(10-25-2016 08:53 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:36 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:31 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:25 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:14 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  20 posts in and nobody posted this meme?

Conservatives are always claiming their beef is with the (nonexistent since 1996) "welfare queens", but the truth is they really despise the working poor.

Charitable giving suggests otherwise.

How many charities assist people that work full-time? The only groups I can think of are churches... and the left wants to tear them down.

Dude was just spouting out a tired talking point. It continues to make no sense.

I'm reminded when Republicans touted Romney's "charitable giving" in 2012. The "charitable giving" turned out to be tithing, which he was required to do, and it turns out the Mormon church generates $7 billion annually from tithing but spends only $40 million on aid for the poor, or one-half of one-percent.

But hey, that blows away the Trump Foundation!

(10-25-2016 09:14 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  How about we eliminate Social Security and let Americans keep their money and take personal responsibility for their retirement?

But I forgot, you believe that people are helpless without Daddy Government.

Oh I forgot, you live in a fantasy land where that wouldn't throw millions of seniors out on the streets.

Or maybe you do know better and are just evil.

(10-25-2016 09:18 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:14 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  How about we eliminate Social Security and let Americans keep their money and take personal responsibility for their retirement?

But I forgot, you believe that people are helpless without Daddy Government.

Oh I forgot, you live in a fantasy land where that wouldn't throw millions of seniors out on the streets.

Or maybe you do know better and are just evil.

You are being obtuse.

Millions of seniors survived before Social Security.

Of course, you will just move the goal posts again.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Come on now Max. You know that is nothing more than an accounting trick. Where is that surplus? Oh, it doesn't really exist because it was loaned to the general fund and spent. So, to tap that surplus, we have to shift money from the general fund back to SS. That means we either cut spending, or we borrow even more.

Tell me again how that is really solvent.

(10-25-2016 09:19 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:18 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:14 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  How about we eliminate Social Security and let Americans keep their money and take personal responsibility for their retirement?

But I forgot, you believe that people are helpless without Daddy Government.

Oh I forgot, you live in a fantasy land where that wouldn't throw millions of seniors out on the streets.

Or maybe you do know better and are just evil.

You are being obtuse.

Millions of seniors survived before Social Security.

Of course, you will just move the goal posts again.

lol, it's like libs think all seniors just up and died before social security was instituted. I, for one, have no problem with SS, I just wish there was an opt out option so I, not the govt, could invest my own money. However, I do realize the ponzi scheme may be jeopardized if folks were allowed to opt out which is the reasons libs are opposed to giving up other people's money. Wll that and they must inherently think people are too stupid to invest their own money, etc.

(10-25-2016 09:17 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:53 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:36 AM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:31 AM)VA49er Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:25 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Conservatives are always claiming their beef is with the (nonexistent since 1996) "welfare queens", but the truth is they really despise the working poor.

Charitable giving suggests otherwise.

How many charities assist people that work full-time? The only groups I can think of are churches... and the left wants to tear them down.

Dude was just spouting out a tired talking point. It continues to make no sense.

I'm reminded when Republicans touted Romney's "charitable giving" in 2012. The "charitable giving" turned out to be tithing, which he was required to do, and it turns out the Mormon church generates $7 billion annually from tithing but spends only $40 million on aid for the poor, or one-half of one-percent.

I would bet that you give very little to the poor, either in time or money.

Just a typical liberal blowhard hypocrite who complains that everyone else doesn't do enough.

(10-25-2016 09:20 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Come on now Max. You know that is nothing more than an accounting trick. Where is that surplus? Oh, it doesn't really exist because it was loaned to the general fund and spent. So, to tap that surplus, we have to shift money from the general fund back to SS. That means we either cut spending, or we borrow even more.

Tell me again how that is really solvent.

Let's not forget it was Reagan (for the 80s military buildup) and GWB (for Iraq) who borrowed from the SS trust fund. It will have to be borrowed but the SS fund is owed that money and it's no fault of SS. It's wildly misleading for Republicans to suggest that SS is insolvent as if the program is broken beyond repair when the fact we have securities in the trust fund is due to GOP presidents who ran up tabs.

