18 points 1 year ago

Man, things would be way better for everyone if we just listened to Bernie once in a while (read: always)

[-] OpenPassageways@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If Republicans were serious about cuts to entitlements, they would do it when they have power instead of cutting taxes. Of course, their voters depend on it, so they won't.

[-] ericisshort@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

I get what the title is trying to say, but it is pretty poorly written because low birthrates DO strain social security. However inequality causes lower birthrates which in turn strains social security

[-] pjhenry1216@kbin.social 17 points 1 year ago

That isn't what the title is saying.

Basically the percentage of taxable income has dropped drastically. The wealthy's income has spiked drastically compared to less monetarily-gifted citizens. So the population is putting less money into social security. That drop is hitting a lot harder than just have fewer workers.

[-] ericisshort@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Thanks for clarifying. Your interpretation does make more sense.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm for reducing the birthrate to zero until inequality is fully addressed.

You have to either be a monster or truly not care about anyone to bring a non-wealthy child into this work camp as our very habitat fails by our own sabotage. Why? Because misery loves company? Because the job creators want new capital batteries for their progeny to drain the life force of?

Oh I know, because the owners promised 50 years ago that if we gave them ALL the money and power, and we did for some reason, one day they would emerge from their guarded towers to whip their cocks out and urinate golden showers of prosperity upon all of us, and though you won't live to see it, surely your child will amirite!

[-] dudinax@programming.dev 2 points 1 year ago

If you don't reproduce then you leave the world to the kids of the bootlickers.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

No I leave it to the owners. Those bootlicker's kids are going to have a worse time than their parents.

[-] PolyLlamaRous@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Anyone know or can find who funds them? I can't.

[-] tintory@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why not message him on Twitter, because it doesn’t look like any billionaire or even millionaire are funding this

https://x.com/realdaviddemos/status/1695135359955304774?s=46

[-] Brawndo@kbin.social -3 points 1 year ago

Social Security is one of the greatest scams of all time.

Generally speaking, this is how it works

Lower Income families pay into it longer (didn't go to college, have to get a job and start getting taxed at 18 vs. going to college and started to be taxed at say 22)

Lower Income families receive benefits for less time (pretty much all statistics show that the wealthier you are, the longer you live)

Lower income families pay a higher percentage of their income than wealthier families. (Social Security only on the first ~$130K in income. It's a regressive tax)

Lower income families are paid out less in benefits. You get paid out based on what you pay in.

Wealthier families typically have other passive forms of income that are not subject to the Social Security tax, this means that if they get to keep this income stream going into retirement they are at a massive advantage over lower income families who if they have to work a job in retirement that again have to pay Social Security taxes on wages they earn.

In addition to all of this, upon death of both the primary and spouse, all the money taken vanishes and cannot be passed down to their children or beneficiaries which only compounds wealth inequality.

In short, Social Security is a regressive tax that unfairly penalizes the poor and provides a higher welfare pay out to families that are wealthier.

[-] Willy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

maybe it could be better? maybe it has been perverted? scam is a hard word I appreciate insight

this post was submitted on 28 Sep 2023
201 points (96.7% liked)

politics

19090 readers
3778 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS