YES! Letting older workers retire opens up jobs for younger people.
40%
YES! Americans should be able to retire without living in poverty.
60%
Comments
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
Images of Thom
From Cracking the Code:
"Thom Hartmann ought to be bronzed. His new book sets off from the same high plane as the last and offers explicit tools and how-to advice that will allow you to see, hear, and feel propaganda when it's directed at you and use the same techniques to refute it. His book would make a deaf-mute a better communicator. I want him on my reading table every day, and if you try one of his books, so will you."
From The Thom Hartmann Reader:
"Right through the worst of the Bush years and into the present, Thom Hartmann has been one of the very few voices constantly willing to tell the truth. Rank him up there with Jon Stewart, Bill Moyers, and Paul Krugman for having the sheer persistent courage of his convictions."
From Screwed:
"Hartmann speaks with the straight talking clarity and brilliance of a modern day Tom Paine as he exposes the intentional and systematic destruction of America’s middle class by an alliance of political con artists and outlines a program to restore it. This is Hartmann at his best. Essential reading for those interested in restoring the institution that made America the envy of the world."
I don't like either choice. My vote is NO. Social Security (SS) was NEVER meant to support a person in retirement. It was meant to supplement a person's pension. What SS needs to do is to raise the taxing limit.....I think taxing the first $500,000 of a person's income is in order rather than the present superficial $110,000 limit. This would secure SS into infinitum for the time being.
I agree to lifting the CAP but with 2 conditions
1- FIrst It should be done ONLY on the EMPLOYEE side right now both the Employer and Employee contribute
it is too burdensome for EMployer to raise theit share which should remain AS IS
2- I think we have to calculate the LEVEL to which we want to RAISE the CAP
500,000 is TOO MUCH.. i think i heard 200 K might do the trick
>>>>>>>>> It is a big lie to say that S S will not be there for those under 35 THIS BIG lie has been spread by GOP who want to PRIVATIZE S S
Tpday ON NPR at about 2.17 pm A lady high up in Social Security ??? came and said SS will be there right now for 80 years .......
SHE EVEN mentioned something VERY IMPORTANT AND SINISTER........NPR said that the FINANCIAL ADVISORS when planning tell their STUPID CUSTOMERS a LIE about SS that WE DO NOT EVEN CONSIDER Social Security being there for YOU so he asked her and she said NO NO
OF COURSE as a LESS Stupid Person , i know exactly why they are doing this . PRIVATIZATION will RUIN S Security. They want the MONEY to go to WALL Street
Now i am not ANTI WALL Street........but LYING abt S. S is CRIMINAL .
I also have a SOLUTION ready to go.
Yes they should expand SSI . If Wallstrret and the Bush Admin. Hadn't made it possible for them to run off with all of our retirement I wouldn't feel so stongly about it as along as we kept up with the standard of living. But we have not! Many baby boomers worked all their lives for their retirement just to have half if not more taken from them. They will never be able to catch up to live a comfortable life astheyhad planned. Also The Gov't needs to keep their fingers out of it so it can grow as originally intended and not be peacemealed to help other programs. !!!
They should expand Social Security, in face benefits should be double, if not triple what they are, workers should also have the option to retire at 55 if they choose, it would open up thejob matket as well for younger workers, most europeans can retire in their 50's, or age 60.