(10-25-2016 09:19 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:18 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:14 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  How about we eliminate Social Security and let Americans keep their money and take personal responsibility for their retirement?

But I forgot, you believe that people are helpless without Daddy Government.

Oh I forgot, you live in a fantasy land where that wouldn't throw millions of seniors out on the streets.

Or maybe you do know better and are just evil.

You are being obtuse.

Millions of seniors survived before Social Security.

Of course, you will just move the goal posts again.

Yeah? And millions didn't.

I'm not moving any goal posts. It's a wildly popular program because it's allowed countless millions of seniors to keep their dignity and lives.

(10-25-2016 09:32 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:20 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Come on now Max. You know that is nothing more than an accounting trick. Where is that surplus? Oh, it doesn't really exist because it was loaned to the general fund and spent. So, to tap that surplus, we have to shift money from the general fund back to SS. That means we either cut spending, or we borrow even more.

Tell me again how that is really solvent.

Let's not forget it was Reagan (for the 80s military buildup) and GWB (for Iraq) who borrowed from the SS trust fund.

Yet another, and possible best, reason to allow folks to opt out.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  What a bull**** misleading statement. You're counting amounts to be paid out 60 years down the line but not expected revenues.

Amounts to be paid out = already promised
expected revenues = not guaranteed to be received.

The result is unfunded liabilities, so his statement isn't a "bull**** misleading statement" as you put it.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Misleading at best. The SS trust does not physically "hold" that surplus. It's been borrowed by the government and only interest payments and redemption of trust funds allow SS to pay it's promised benefits. The government uses deficit spending to pay back the SS trust so that benefits can be paid.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Right now a billionaire pays the same amount of money into Social Security as someone who makes $118,500 a year. That’s because there is a cap on taxable income that goes into the Social Security system.

Your point, other than you want to redistribute more wealth.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Bernie proposes lifting this cap so that everyone who makes over $250,000 a year pays the same percentage of their income into Social Security as the middle class and working families.

To what end, other than to redistribute wealth. Only a relatively small portion of SS benefits go to the wealthy.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  This would not only extend the solvency of Social Security for the next 50 years, but also bring in enough revenue to expand benefits by an average of $65 a month; increase cost-of-living-adjustments; and lift more seniors out of poverty by increasing the minimum benefits paid to low-income seniors.

So redistribution of wealth. Got it. You're a commie.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Republicans oppose it, of course, because they're the party of the rich (and gullible rednecks voting for them based on social and racial wedge issues).

Oppose redistribution of wealth? Of course. Oppose the idea that the government is responsible to taking care of elderly in retirement? Of course. Why should the government be trusted with SS when government has treated the "off budget" SS trust fund as it's own piggy bank?

(10-25-2016 09:32 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Let's not forget it was Reagan (for the 80s military buildup) and GWB (for Iraq) who borrowed from the SS trust fund. It will have to be borrowed but the SS fund is owed that money and it's no fault of SS. It's wildly misleading for Republicans to suggest that SS is insolvent as if the program is broken beyond repair when the fact we have securities in the trust fund is due to GOP presidents who ran up tabs.

Every president since 1935 as 'borrowed' from SS. Try being at least a tiny bit intellectually honest.

(10-25-2016 08:00 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(10-24-2016 11:30 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(10-24-2016 11:09 AM)Max Power Wrote:  You get paid overtime right? I have a cop friend who makes a boatload with OT.

Salaried. That 55-60 is just my day job. I also farm and fish. I'll put in another 16-20 during the week in the evening and nights, and another 20-24 on the weekends most of the time.

sounds like you need to be more efficient.

I'd probably go back to school and apply for new company

(10-25-2016 09:32 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:20 AM)GeorgeBorkFan Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Come on now Max. You know that is nothing more than an accounting trick. Where is that surplus? Oh, it doesn't really exist because it was loaned to the general fund and spent. So, to tap that surplus, we have to shift money from the general fund back to SS. That means we either cut spending, or we borrow even more.

Tell me again how that is really solvent.

Let's not forget it was Reagan (for the 80s military buildup) and GWB (for Iraq) who borrowed from the SS trust fund. It will have to be borrowed but the SS fund is owed that money and it's no fault of SS. It's wildly misleading for Republicans to suggest that SS is insolvent as if the program is broken beyond repair when the fact we have securities in the trust fund is due to GOP presidents who ran up tabs.

I'll take that as you agree with me as you moved the goal posts.

And, who moved the SS fund into the "unified budget" and started spending the money? Oh yea, LBJ.

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Republicans oppose it, of course, because they're the party of the rich (and gullible rednecks voting for them based on social and racial wedge issues).

If Republicans are the party of the rich then why are the richest Congressional districts represented by Democrats?

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:49 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:16 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Republicans are at fault for refusing to implement any fixes to Obamacare short of full repeal, which is obviously a nonstarter. Initial bills are always amended/fixed later on, because Congress realizes ways it can be improved and wants to better the lives of the American people. Republicans see a political opportunity, to hell with the American people.

A list of fixes to the 1935 Social Security Act--

1939 - Social Security Amendments of 1939, Pub.L. 76–379
1942 - Revenue Act of 1942, Pub.L. 77–753
1943 - Pub.L. 78–211
1943 - Revenue Act of 1943, Pub.L. 78–235
1945 - Federal Insurance Contributions Act, Pub.L. 78–495
1945 - Revenue Act of 1945, Pub.L. 79–214
1946 - Social Security Amendments of 1946, Pub.L. 79–719
1947 - Social Security Amendments of 1947, Pub.L. 80–379
1948 - Provision for Exclusion of Certain Newspaper and Magazine Vendors from Social Security Coverage, Pub.L. 80–492
1948 - Provision to Maintain Status Quo Concept of Employee, Pub.L. 80–642
1950 - Social Security Amendments of 1950, Pub.L. 81–734
1952 - Social Security Amendments of 1952, Pub.L. 82–590
1954 - Social Security Amendments of 1954, Pub.L. 83–761
1956 - Social Security Amendments of 1956, Pub.L. 84–880
1958 - Social Security Amendments of 1958, Pub.L. 85–840
1960 - Social Security Amendments of 1960, Pub.L. 86–778
1961 - Social Security Amendments of 1961, Pub.L. 87–64
1965 - Social Security Amendments of 1965, Pub.L. 89–97
1966 - Tax Adjustment Act of 1966, Pub.L. 89–368
1967 - Social Security Act Amendments, Pub.L. 90–248
1969 - Tax Reform Act of 1969, Pub.L. 91–172
1971 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–5
1972 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–336
1972 - Social Security Amendments of 1972 (Supplemental Security Income), Pub.L. 92–603
1973 - Social Security Benefits Increase, Pub.L. 93–233
1977 - Social Security Amendments of 1977, Pub.L. 95–216
1980 - Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, Pub.L. 96–265
1980 - Reallocation of Social Security Taxes Between OASI and DI Trust Funds, Pub.L. 96–403
1980 - Retirement Test Amendments, Pub.L. 96–473
1981 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, Pub.L. 97–35
1981 - Social Security Amendments of 1981, Pub.L. 97–123
1983 - Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and Social Security Act, amendments. Pub.L. 97–455
1983 - Social Security Amendments of 1983, Pub.L. 98–21
1984 - Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984, Pub.L. 98–460
1985 - Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, Pub.L. 99–177
1986 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, Pub.L. 99–509
1987 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, Pub.L. 100–203
1988 - Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988, Pub.L. 100–647
1989 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, Pub.L. 101–239
1990 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Pub.L. 101–508
1993 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub.L. 103–66
1994 - Social Security Administrative Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–296
1994 - Social Security Domestic Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–387
1996 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 1996, Pub.L. 104–121
1999 - Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act, Pub.L. 106–170
2000 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 2000, Pub.L. 106–182

If it has been "fixed" that many times, then why does it have tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities?

What a bull**** misleading statement. You're counting amounts to be paid out 60 years down the line but not expected revenues.

Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Right now a billionaire pays the same amount of money into Social Security as someone who makes $118,500 a year. That’s because there is a cap on taxable income that goes into the Social Security system.

