Penalizing Families...a New Low For Radical Conservatives

[franklinstower]

Just speaking of myself.
I'm average dude
working at average job
getting the average pay
and I'm far from "not living a life of dignity"

The people in the very bottom already get assistance from the government.

For me it comes down to the entry level jobs and in my opinion, entry level work was never designed to support a family. That's what Society wants now.

What do you do? How much money do you make? How many kids do you have? Do you own a home or rent? Are you a one or two income home. Can you put your kids into college when they come of age?

 

[franklinstower]

Double post.

 

[panamaican]

Sure but it’s actually quite a pathetic way to say they are doing something.

SS exists becuase we don’t or can’t save enough to prevent poverty in the elderly. The government should not be providing ways to “borrow” against these forced savings, they should be setting up real maternity support and paying for it through taxes.

No argument that it's probably the shittiest way to deal with maternity leave. You want to take off to raise your kid? Give up some of your retirement. :sniper:

But when measured against doing nothing, well....

 

[cincymma79]

A majority of Americans do go without that stuff. The average American isnt even able to handle a $500 financial emergency. Stop living in your imaginary 1950s troll world.

Be an adult
If you can’t raise 500 you are horribly irresponsible
That’s oknwhen you’re 20

 

[Big Nasty Edison]

Be an adult
If you can’t raise 500 you are horribly irresponsible
That’s oknwhen you’re 20

Ok please let all your fellow conservative voting blue collar working class voters know that then. Because they probably make up a majority of that statistic, since I hear so much that they vote based on jobs (allegedly).

 

[Fawlty]

Hat's off, this is at least one of the more clever attempts to rob Social Security that I've seen in a while.

 

[IReallyDoTrainUFC]

By applying the "check cashing and car title loan" principle to parenthood, the GOP is now proposing that people rob themselves of the social security they may need in the future by using it do what ever parent ought to be able to do - stay home with your newborn.

Jesus Christ, just start wearing Russian Letterman Jackets and propose a bill to turn the U.S. into an official member of the "Axis of Evil".

---------------------------------

Rubio's paid family leave bill would have serious Social Security implications
Senator Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) made waves this month by introducing a bill that would allow parents to use Social Security benefits to pay for new-parent leave.

According to a new analysis from the Urban Institute, a Washington, D.C., think tank, Rubio’s Economic Security for New Parents Act would, in fact, provide meaningful help to new parents and would recoup its costs in the long term.

But while this may not cost the government in the long term (at least in theory), it does come at a cost to individuals that would compound over time. The program would borrow from the Treasury in the short term running a deficit, but it would recoup costs and break even fully by raising the Social Security full retirement age for participants by “six months for each paid leave lasting two or more months” every time they take a leave.

This would cut average lifetime retirement benefits by 3.2% each time a parent took a leave, the Urban Institute found, and “participants who took three two-month paid leaves would forfeit one-tenth of their lifetime Social Security retirement benefits.”

The increases in the retirement age would cost the median Social Security beneficiary $910 annually.

The way Rubio’s system works is people essentially borrow against future Social Security payments. (The payment would be 300% of a monthly Social Security disability benefit, which would replace four-fifths of a missing paycheck for a two-month leave.)

Later on, the person starts paying them back when they first take Social Security. There would be interest: That’s why a two-month leave would balloon into a six-month retirement age delay. The analysis gives an example:

A 29-year-old making $40,000 a year who retires at 67 would sacrifice around $17,550 for a $4,757 payment during the leave. This is about four times the amount borrowed.

So how many people might actually participate? The Urban Institute looked to data from California’s paid family leave program to find an estimate. “Based on California’s experience, we estimate a 33% overall take-up rate for new eligible parents in our intermediate scenario,” the report said.

This may be lower, it cautioned, as California does not require such a high cost for its program as a raised retirement age, making estimates challenging and putting a low-use scenario as low as 24%.

Concerns about retirement
“As concerns intensify about financial security at older ages, programs that divert resources from retirement merit special scrutiny,” the paper’s authors wrote.

