A big impetus for passsing Social Security, way back when, was that senors could not afford heat and froze to death during the winter in weather like what the Midwest of the U.S. is experiencing now.

And, yes there will be more homeless. However the rich don't care. In their (richly warped minds) minds people who are that old who can no longer work shoudl just die anyways and stop beign a burden.

@snytiger6 I remember reading about Venezuela selling oil to poor Americans so they could be warm during winter and now the US want to go and steel all their oil.

@Jolanta just like all the oil production in Iraq came under control of American and British oil companies (a result of the war in Iraq), they also want oil production in Venezuela to also be under their control too.

@snytiger6 Unfortunately Australia is still bombing Iraq, they are keeping it very quiet.

What? What kind of person are you, don't you understand that there are people who have to work 2 - 3 job and they still don't earn enough to feed their families? Have you not heard about the sub prime mortgage crisis when thousands upon thousands lost their homes, and now it will start again since Donald revoked the laws in banking?

@Jolanta

Where are these people that are working 3 jobs and cannot feed their families? How big is that family and why are they not making better decisions with all of that money?

People would be better off if they werent giving all of the money they make on those 3 jobs to government. People who call themselves government should not be stealing money from anyone, especially these people.

Im the kind of person who wants to see people keep all of the money they worked hard for, and to be able to donate that money to whatever cause they see fit. Even if that cause is to keep all of it.

@BryanLV I don't know if you're voluntarily paying attention or not, but average sized families are seriously struggling and juggling 2 and 3 part time jobs at a time that have no benefits, no sick days, and are the kind that will fire you at the drop of a hat. And they're doing it because those are the jobs that are available in this 'glorious' economy.

@CommonHuman

All average size families are struggling? Should government be taking money from these struggling families?

Seems like the best way to help people is to allow them to keep all of the money they earn, and stop having their hard earned money be redistributed. Also, what average size family with 2 and 3 part time jobs is also drawing from SS?

Seems like you two are making a point that does not apply to SS at all. Meanwhile, my point to end SS and privatize the industry would actually help the people youre talking about.

@BryanLV I don't believe anyone said all. No privatizing really, really wouldn't. That would make it a business. Never met a business that actually looked out for the interest of people. See insurance.

@BryanLV All of that money, are you serious. Have you got a clue how much the minimum wage is and how much rent is? Teachers in the US need a second job to survive, they haven’t had a decent wage increase for yoinks and to pour more salt into the wound they cannot get a tax refund for materials that they use teaching while people living in mansions have a tax credit. You really need to educate yourself

@CommonHuman

Youre not making sense. Insurance companies make their money because governments force people to use their services. All of the Scandanavian countries took their SS system away from govt control and privatized them.

Socialists who love govt and hate businesses love Denmark and Sweden. Just don't tell them their success is due to privatization and Capitalism.

@Jolanta

All the more reason to privatize education. Then teachers could raise their prices, and if people did not want to pay, those greedy teachers would go out of business. Dont those greedy teachers care about kids?

Please do not condescend to me telling me I need to educate myself, when you obviously have no clue what youre talking about. I price units all over the US, and I know for a fact people with 2 or 3 jobs making minimum wage can afford a place and food. Do the math. Its mot hard at all.

Its a nonsense argument. You should not raise a family with a min wage job. You should refrain until you are more financially stable. Pretty simple.

@BryanLV Education has been partially privatized with the charter schools. However the numbers for the schools which seemed too good to be true were. They took only the best students, so of course the scores were intially higher. Then as time passed they started to cut corners, and now most charter schools score lower than public schools.

Pribatization has always resulted in lower/fewer services for higher fees. Because the purpose of corporations isn't to provide good services, but to make as large of a profit as possible, so they have always, so far, cut corners to try to increase profits resultign in worse services over the long run.

Social Security is insurance, It was established because when people got old t=and could no longer work they were starving to death, or they fraze to death durign winter because they coudl not afford to heat their homes. The insurance of Social Security insures that you wil have some income when you get old or if you get disabled before you get old.

Social Security is run not for profit which means that over head is about 3%, while overhead for private insurance ranges from 25-50% of premiums. So righ taway privatization woudl increase the overhead, which woudl mean less money goign to actually befitting people.

many of the propositions for privatizationof Social Security would wipe out a persons benefits is the stock market tanked, or if they were sold bad investments by unscrupulous bankers or brokers. Like what just happened 10 years ago with the sub prime mortgages beign sold as investments. Because private industry isn't interested in providing benefits, but are only interested in making a profit. Even if their clients lose everything, if they made a profit, they just pat themselves on the back and buy themselves a new yacht.

Social Security is the most successful government program in the history of the U.S., which is why the right wing wants to ruin it, because Social Security is a symbol that if done right government can actually work and solve problems.

@snytiger6

Answers by paragraph.

1. Nope. Not true when there is true privatization. In the Scandinavian countries, the school system was privatized, which led to an increase in scholastic measures, including an increase in funding and an improved approach to the public system. Minus the competition from the private sector, there is no incentive for the govt sector to make any improvements, and when they do, they are mired down by bureaucracy.

2. This is an incredibly myopic view. First, you claim what you said "always" happens, yet you do not include even a single example of what you claim. Seems like if this happens 100% of the time, as you claim, that you should easily be able to throw in an example, but you didnt. I wonder why? Now, listed as #1 in my reply, is an actual example of your claim being absolutely and completely false. So theres that.