Bernie proposes lifting this cap so that everyone who makes over $250,000 a year pays the same percentage of their income into Social Security as the middle class and working families.

This would not only extend the solvency of Social Security for the next 50 years, but also bring in enough revenue to expand benefits by an average of $65 a month; increase cost-of-living-adjustments; and lift more seniors out of poverty by increasing the minimum benefits paid to low-income seniors.

Republicans oppose it, of course, because they're the party of the rich (and gullible rednecks voting for them based on social and racial wedge issues).

Using accounting is "bull****." Ok.

Your numbers are bull****. Like usual, Bernie's promises have no mathematical basis in reality.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucemccain/...35d32d6144
http://www.bankrate.com/financing/retire...-security/

You are voting for Hillary Clinton. You do not get to call anyone "the party of the rich" anymore. Wall Street bankers, military contractors, frackers, and Saudi princes are all masturbating furiously to the thought of a Clinton presidency because they can get ANYTHING they want just by throwing a little coin her way.

(10-25-2016 10:42 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:12 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:49 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 08:16 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Republicans are at fault for refusing to implement any fixes to Obamacare short of full repeal, which is obviously a nonstarter. Initial bills are always amended/fixed later on, because Congress realizes ways it can be improved and wants to better the lives of the American people. Republicans see a political opportunity, to hell with the American people.

A list of fixes to the 1935 Social Security Act--

1939 - Social Security Amendments of 1939, Pub.L. 76–379
1942 - Revenue Act of 1942, Pub.L. 77–753
1943 - Pub.L. 78–211
1943 - Revenue Act of 1943, Pub.L. 78–235
1945 - Federal Insurance Contributions Act, Pub.L. 78–495
1945 - Revenue Act of 1945, Pub.L. 79–214
1946 - Social Security Amendments of 1946, Pub.L. 79–719
1947 - Social Security Amendments of 1947, Pub.L. 80–379
1948 - Provision for Exclusion of Certain Newspaper and Magazine Vendors from Social Security Coverage, Pub.L. 80–492
1948 - Provision to Maintain Status Quo Concept of Employee, Pub.L. 80–642
1950 - Social Security Amendments of 1950, Pub.L. 81–734
1952 - Social Security Amendments of 1952, Pub.L. 82–590
1954 - Social Security Amendments of 1954, Pub.L. 83–761
1956 - Social Security Amendments of 1956, Pub.L. 84–880
1958 - Social Security Amendments of 1958, Pub.L. 85–840
1960 - Social Security Amendments of 1960, Pub.L. 86–778
1961 - Social Security Amendments of 1961, Pub.L. 87–64
1965 - Social Security Amendments of 1965, Pub.L. 89–97
1966 - Tax Adjustment Act of 1966, Pub.L. 89–368
1967 - Social Security Act Amendments, Pub.L. 90–248
1969 - Tax Reform Act of 1969, Pub.L. 91–172
1971 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–5
1972 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–336
1972 - Social Security Amendments of 1972 (Supplemental Security Income), Pub.L. 92–603
1973 - Social Security Benefits Increase, Pub.L. 93–233
1977 - Social Security Amendments of 1977, Pub.L. 95–216
1980 - Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, Pub.L. 96–265
1980 - Reallocation of Social Security Taxes Between OASI and DI Trust Funds, Pub.L. 96–403
1980 - Retirement Test Amendments, Pub.L. 96–473
1981 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, Pub.L. 97–35
1981 - Social Security Amendments of 1981, Pub.L. 97–123
1983 - Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and Social Security Act, amendments. Pub.L. 97–455
1983 - Social Security Amendments of 1983, Pub.L. 98–21
1984 - Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984, Pub.L. 98–460
1985 - Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, Pub.L. 99–177
1986 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, Pub.L. 99–509
1987 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, Pub.L. 100–203
1988 - Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988, Pub.L. 100–647
1989 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, Pub.L. 101–239
1990 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Pub.L. 101–508
1993 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub.L. 103–66
1994 - Social Security Administrative Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–296
1994 - Social Security Domestic Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–387
1996 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 1996, Pub.L. 104–121
1999 - Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act, Pub.L. 106–170
2000 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 2000, Pub.L. 106–182

If it has been "fixed" that many times, then why does it have tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities?