Though Social Security has played a vital role in making sure senior citizens are taken care as they age, any weakening of its finances is problematic problem, especially since many workers retire earlier than expected, may not have other retirement savings, or may have chronic conditions and disabilities.

The retirement age move would also hit people who want to take Social Security on the early side, as the early Social Security age would change as well. (The earliest a person can start taking Social Security is 62.) “Having to delay Social Security retirement benefit take-up can create financial hardships for some older adults,” the report says. “Three-quarters of employed adults ages 51 to 55 develop a work disability or new chronic condition or lose their job by age 62, limiting their ability to work longer.”

The think tank ultimately notes the strong case for paid leave for new parents — as is the case in “every other developed nation,” it says — but that Social Security may not be the best way given the potential retirement crisis it could precipitate and the fact that it could cause Social Security to turn into a “forced savings program.”

“Should we ask parents to self-finance investments in the next generation by borrowing from their retirement,” the authors muse, “or should we assume greater collective responsibility, as other high-income nations do?”

Here's an idea: Don't steal from people to begin with to pay for these bankrupt entitlement programs, and then they would have thousands and thousands of dollars to spend for as much time off as they need.

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

"Herr derr we dont like immigrants but if you want to have paid maternity leave like every other first world nation you have to give up your Social Security...."

then later

"Why arent Americans having more kids!!!!!"
from the same retards.

 

[SBJJ]

No argument that it's probably the shittiest way to deal with maternity leave. You want to take off to raise your kid? Give up some of your retirement. :sniper:

But when measured against doing nothing, well....

The mother being home with the child might actually save the family more money than they lose. Child less likely to cost them down the road

The more I think about it. The more I actually like the idea with some tweaking

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

What do you do? How much money do you make? How many kids do you have? Do you own a home or rent? Are you a one or two income home. Can you put your kids into college when they come of age?

Claims adjuster for auto insurance
2 kids
Own
Two incomes both making average income.
I do not have money saved for their college.

7 inches

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

Hat's off, this is at least one of the more clever attempts to rob Social Security that I've seen in a while.

I may be looking at this the wrong way..and I'm not supporting this.
but if I borrow $100 (for example)out of Social Security now . In the end I'm going to owe Social Security *150.

In the long run it would seem to impact the consumer more than the Social Security account

*reflects inflation

 

[Fugazy]

Edit: It’s not govt’s job to pay you

How long are you gonna be on yellows man?

 

[Fugazy]

Rubio needs uppercuts for this.

 

[Ripskater]

How long are you gonna be on yellows man?

I don't know. I think I've got the max. It's been 3 weeks 1 day since I got these.

 

[WTF2008]

I may be looking at this the wrong way..and I'm not supporting this.
but if I borrow $100 (for example)out of Social Security now . In the end I'm going to owe Social Security *150.

In the long run it would seem to impact the consumer more than the Social Security account

*reflects inflation

You're assuming that people actually pay it back.

 

[Fugazy]

Sure but it’s actually quite a pathetic way to say they are doing something.

SS exists becuase we don’t or can’t save enough to prevent poverty in the elderly. The government should not be providing ways to “borrow” against these forced savings, they should be setting up real maternity support and paying for it through taxes.

If the govt is gonna do it, this would be the right way.

 

[gassius_clay]

Ok please let all your fellow conservative voting blue collar working class voters know that then. Because they probably make up a majority of that statistic, since I hear so much that they vote based on jobs (allegedly).

LOL sure.

 

[Gandhi]

If the govt is gonna do it, this would be the right way.

Taking an advance on one social program to pay for another, it’s a shell game that will hurt the people that most need it.

 

[WTF2008]

Sure but it’s actually quite a pathetic way to say they are doing something.

SS exists becuase we don’t or can’t save enough to prevent poverty in the elderly. The government should not be providing ways to “borrow” against these forced savings, they should be setting up real maternity support and paying for it through taxes.

It's literally their money. They're not "borrowing" anything and definitely shouldn't be charged for it. If you can't afford kids, don't have kids.

 

[Fugazy]

Taking an advance on one social program to pay for another, it’s a shell game that will hurt the people that most need it.

I was agreeing with your last sentence. I guess I wasnt clear.