Home | About | Donate

Trump Administration Considering 'Back-Door Way' to Cut Social Security


Trump Administration Considering 'Back-Door Way' to Cut Social Security

Deirdre Fulton, staff writer

President Donald Trump, who campaigned on a promise not to cut Social Security, is reportedly considering a plan to eliminate much of the payroll tax that funds the critical safety net program.

According to the Associated Press on Monday, the proposal is being floated as the Trump administration goes "back to the drawing board in a search for Republican consensus behind legislation to overhaul the U.S. tax system."


Let's fund Social Security out of general revenues and find "a new dedicated funding source" for the Pentagon.


These Trump people and the Republicans are fools. This proposal would take any funding by employers out of the SS funds, replace it by an effective sales tax disproportionately paid for by the middle class and poor, and otherwise screw everyone. If the Republicans actually propose this it will kill them in 2018 and for the next eight years.
The reason the ACA replacement went down to defeat is that it was obviously going to really negatively affect tens of millions of voters. I don't think Trump or the Reps can possibly survive another proposal like this.
I suspect the Republicans think the American public are fools and that they can get them to agree to destroying their own benefits. I think when it comes to pocket book issues the American public is pretty smart.


The VAT is used by the most left-leaning European countries with highest wealth equality and quality of life ratings. It is not regressive if basic living necessities are exempt from it. This proposal will likely not be that kind of VAT though...


Wikipedia keeps a list of "frivolous political parties". Interesting to take Drumph at face value as 'reality TV' empresario and take the 'frivolous' and see it as a 'party' 24/7/365. The big top 3 ring travelling medicine show, snake oil included, as much as the market will bear on its spiral into dustbin of history. And last but not least in the vein of Jamie Diamond, derivatives parasite supreme, Drumph the walking talking king of bankruptcy. So familiar with it that he and Romney suck parallel tracts for all they are worth.

Know local, support organic farmers and regional networks


Yes, the wealthiest 1% hold about $40 trillion in wealth and the wealthiest 0.1% hold about $20 trillion of that.

A annual tax of 1% on the wealth of the wealthiest 1% would raise $400 billion next year and an additional tax of 1% (total 2%) on the wealthiest 0.1% would raise another $200 billion. That $600 billion is about what the defense budget is running now.

Per Pikkety and Saez, the wealth of this group has grown at 6% compounded annually since 1980 so they should continue to get even wealthier after the wealth tax (just not as fast as before).


Are they kidding? What kind of fools get crushed by the citizen outcry against the ACA and then come right back and want to double down against Social Security. Are they really that stupid? (rhetorical question). Social Security is WAY more popular than the ACA could ever dream to be. SMDH


They are delusional. They really think this country is going to accept this BS and just do nothing? They didn't learn from the health insurance debacle that they can't just pull this off and be done. What a bunch of losers and idiots.


This shows how oblivious ideologues are to their fellow citizens, and the effects of their generally stupid self serving short sighted ideas. If they think the seniors of this country, who are consistent voters, are going to allow themselves to be shafted by some slimy politicians, they are cruising for a rude awakening.


I think we who protest what is happening need to approach things differently. The news happens and we all get out there with our opinions and our half assed facts and assumptions and basically deliver on what we do not really know.what we are talking about . We express the effects of the problem but never the the cause. I know you will disagree but joining in on the conversation on its terms is in fact dividing and separating your opinion from those of others and thus complying with the Ruling Elite's desire to keep us busy while they get up to unpleasant or subversive activities. Cutting Social Security does injury to those who need it. Cutting regulations hurts people, cutting meals on wheels is an act of barbarism with the intention to kil. giving money to the rich or enlarging the military against the welfare of the population is a violence is hurtful and nasty . We all rush to argue with the hurtful aggressor on their terms their way arguing their facts, using the antithesis of their argument to make our "enlightened" suggestion or critique.
This is like pouring good thinking down the drain after bad. let me suggest we concentrate on the evil of the hurtful act and call out the purveyor of the evil as a disgusting rotten individual.
Presently everything Trump is doing and his Administration is doing is against the welfare of the nation. Lets not join them as they explain their policies. lets not argue lets just start to call them out as psychopathic, antisocial and against people to the point of killing them for profit. Overtime we engage in as a critic we are forgetting the plain awful truth. They are hurting and killing us
Trump believes in brandding so lets brand him as a hurtful killer as a poisoner, Every foul policy he comes up with we think about and discuss The guy hurts people thats his bag Stay oon how he doesn't careshow he has no compassion no empathy and undermine his every breath.


Automation and computerization has meant the elimination of many jobs, much more than has been lost to overseas labor. The payroll tax that funds SS and Medicare are paid by both emplyees and employers. If the robots and computeres used in business that replace workers were taxed as workers then SS would be solvent essentially the foreseeable future. Such a plan would also make converting to automation and computerization less attractive to employers since they couldn't avoid the payroll taxes. Solves the problem of worker to retiree ratio.
Or as has been suggested by sgbruns SS could be funded from the general budget as was anticipated when SS was instituted in the 30s when there was no difference in taxation between earned and unearned income (capital gains) for taxation purposes.
The 1% of the 1% never sleep or I should say their minions never sleep. SS security was entirely separate from the general budget until 1964 when LBJ and Congress moved its revenues into the general fund to hide the deficit caused by Vietnam. Then Reagan doubled the tax and reduced taxes on the wealthy. Neat way to hide a burgeoning deficit. Immediately the taxes on the working poor increased such that they were paying and now pay more in SS and Medicare than in income tax. Oliglopoly works for a few.


Seeing how the SCOTUS decided that corporations are people, corporations need to pay into Social Security and Medicare like the rest of us do. Yes, they currently are paying the employer share for their employees, but they need to pay it on behalf of their corporations as well.


I think the fact that republicans chose or allowed Trump to be their standard bearer proves at least half or more of the population are stupid ignorant fools.


I disagree. People have been voting against themselves for many years. Repub voters will vote for anything or anybody talking tax-cuts whether or not it is good for them. We knew what Trump would do before he was elected.


May the diabolical demagogue be "back-doored" with a pound or two of gravel and set adrift while strapped down on top of a garbage scow/barge hauling all manner of excrement out to sea never to be seen or heard from again. How can one tell if the tyrant is lying?...His lips are moving (or fingers flying on Twitter).

Everyday the monster vomits more and more ruinous vitriole and heinous hyperbole and laughs like a madman with his new-found seemingly unlimited power.


No. Let's not forget that less than half of voting age people did not vote because they were either indifferent to, or hated, one or the other candidates. Then remember that less than half of those who voted, voted for rump. I don't buy into the most Americans are idiots narrative. Half may be indifferent, but I think that may change given the insane idiot now in the White House.


You forgot self-serving and greedy....


Love this sentence. A fine example of the English language at its best! rump wouldn't even know what half those words mean.


ALL the Republicans ever think about is tax cuts. Their solution to anything is another tax cut for the highly wealthy. They only play one tune -- tax cuts. We have to opposed this, since 67% or so of retired citizens live entirely on their Social Security benefit.


Unless one was a Trump voter.