What a bull**** misleading statement. You're counting amounts to be paid out 60 years down the line but not expected revenues.

Social Security has a $2.8 trillion surplus. It can pay every benefit owed to every eligible American through 2035 (and more than three-quarters after that).

Right now a billionaire pays the same amount of money into Social Security as someone who makes $118,500 a year. That’s because there is a cap on taxable income that goes into the Social Security system.

Bernie proposes lifting this cap so that everyone who makes over $250,000 a year pays the same percentage of their income into Social Security as the middle class and working families.

This would not only extend the solvency of Social Security for the next 50 years, but also bring in enough revenue to expand benefits by an average of $65 a month; increase cost-of-living-adjustments; and lift more seniors out of poverty by increasing the minimum benefits paid to low-income seniors.

Republicans oppose it, of course, because they're the party of the rich (and gullible rednecks voting for them based on social and racial wedge issues).

Using accounting is "bull****." Ok.

Your numbers are bull****. Like usual, Bernie's promises have no mathematical basis in reality.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucemccain/...35d32d6144
http://www.bankrate.com/financing/retire...-security/

You are voting for Hillary Clinton. You do not get to call anyone "the party of the rich" anymore. Wall Street bankers, military contractors, frackers, and Saudi princes are all masturbating furiously to the thought of a Clinton presidency because they can get ANYTHING they want just by throwing a little coin her way.

Didn't you hear? After taking all the money from those people she promised the Bernie Bros she had changed her ways and is now going after all of the people who paid for her campaign. Just ask Maxie.

(10-25-2016 09:34 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:19 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:18 AM)Max Power Wrote:  

(10-25-2016 09:14 AM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  How about we eliminate Social Security and let Americans keep their money and take personal responsibility for their retirement?

But I forgot, you believe that people are helpless without Daddy Government.

Oh I forgot, you live in a fantasy land where that wouldn't throw millions of seniors out on the streets.

Or maybe you do know better and are just evil.

You are being obtuse.

Millions of seniors survived before Social Security.

Of course, you will just move the goal posts again.

Yeah? And millions didn't.

I'm not moving any goal posts. It's a wildly popular program because it's allowed countless millions of seniors to keep their dignity and lives.

You are saying that millions of seniors before Social Security the day after they stopped working just curled up and died. I bet that their families helped them.

If people really understood Social Security, it wouldn't be popular but because the Democrats use fear tactics about everything when it comes to government programs, most people are not aware of the government theft.

(10-24-2016 11:06 AM)200yrs2late Wrote:  If I only worked a 40 hour week...

I'm closer to 55-60 right now over 5 days, I'd much rather work 4 10 hour days or even 4 12 hour days.

Yea, who, other than gubment "employees" works 40 hours? I haven't done that since I was about 15 (when employed, not in school).

Child labor stuff? Fine , I guess, but shouldn't 13YO Susie be allowed to bus tables in mom and dads pizza shop?

Gotta love B I G Gubment do-gooders.

(10-25-2016 07:30 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Republicans do EVERYTHING under the sun to undermine Obamacare just to point years later. See see told you it wouldn't work. Rubio did something sneaky along those lines is a major reason why Premiums are escalating this election year. Saboteurs.

Something sneaky? Like passing it over Christmas season, on strictly party line vote after a suspension of the rules of regular order? Without posting if to the internet first as promised so the public could go over the failed boondoggle?

Like that kind of "sneaky"?

And nothing Rubio did was in any way pernicious or anything else. What he did was simply say, Uhhhhhh, no. Money from the public debt (read taxpayer or China) is not going to pay off to the Ins Co's as zerO promised to prop up his crap, failed, socialist, redistributionist scheme.

Yea, with 20 trillion in debt, and having doubled that same debt in two terms, that which ALL 43 previous Presidents had accumulated combined, I'd say that was a pretty sound decision.

