Is this where I turn into a republican?
Posted 12 December 2012 - 11:46 PM
I guess the reason I even bring up that I think everyone should be able to collect social security (from cradle to grave) is to give the rationale for lowering the qualifying age, which is the issue at hand right now. It's just a step in the right direction of what I see to be the complete picture, eventually... like several decades or even centuries from now.
I get the feeling that it is the vision of some politicians, but as I've said, I've never heard them come right out and say it. Instead, they say "expanded not cut."
Posted 13 December 2012 - 12:59 AM
Posted 13 December 2012 - 02:55 AM
I think the only way it could ever happen is by lowering the age to qualify incrementally... which is exactly the opposite of what Republicans are now trying to do.
I know that this idea is radical. I know it can't be done right away... it's just a direction. Sorry if I'm not explaining my idea clearly enough.
The money would build up over time and the program would pay for itself if it was done correctly (and politicians weren't allowed to 'borrow' from it -- remember Al Gores "lockbox"). Again, small steps... just in the other direction that Republicans are pushing toward eliminating it.
Just sounds like more entitlement spending to me.
And isn't that the same logic used for Social Security? Lock box is a good start but again you are trusting the government to run this program? I would not.
Posted 13 December 2012 - 03:19 AM
The whole idea doesn't really make complete sense until it's done and everyone collects, but there has to be intermediate steps, because I believe in gradualism.
The alternative would be to just hire more workers and investigators at the DOL and SSI to track benefit recipients and make sure they're truly eligible. Or, hire a separate agency to cut down on waste, fraud, and abuse... more bureaucracy.