>>DON'T YOU THINK THESE SCARE TACTICS ABOUT GETTING RID OF
MEDICARE AND MEDICAID ARE BECAUSE THEY HAVE RAPED AND
PILLAGED THOSE ACCOUNTS, THEY ARE SO IN THE RED THEY HAVE TO
COME UP WITH SOMETHING?
THERE IS NO MONEY IN THEM ANYWAY BECAUSE
THEY ALREADY RAPED SOCIAL SECURITY TO THE POINT WHERE IT
IS NO MORE.
I THINK IT IS A SCARE TACTIC.
WHO WANTS POOR OLD
PEOPLE?
NOBODY.
THAT IS THE WORST THING EVER.
>> THEY SMELL WEIRD.
YOU MIGHT HAVE A POINT.
AT THE DEBATE LAST
NIGHT A LOT OF REPUBLICANS TRIED TO MAKE THAT POINT, EITHER THAT
IT NEEDS TO BE SAVED DESPITE HOW IT HAS BEEN ROBBED, OR WE NEED
TO EFFECTIVELY HANDICAP IT, LIKE CHRIS CHRISTIE WANTS TO
DO.
POSSIBLY MEANS TEST IT, RAISE THE AGE FOR BENEFICIARIES, BUT
OF COURSE THEY DID NOT MENTION THE OTHER POSSIBILITIES, WHICH
SEEMS ODD THAT THE MODERATORS DID NOT CALL THEM ON IT, WHICH
IS THAT YOU CAN RAISE THE CAP ON PAYROLL TAX AND CONTRIBUTIONS TO
SOCIAL SECURITY.
THAT MAY NOT SOLVE THE PROBLEM BY ITSELF BUT
IT SEEMS CONSPICUOUS BY ITS ABSENCE IN EVEN BEING MENTIONED.
IF YOU TALK ABOUT HOW WE ARE ON THE BRINK OF A CRISIS --
>>EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE WHAT YOU MEAN.
>>BASICALLY YOU PAY A CONTRIBUTION TO SOCIAL SECURITY IN THE FORM OF A
TAX ON YOUR PAYROLL, BUT IT IS CAPPED AT $108,000.
>>SO THEY STOP TAKING MONEY OUT OF YOUR PAYCHECK ONCE YOU GET TO
$108,000, AND AFTER THAT THEY DON'T TAX IT.
>>THEY TAX THE FIRST 108,000, BUT NOT ABOVE.
BUT IF YOU RAISED
THAT OR ELIMINATED IT, SO PEOPLE ARE PAYING ON ALL THEIR
INCOME INSTEAD OF JUST THE FIRST $108,000,
THAT WOULD BE A FLOW OF NEW MONEY.
>>SO BASICALLY, LEBRON JAMES IS PAYING THE SAME AMOUNT INTO
SOCIAL SECURITY AS A JUNIOR CORRESPONDENT FOR AL JAZEERA.
THAT DOES NOT SEEM RIGHT, SO WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS YOU SHOULD
STILL HAVE TO KEEP PAYING ON YOUR 500,000, MILLION DOLLARS,
BUT FOR SOME REASON WE STOPPED IT.
THAT IS A GREAT FIX, AND IF THEY JUST DID THAT IT WOULD MAKE
SOCIAL SECURITY SOLVENT UNTIL ALMOST 2070.
>>THAT IS THE NUMBERS I HAVE SEEN.
THERE IS AN ARGUMENT TO BE
MADE FOR WHY THAT IS NOT FAIR, DEVIL'S ADVOCATE IS PEOPLE GET
THE SAME AMOUNT OUT OF SOCIAL SECURITY ROUGHLY, SO THEY SHOULD
PERHAPS ONLY PAY THE SAME.
THAT IS WHAT THEY WILL SAY.
AS IF
EVERY OTHER PART OF OUR SYSTEM IS SO INHERENTLY FAIR WHEN IT
COMES TO THE POOR AND THE RICH, WHY NOT JUST HAVE ONE MORE?
I
WOULD SAY THE LONG-TERM SOLVENCY OF ONE OF THE MOST POPULAR
SOCIAL PROGRAMS IN THE WORLD IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN THESE VAGUE
NOTIONS OF HOW THAT IS UNFAIR.
>>WHAT INFURIATED ME LISTENING TO THE DEBATE WAS RAND PAUL,
FOR EXAMPLE, WANTING TO RAISE THE AGE.
THEY FIGURED OUT THAT
PEOPLE DIE AT 74, WE WILL RAISE IT TO 72, 73, WE WILL ONLY GIVE YOU A
YEAR.
YOU WORKED YOUR ENTIRE LIFE, PUT ALL THIS MONEY IN, WE
WILL GIVE YOU A YEAR OR TWO BEFORE YOU KICK THE BUCKET.
THAT
IS WHAT WE NEED TO DO, JUST TO SAVE OUR SYSTEM.
THAT MADE ME SO
SICK, I HAD TO WALK AWAY.
>>THAT IS SO FUNNY TO HEAR GUYS LIKE CHRIS CHRISTIE SAY THAT WE
HAVE TO RAISE THE RETIREMENT AGE, BECAUSE WE ARE LIVING
LONGER.
RICH WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS ARE LIVING LONGER.
BRICKLAYERS, TRUCK DRIVERS, WAITERS, THEY ARE STILL LIVING
THE SAME AMOUNT.
SO WHEN HE SAYS WE HAVE TO RAISE IT, DO YOU WANT
A 71-YEAR-OLD FIREMAN?
A 72-YEAR-OLD UPS TRUCK DRIVER?
I HAVE THAT WASHING MACHINE FOR YOU, I AM 72.
>>DO YOU WANT US DOING THIS SHOW WHEN WE ARE 71?
>>I DO.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE TELLING US -- FIRST OF ALL WE
ARE THE RICHEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD, WE CAN
AFFORD SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE, IT IS FUCKING BULLSHIT
WHEN THEY SAY THINGS LIKE THAT AND CNBC DID NOT CORRECT
THEM SO IN THAT REGARD THEY DID A SHIT JOB.
>>THEY DID A GOOD JOB IN OTHER PARTS, BUT NOT THAT PART.
>>MEDICARE, BY THE WAY, WHEN IT WAS INSTITUTED, THE POVERTY RATE
FOR SENIOR CITIZENS WITH 33%.
10 YEARS AFTER LBJ INSTITUTED
MEDICARE, IT WAS DOWN TO 11% POVERTY RATE FOR SENIOR
CITIZENS.
IT IS A SUCCESSFUL SOCIAL PROGRAM, SO IS SOCIAL
SECURITY.
NOBODY HAS EVER MISSED A CHECK EVER.
>> THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SOME OF THE MORE EXTREME REPUBLICAN
CANDIDATES AND SOME OF THE MORE REASONABLE ONES IS, SOME OF THEM
WANT TO RAISE THE RETIREMENT AGE FOR EVERYBODY, SOME WANT TO SAY
IF YOU ARE ABOUT TO GET IT, THEY WILL SAY, ONLY FOR THE YOUNGER
PEOPLE WE SHOULD RAISE HOW LONG THEY HAVE TO WAIT.
WHICH IF YOU
ARE A YOUNG PERSON WATCHING THAT AND THEY ARE SAYING WE KNOW YOU
ARE NOT AS POLITICALLY ENGAGED, THE CHANCE OF YOU VOTING IS
LOWER, SO SCREW YOU WHEN IT COMES TO THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET
YOU WILL DEPEND ON -- YOU CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THEY MIGHT SAY
THAT BECAUSE THEY KNOW YOUNG PEOPLE GENERALLY DON'T PLAN
AHEAD FOR THEIR RETIREMENT, THEY THINK THAT IS IN DECADES, I WILL
BE FAMOUS AND WEALTHY THEN, WHY DO I WORRY ABOUT IT?
MOST OF YOU,
INCLUDING ME, PROBABLY WILL NOT.
WE WILL NEED THOSE PROGRAMS
LATER, SO WHEN PEOPLE, INCLUDING SOME OF THE REASONABLE ONES,
SAY THEY WILL RAISE THE AGE FOR EVENTUAL INDUCTEES INTO SOCIAL
SECURITY, THAT SHOULD SCARE YOU AND CAUSE YOU TO LOOK ELSEWHERE.