Sorry zerO, no cookie for you.

(10-25-2016 08:16 AM)Max Power Wrote:  Republicans are at fault for refusing to implement any fixes to Obamacare short of full repeal, which is obviously a nonstarter. Initial bills are always amended/fixed later on, because Congress realizes ways it can be improved and wants to better the lives of the American people. Republicans see a political opportunity, to hell with the American people.

A list of fixes to the 1935 Social Security Act--

1939 - Social Security Amendments of 1939, Pub.L. 76–379
1942 - Revenue Act of 1942, Pub.L. 77–753
1943 - Pub.L. 78–211
1943 - Revenue Act of 1943, Pub.L. 78–235
1945 - Federal Insurance Contributions Act, Pub.L. 78–495
1945 - Revenue Act of 1945, Pub.L. 79–214
1946 - Social Security Amendments of 1946, Pub.L. 79–719
1947 - Social Security Amendments of 1947, Pub.L. 80–379
1948 - Provision for Exclusion of Certain Newspaper and Magazine Vendors from Social Security Coverage, Pub.L. 80–492
1948 - Provision to Maintain Status Quo Concept of Employee, Pub.L. 80–642
1950 - Social Security Amendments of 1950, Pub.L. 81–734
1952 - Social Security Amendments of 1952, Pub.L. 82–590
1954 - Social Security Amendments of 1954, Pub.L. 83–761
1956 - Social Security Amendments of 1956, Pub.L. 84–880
1958 - Social Security Amendments of 1958, Pub.L. 85–840
1960 - Social Security Amendments of 1960, Pub.L. 86–778
1961 - Social Security Amendments of 1961, Pub.L. 87–64
1965 - Social Security Amendments of 1965, Pub.L. 89–97
1966 - Tax Adjustment Act of 1966, Pub.L. 89–368
1967 - Social Security Act Amendments, Pub.L. 90–248
1969 - Tax Reform Act of 1969, Pub.L. 91–172
1971 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–5
1972 - Social Security Amendments, Pub.L. 92–336
1972 - Social Security Amendments of 1972 (Supplemental Security Income), Pub.L. 92–603
1973 - Social Security Benefits Increase, Pub.L. 93–233
1977 - Social Security Amendments of 1977, Pub.L. 95–216
1980 - Social Security Disability Amendments of 1980, Pub.L. 96–265
1980 - Reallocation of Social Security Taxes Between OASI and DI Trust Funds, Pub.L. 96–403
1980 - Retirement Test Amendments, Pub.L. 96–473
1981 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981, Pub.L. 97–35
1981 - Social Security Amendments of 1981, Pub.L. 97–123
1983 - Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and Social Security Act, amendments. Pub.L. 97–455
1983 - Social Security Amendments of 1983, Pub.L. 98–21
1984 - Social Security Disability Benefits Reform Act of 1984, Pub.L. 98–460
1985 - Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act, Pub.L. 99–177
1986 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1986, Pub.L. 99–509
1987 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1987, Pub.L. 100–203
1988 - Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988, Pub.L. 100–647
1989 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1989, Pub.L. 101–239
1990 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, Pub.L. 101–508
1993 - Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, Pub.L. 103–66
1994 - Social Security Administrative Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–296
1994 - Social Security Domestic Reform Act, Pub.L. 103–387
1996 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 1996, Pub.L. 104–121
1999 - Ticket to Work and Work Incentives Improvement Act, Pub.L. 106–170
2000 - Senior Citizens' Right to Work Act of 2000, Pub.L. 106–182

Yea, good point, so after ALL that time AND all those "improvements", we still have a failing, bankrupt government run ponzi scheme,

SO HAY GUISE?!?!?! I have a great idea, LET'S START ANOTHER ONE!!! It'll be great this time, just great, I promise!

So yea, no.

And, of course, you intentionally ignore the 1/2 dozen or more "fixes" already originated, passed by both houses of the Republican Congress and SIGNED INTO LAW, by zerO himself. Many, many more were passed by the House and stopped at the feet of that vicious partisan hack reed when he was still in charge and not chasing elderly cowboys around the plains.