Why Republicans want to abolish social security

[vlyons]

During your working life, you pay 6.2% of your income up to a limit $137,000. Your employer also pays a matching 6.2%. It is that matching 6.2% or $8537 possible max that Republicans deeply resent shelling out for your retirement security.

The old canard about SSI being creeping socialism is -- Yeah? Well so what?

[Ritabert]

1. Bingo!

That's their real motive. They can duck all other taxes.

[XanaDUer2]

2. RWers are fine receiving their socialism

Fuck them. They're too stupid or racist or both to realize how shitty their party is and wants to screw them over. If it was just them, fine, they screw the rest of us

[Hotler]

3. It's about stealing the money, your money and forcing it

into unsafe investments such as Wall St.. It is always about money.

[Captain Zero]

4. Right they might let employers have their 6.2 % back

But they are going to divert that revenue stream from employees into financial instruments that they can Rob Blind. It's all about the REVENUE STREAM. They want it.

[MarcA]

6. And keeping the rest of us in debt, poverty and serfdom. n/t

[vlyons]

10. Yes they think we should fund our own retirement with their

retirements investment products that they will happily manage for us for a fee.

[njhoneybadger]

5. The thing is most tRump voters don't know or believe Republicans want to kill Social Security.

These people are very very low information

[TheFarseer]

7. He claims he is better than Biden

On saving SS, all while trying to kill SS. Mind boggling.

[ooky]

13. They don't talk about SS (or healthcare anymore) on Fox News.

They blow right by their politicians lies about SS and health care and move on to other stuff. Today has been the Durham investigation, how "Biden and Harris approve of 'riots' in the streets", and SCOTUS. Their new, repetitive talking point this weekend is its perfectly fine to vote on a new SCOTUS justice in an election year "if the President and Senate majority are of the same party" making up the rules as they go. Its repeated several times an hour. And their sheep believe all this poop, because they never watch anything else. They have been propagandized beyond belief.

[LakeArenal]

8. Have they "borrowed" from the fund over the years

Isn’t that part of the reason it’s in trouble?

[vlyons]

11. Yes and the $137,700 income limit is riduculous

It should be raised to $400,000 or even higher. $2 mil seems about right, or $124,000 each from employee and employer.

[Mike 03]

9. This is very clarifying.

I had all sorts of theories that weren't close in precision and believability to your statement.

Kicking

[Hortensis]

12. That for sure, but hard-core cons have always been against

it due to conservative notions about the corrupting effects of government programs, and of course the resentment of many voters that the benefits were available to everyone, not just those "like them."

Only those SS was meant for and who needed it came around to acceptance. The rest have been trying to destroy it since inception and were often blatantly public about it. RW recipients have been voting them into power for over 8 decades, apparently always secretly believing we'd always be able to save it for them.

Btw, when the Repubs won control of both houses in the 1994 midterms, both Bob Dole and Newt Gingrich FIRST THING, while celebrating with press conferences on the steps of the Capitol and being asked what they would do now, said maybe they'd repeal Social Security. They said it 3 times that I heard, separately and together. Turns out they couldn't then. But now, after 85 years of this as a prime goal and passionate hate, they're far closer than they've ever been.

As I congratulated a very stupid, hard-core trumpster neighbor who was complaining that her Medicare didn't pay enough. Congratulated her on her success in that also.

[no_hypocrisy]

14. More than that.

Social Security helps keep poverty in abeyance for seniors and the disabled. Without those funds, this demographic would have no choice but to depend upon their families, who likely don't have those assets available -- or they go begging for charity at "the Church," which will demand subjugation to their dogma in order to eat, to get medicine, perhaps a place to live. Nothing is for free.

[NBachers]

15. They're still butthurt about all the good Franklin D. Roosevelt accomplished. They're vicious shits.

[JHB]

16. It's a successful government program, and that makes it an abomination in their eyes

Successful, popular programs are practical examples that argue for more.

But that goes directly against Conservatively Correct policy, so no matter what it does on a practical level, hi has to be eliminated.

Conservatism is the original "Cancel Culture."