3 - 6 There are no guarantees coming from people who call themselves government. The only guarantee is coming from you! Further, I know quite a few people who receive SSi and most of them get about 700$ per month. Not all of them are old either, as the program continues to get expanded to include more people. To top it off, it is a complete ponzi scheme that has been borrowed against numerous times and that can absolutely be depleted. “I cannot guarantee that those checks [he included veterans and the disabled, in addition to Social Security] go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it.” - Barack Obomber

Now ask yourself, if that money was all sitting there, why would government need to raise the debt ceiling in order to pay out the checks? Because they are borrowing the money to pay it out, thats why. It's a complete scam. Privatization, like the Scandinavian countries, would completely solve the issue. Let people pay in if they want, and keep 100% of their money. Period. Your numbers for insurances and 3% blah, blah are an absolute red herring. The answer again is privatization, not a forced insurance program again run by an untrustworthy government running a ponzi scheme. Your claims about the stock market are again completely fake. There is no reason that those funds need to be held in a stock market fund, and even if they were, theyd probably be in a mutual fund or held in bonds. Again, its a completely false scenario. These are matters for the private sector to deal with. If people want to have the govt handle their money, then they can volunteer it, but you and people like you are happy to volunteer everyone elses hard earned money at the barrel of a govt gun. Youre very generous with everyone elses money and are more than happy to allow an unscrupulous govt that you seem to trust wholeheartedly for some inexplicable reason, handle everyones funds.

Just remember Cyprus. When things go bad, its not your money, it belongs to the united states government, and they will give it to you if they feel like they want to. I don't trust them and or their forced services, and nothing you have stated is the least bit persuasive given the track record of government.

@BryanLV What you fail to mention about Scandinavian countries is that schools get paid by the government by peformance, which means it is highly regulated and monitored by the government.

In anser to number your number 2 listing, you also fail to be able to mention even one instance where privatization (in the U.S.) ever improved things over the long term. Go ahead and try to find one privatized enterprise where things were better at the ten year mark. Granted I have not read up on studie34s for many years to see if it still holds as true, but I am legally blind, so my readign is generally limited to what is available in audio formats anymore.

Getting back to Scandinavian examples, people there who are not working or are receiving government assistance are nto stignatized as they are here int eh U.S. It is a very different culture.

And BTW, SSI, although paid through the Social Security Offices is not Social Security or even federally funded, but would be a state funded program for persons who usually have some kind of disability which prevents them from ever beign employable. As an example, I have a niece who was a shaken baby and who will never mentally mature to a point of being able to fully manage her own affairs. She is on SSI.

The Social Security Disability Insurance benefit is SSDI, and is given to persons who had worked but became disabled. (I receive this one, because I was working and became legally blind)

Then there is the regular Social Security benefit given to person who reach the age of 65, or if born 1960 or later, when they reach the age of 67. My parents worked hard all theri lives, and they tried to save and make investments, but unscrupulous peopel pretty much stole their money. Social Security was all they had to live on in the end, despite having done everything "right" according to experts to prepare for retirement.

Perhaps you shoudl familiarize yourself with Social security and the many associated programs before you suggest privatizing or changing something you don't seem to have an understanding of. From the tone of what you wrote it seems you resent that you pay taxes which makes various programs work.

I certainly never planned to go blind. My parents planned, but they lost their savings. My niece had a bad mother, and she has suffered for it for her entire life.

You say the government didnt guarantee anything. Yet, When my parents needed it, they got their benefits. When I went blind, which nobody actually thinks will hapen to them, I got benefits. My niece doesn't get much, but it is enough hat she isnt' a financial burden on those who take care of her.

Back before I went blind i did drive a car and had an accident, and on a separate occasion my car was stolen. From my experiences with insurance companies I would not trust or rely on an insurance company to come through for me.

My father had carried life insurance on my mother. However the insurance company got wind my mother was goign to die soon and cancelled the policy about two months befor eshe passed. If it were me, Id' have sued. However my father beign a republican believed that lawsuits just raised prices for everyone, and besides he was in mourning, he had to move because with the loss of her Social security he coudl no longer afford to live where he did, and beign old he just didn't have the energy. Insurance companies do this all the time, because the amount they pay in lawsuits costs less than payign promised benefits which people paid for in good faith.

A former roommate worked for Kemper Instance. They had (and probably still have) a policy to deny all claims the first time they were made. So peopel who are sick and ill hae to spend hours on the phone and writign letters and emails to get the benefits they were assured they would get.

The government has kept its promises. Private companies have not. In those cases where insurance companies have kept polices up you will find the likelihood of keeping their promises has a direct correlation to the income the person has or their net worth. The more money a person had the more likely they are to pay benefits.

I do not trust private companies to keep their word. So far as far as Social Security goes anyway, th government has kept its word. If it isnt' broke, don't try to fix it.

@snytiger6

"What you fail to mention about Scandinavian countries is that schools get paid by the government by peformance, which means it is highly regulated and monitored by the government."

It's really not worth my time to respond to much of what you wrote. Your opinions are slanted by half truths and outright falsehoods.

Privatized schools in the Scandinavian countries are paid by the institution, not by government. Youre parsing words and omitting key information on purpose to prop up what you already think. Where you have been shown to be wrong, you petition emotion. The word disingenuous comes to mind. I stopped reading and just skimmed the rest and I don't have time educate you, man.

Especially when you end with "government has kept its promises."

That's just ridiculous.

That’s exactly right, the rich looking after the rich and taking advantage of those who still look to them with respect when voting

Yes...we need a revolution in 2020. We need to vote out the Republicans and vote in Progressive Democrats. Tax the rich and provide health care for all...free college for all...and raise the minimum wage to $15.00/ hour @Denker