about the "catfood commision"; if Social Security takes a big hit

[hedgehog]

or is eliminated, just how are people supposed to afford cat food?

I don't see Social Security taking a big hit precisely because so many people are depending on Social Security right now. Pensions are gone and a lot of 401Ks are in the crapper, housing prices are upside down and a lot of people don't have or never had any type of savings or investments. My point is, you can eliminate Social Security, but how do you eliminate all the people who depend on it? Re-open the county poor houses?

[Xithras]

1. I don't know about yours, but my county is flat broke.

If you want to know what the world would REALLY look like, crack open the Grapes of Wrath.

[mmonk]

2. You pretend the people that need it don't exist or you believe

your decision to eliminate it will make their lives better or the country better or if you are some politicians, your expense account better.

[Jennicut]

3. It is not being eliminated outright. Only politicians that never want to be elected again would vote

for that. Honestly, realistically, what politicians do not want to be elected again? The majority of the public, even many of the supposedly the small govt. types do not want social security gone. A few dingbats in the Repub party and that is about it. Most people would be for lifting the caps. And maybe, though I bet not a majority, would be okay with lifting the retiring age, though that presents huge problems as there are no jobs right now for younger workers let alone those 65 to 70!

[NoNothing]

4. Let's dial down the FUD

"Eliminating social security" is not and never will be a serious consideration. Even the most radical proposals like Paul Ryan's do not change anything for anyone 55 or above.

[Subdivisions]

15. LOL... n/t

[BrklynLiberal]

5. KnR for later

[daleanime]

6. Ask the people who's unemployment has run out..

:banghead:

[hedgehog]

9. I don't understand that either - unemployment is barely enough to let you

pay one bill - the mortgage or the utility bill - maybe. In a dual income family that has one worker unemployed, unemployment allows you do go into debt slowly. If both workers are jobless, I don't know what happens. I think a lot of states make it very hard to go on public assistance or even to get food stamps as long as you have any assets to sell.

So, if you have unemployment coming in, you're sinking slowly.

Now, unemployment stops, it stops for a lot of people in a community - , the safety net is in tatters - I expect a missing white woman story to dominate the headlines any minute now!

[doc03]

10. I think the holdup with the unemployment extension

is about one issue "extending the Bush tax cuts". When the Democrats cave in on that if they haven't already you will get the unemployment extended.

[peace frog]

7. Looks like us old-timers

will be switching from canned to dry cat chow-chow-chow. MMM-MMM-Good!

[hedgehog]

8. Well, I guess that answers my husband's question about what

will happen to the people already eating cat food!

[FBI_Un_Sub]

11. Not yet

Think--

• Heller v. District of Columbia,
  
• McDonald v. Chicago

We have our pitchforks and we are the "Teabaggers of the LEFT

[Greyhound]

12. They simply don't care. They believe themselves to be protected by walls and thugs.

:kick: & R

[jwirr]

13. I do not think they want to get rid of social security totally however,

they do want to cut the amount future claimants would collect. I am against this. What I would like is to see the caps taken off completely. There is another thing that could be done but it is totally controversial: turn it into a means tested program - everyone pays in but only those who need it for retirement can collect. The problems with that is that left up to the congress they will make the level of eligibility too low and the rich will yell their heads off because they had to pay for something they cannot collect on. Oh, well - it will never be done anyhow. Just wondering what others here on DU would think of this? Please be gentle.

[hedgehog]

14. I'm all for what you suggest - the problem is selling it. FDR

got a wealth redistribution program through by camouflaging it as a government guaranteed savings program. I think we need the wealth redistribution or else our entire economy seizes up. The problem is convincing people that some layabout isn't going to get their hard earned money!

[Liberal In Texas]

16. I'm sure the mega churches will start soup kitchens and bread lines for

all the people will lose their jobs, SS, pensions, 401Ks....etc.

[peace frog]

17. Not unless each beggar with a tin cup

declares he or she has accepted Jayzus as his or her personal savior, becomes born again, baptized and wintnessed before the entire congregation, etc.

On second thought, I'd rather dumpster-dive. Who's joining me? :hi: