this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
2 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
2796 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The Republican nominee-in-waiting said that “there’s a lot you can do in terms of cutting” when pressed on CNBC about the solvency of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump opened the door Monday to “cutting” spending under Social Security and Medicare, drawing swift pushback from President Joe Biden and elevating a key policy battle in the 2024 election.

Phoning into CNBC's "Squawk Box," Trump was pressed on how he plans to resolve the long-term solvency problems of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

“So first of all, there is a lot you can do in terms of entitlements, in terms of cutting,” Trump responded. “And in terms of, also, the theft and the bad management of entitlements — tremendous bad management of entitlements — there’s tremendous amounts of things and numbers of things you can do.”

top 17 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

US worker: pays into Social Security with every hour of labor

CNBC: how do we rich people claw back these “entitlements”?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

If social security is cut, can I get all the money I put into it back? Because I'd have a sizeable retirement rather than losing all that money to the ether.

Fucking stupid.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Best we can do is a tax break to corporations.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If social security is cut, can I get all the money I put into it back?

The social security cut will be coupled with a tax cut. And you'll be told to invest the difference in the stock market

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The social security cut will be coupled with a tax cut for the rich. And you'll be told to just be grateful the "job creators" blessed you with technically-slightly-better-than-slave wages you can spend renting your home from them

FTFY

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

The social security cut will be coupled with a tax cut for the rich

Nah, Republicans aren't quite that stupid. They'll throw out a $200 increase to the child tax credit for six months or an increase in the standard deduction. Everyone (who isn't already zeroed out by the last round of tax cuts) will get a taste.

And you’ll be told to just be grateful the “job creators” blessed you with technically-slightly-better-than-slave wages you can spend renting your home from them

This record low unemployment is, unironically, the right-wing technocrat's wet dream. Everybody kicking and clawing for a seat at the table in a market that's very easy to enter and very unsteady to climb. It really is the War Of All Against All out there. Survival of the ~~Whitest~~ Fittest. Real Social Darwinism Hours.

You, too can gamble on Bitcoins / Sports Betting, win big, and pull together enough money to become a landlord, so you can tell the next generation to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.

Or gamble and lose and just fucking die, to thereby decrease the surplus population.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

You know who’s really going to understand retirement? The rich guy who inherited millions from his daddy and famously likes to stiff the working class folks he hires.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Telling your core voting block you're gonna take money away from them is a bold strategy.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

It's the Dan Crenshaw Gambit.

"We need to cut social security for everyone under 55 so we can keep it going for everyone over 55".

And then let them fight.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (2 children)

That makes me think of the two pro Trump ladies on the Channel 5 video that were complaining about social security being too low. I'm sure their reaction will be "But it won't affect me, only cheaters!"

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I used to love Channel 5 and Andrew but haven't been able to bring myself to watch since any of the allegations against him came out.

Has he made any sort of indication that he has learned and changed from that experience or has it just been business as normal since he started making content again?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, he made a statement I think on Twitter or somewhere apologizing and recognizing his wrongdoing. Whether it was sincere or not, I dunno

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

What were the allegations?

Edit: eww, read his wiki

In January 2023, two women posted TikTok videos accusing Callaghan of trying to pressure them into having sex with him. A reporter at The Stranger then interviewed two other women who alleged that Callaghan tried to pressure them into having sex with him and made them uncomfortable. On January 12, his legal representative responded to the allegations in a statement released to Variety, saying in part: "Conversations about pressure and consent are extremely important and Andrew wants to have these conversations, so he can continue to learn and grow. While every dynamic is open to interpretation and proper communication is critical from all those involved, repeated requests for money should not be part of these conversations."

On January 15, Callaghan responded to the allegations in a YouTube video, stating that some of the allegations about him are "not true" or "missing important contextual information" but apologizing for his behavior and revealing plans to attend therapy and Alcoholics Anonymous. On February 28, The Stranger published an additional story with two more women accusing Callaghan of sexual assault and coercion that took place at Loyola University in 2017. Callaghan's legal representative said, "Andrew has taken accountability for his role in other situations and will be the first to admit his shortcomings; however, these accusations go further and are completely without merit. Andrew will utilize every option he has in order to clear his name and protect his reputation."

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

Not invalidating anyone's experience, I'm just curious on the details. One person's drunk harassment....

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I've seen plenty of conservatives insist that investments pay back better than SS. Therefore, all retirement should be privatized and invested in the stock market.

I've never really seen why they are wro- 40% market dip OH SHIT OH FUCK OH NO!

[–] [email protected] 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, you're highly reliant on your personal ability to control yourself and actually invest that money without ever taking it out AND investing it right so your plan doesn't blow up in your face just at you're about to retire.

So a universal system is better.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 8 months ago

Okay, but here me out. What if we privatized the gains and just socialized the losses?