Country Living    Country Living, Country Skills
Country People

KountryLife.com - A Country Living Resource and Community

Menu on/off







news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

The place to talk with others about topics related to country life and rural living. Ask a question, help with an answer or just share some of your ideas and experiences.

news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

Postby wsmm » Wed Sep 01, 2021 8:08 am

Just saw on the news that they now expect social security to run out earlier than expected to the pandemic. If stead of passing all these ridiculous spending bills that the ** NO POLITICS PLEASE ** want to pass, why NOT repay the money they have borrowed from Social Security in the PAST!! From my understanding it is quite a substantial amount. Of course they have probably conveniently lost the records showing the amounts and when supposedly borrowed ( with no intention of paying back). They should be forced to pay it back with INTEREST!

Interested in what other people's views are on this issue.
wsmm
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 5:21 pm
Location: Mid-Michigan (Sunrise Side)

Re: news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

Postby smugpug » Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:10 am

We always seem to have money for welfare benefits and rewarding irresponsible behaviors and choices(and encouraging single-parent and fatherless homes)as Big Daddy government becomes the father. And it seems no matter how big the pool of welfare people grow, there's always lots of money for them, no matter how shiftless or irresponsible a person they are.
There always seems to be government money for unskilled illegal aliens and their families, and extended families, and so on. Even though there are immigration laws and legal ports of Entry, we seem to like to reward those who cross illegally, while those who wait patiently to come here legally are basically punished for their decency.
There always seems to be money for every meaningless social program out there to "save" those who seek to throw their lives away by their own free choices. I guess some in government think it's better to enable people in their irresponsible behavior and to let them know that no matter what self-destructive thing they engage in, there is always a safety net instead of negative consequences that you learn from.
The government seems to have little trouble giving money, weapons, and other things(that cost money)to our enemies and terr orist nations that we get nothing from.
The government seems to have no problem with finding money for extending unemployment benefits, even though just about every business in America is looking for workers.

It seems like in this country if you work hard, act responsibly, are God-fearing, thrifty, and a host of other good virtues, when you get old and need to retire and let a younger person take your place, the government seems like it wants to do all I can to make your life miserable instead of enjoyable. The constant threat that Social Security will end or be cut does not help old people out. Why can't the mentality that the government seems to have towards the poor, the irresponsible, the illegal, etc, be the same for old people?
smugpug
 
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

Postby smugpug » Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:29 am

Re publi cans rip Bi den administration for massive food stamps increase: 'Abusing its authority'Bi den's food-stamp expansion projected to cost $20B a year
By Megan Henney FOXBusiness
White House announces changes to SNAP, pandemic EBT benefits

National Economic Council director on Biden plan to increase federal food assistance

EXCLUSIVE: Re publi can lawmakers lambasted the Bi den administration on Wednesday over its giant food-stamp expansion, accusing the White House of "abusing its authority" by unilaterally approving the largest permanent increase to benefits in the program's history – a move that could cost taxpayers an additional $20 billion annually. 

In a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, Reps. James Comer of Kentucky and Don Bacon of Nebraska questioned the administration's "dramatic and indefinite" expansion of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which will be formally implemented in October. 

"Taxpayer-funded SNAP assists low-income Americans in meeting their nutrition need," the lawmakers wrote. "But based on recent actions, the Bi den Administration is abusing its authority and expanding SNAP—without congressional authorization."

Under the new rules, average benefits will rise more than 25% from pre-pandemic levels; the changes – which will be available to all 42 million SNAP beneficiaries – are intended to be permanent. The increase coincides with the end of a 15% boost to SNAP benefits installed by Congress last year as a pandemic relief measure.  

The White House has combined the aid boost with a major revision to the USDA's Thrifty Food Plan, which estimates the cost to purchase groceries for a family of four and determines how the government calculates benefits. The average monthly per-person benefits for recipients is expected to jump from $121 to $157.

But the Re publi can representatives noted the new maximum SNAP benefit for a family of four will be $835 per month, or about $10,020 per year. That's well above the $537 per month that the average four-person household in the U.S. spent on food in 2019. 

The White House "broke with longstanding precedent that the USDA only increase the cost of the plan in accordance with inflation," Comer and Bacon wrote, adding: "The Bi den Administration’s move reflects its continued willingness to ignore precedent and unilaterally expand government programs."

During an August call with reporters, Vilsack said the program expansion "will do a better job of providing healthy food for low-income families." But the G OP lawmakers argued there's little recent, comprehensive data that suggests bigger benefits lead to a healthier diet, and pointed to a 2018 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that showed low-income Americans who did not receive benefits ate healthier than those who did. 

"The Bi den Administration’s actions to dramatically expand SNAP—without guardrails and without congressional input—appears to be another example of its efforts to keep Americans dependent on government handouts," they wrote. 

The increase, which is projected to cost about $20 billion a year, does not need to be approved by Congress under a farm law — passed in 2018 and signed by former President ** Keep Politics out of the Kountry Life Forums Please ** — which directed the Agriculture Department to reexamine the Thrifty Food Plan.
smugpug
 
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

Postby smugpug » Wed Sep 01, 2021 10:50 am

Terr orist supporting, and brother marrying rep. Ilhan Omar wants to give everyone $1,200 a month free money, on top of basically free medical, and she wants to shut down the Minneapolis Police Department and start a whole new Department. Maybe she can get her friends from the "religion of Peace" in Afghanistan to come over and staff it, she certainly won't have to spend any money on weaponizing this department if they bring over the Afghans.
smugpug
 
Posts: 1263
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 7:18 pm

Re: news says Socail Security to run out earlier than expected

Postby Red Dave » Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:03 am

We've been hearing since the 1970's that Social Security was going to run out if money. For more than 50 years, politicians of both parties have been using the Social Security Trust Fund as their personal honey pot. I started planning back in the early 1980's, when IRA's and 401k's became available, to retire without depending on Social Security. I was surprised when I did retire that Social Security was still available after all we had been told about how it was going broke. I'm glad that it is there, but I still wish I could have invested on my own all the money that my employers and I put in it over the years. It would have been quite a nest egg.

I'm doubtful that the politicians will allow it to go broke. Look at all the trillions they printed to fund stimulus payouts. I expect they will do the same thing. The printing presses don't even have to roll anymore, it's all done with the stroke of a computer keyboard.
Red Dave
 
Posts: 5291
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:41 pm
Location: Lancaster County PA


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

cron


[Home] [Search]

Copyright © 1999-2013 KountryLife.com
All Rights Reserved
A Country Living Resource and Community