Elizabeth Warren cornered by billionaire: "I shouldn't get Social Security"

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and billionaire Home Depot founder Ken Langone locked horns on Monday when the business magnate demanded that the lawmaker explain why he receives social security checks despite his $5.8 billion net worth.

"How do you rationalize giving me [sic] $3,000 a month check every month with all my wealth?" Langone asked the lawmaker in a Squawk Box interview. "Why don't you people have the courage to address entitlements as to what should no longer be an entitlement? I shouldn't get Social Security."

Langone, riding on a wave of apparent magnanimity, seems to be forgetting the fact that his social security checks are a far cry from government handouts. Social Security is in fact financed primarily by payroll taxes, which he claims he's paid for decades.

"Social security is… structured as an insurance policy," Warren explained to the Republican donor. "And you paid in year after year after year."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/elizabeth-warren-cornered-by-billionaire-i-shouldnt-get-social-security/ar-AAMFJy5

[brooklynite]

1. One of Howard Dean's campaign messages was: "Bill Gates deserves free health care"

The theory is: If you qualify people based on income, social net programs become something for “poor people”. You need to have buy in from everyone.

[Salviati]

2. Exactly.

It would be stupid tactically to open up SS to that line of attack in order to save what is undoubtedly a rounding error worth of it's budget.

[Skittles]

3. typical repuke thinking

he is free to either not take the payments, or to donate them to people truly in need.....but instead he uses it to try to TRASH the government

[brush]

6. Yes, as if SS is an entitlement, which it is not. It's earned.

And I want mine every month. Liz set him straight so adroitly he had to change the subject.

[Skittles]

7. it actually IS an entitlement

in the sense that we paid into Social Security and are ENTITLED to it

"entitlement" is defined as "the fact of having a right to something".......alas, it has been politicized to the point of being confused with a HANDOUT

[brush]

8. Best not to go there as that's not what republicans mean by entitlement.

It's a negative talking point to them. Let's just keep saying it's earned. And it is.

[Skittles]

11. an earned entitlement

I am sick of allowing repukes to hijack the meaning of words.

[WHITT]

4. Langone Is An Idiot

His proposal would turn SS from a universal program into a welfare program, and we all know what happens to welfare programs.

Langone has shown numerous times for years that he has no comprehension of basic economics. He is a perfect example of the Peter Principle.

https://www.nber.org/digest/may18/peter-principle-isnt-just-real-its-costly

[DURHAM D]

5. I know a couple of wealthy people who have never applied for SS.

Asshole could have made that decision.

[blueinredohio]

9. You don't get social security until you apply for it.

If he didn't think he should have it he shouldn't have applied.

[Igel]

18. That's what I thought.

But haven't thought about it for years (and won't have to think about it for a few more years), so perhaps it's been more automated. Can't see how that would work, but I've given up guessing about some things.

[Blue_true]

25. That is what I thought.

He can also go through a process called “un-retiring”, where he pays back SS funds that he has received and gets nothing unless he goes destitute and need to retire to get money (in that case, he only get the remaining years payout, he doesn’t get the years back that he was un-retired).

[Srkdqltr]

10. How does he get $3,000 a month?

[jimfields33]

14. He paid max for decades.

[Blue_true]

24. He maxed out for a long time.

Most people don’t max out. If the Cap is removed, no one would max out, regardless of how much they make.

For example, on current max out. A person making $1.5 million per year pays into the Social Security Trust fund for less than one month, then pays nothing after.

[rickyhall]

12. You should pay as much of a percentage of your income as we do? MR. $$

[Igel]

17. Which "we"?

I pay nothing for FICA. I'm in a state DCP. I'll still get OASDI because I paid FICA for a sufficient number of years.

If I were single and made $200k/year, I'd only be paying FICA on the first $100-something thousand of my income. Effective tax rate would drop. Never reach zero, of course; asymptotic to zero is the phrase for it, I guess. But since there's a max pay in, there's a maximum pay out.

[rickyhall]

21. OK you got me there. All I know is that there is a limit to payments that below what it should be.

[joetheman]

13. The real solution is to means test social security so that the wealthy get their money more slowly

like over a 50 year period. hehe

[Igel]

19. It's not a fixed amount.

My mother lived to be 90 and retired at 63, I think it was. She drew much more out of OASDI than she personally paid in, even adjusting for constant dollars.

[dsc]

20. they actually do get less than poorer people do

compared to what they pay in. The formula more heavily weighs the first dollars he paid in than the last ones. I make less than half the max for SS but get will get well over 2/3 of the 3k he is getting.

[CarlitosMMT]

15. Taxes cannot and do not "fund" any spending

The Trust Funds just record the amounts collected in the payroll taxes vs expenditures. They are not the ‘money’.
Congress has created a statutory link to taxes collected vs benefits paid. It is a self-constraint.

All federal govt spending is money creation. And all taxation is money deletion.

Alan Greenspan agreed with this under questioning from Paul Ryan.

The issue is whether we create real assets or stuff to buy with our social security dollars.

Operationally we could give 100 trizillion to Social Security retirees, but that would create inflation bc there is not 100 trizillion worth of stuff for retirees to buy.

Democrats need to understand MMT or they will fail their people and allow fascists into power. And acting like idiot Tea Party people which some Social Security advocates do is not the path towards provisioning real retirement benefits.

Read the Deficit Myth by Dr Stephanie Kelton as the House Budget Chairman, Rep Yarmuth, has told us to do.

If you need help working out details please message me.

[JHB]

16. He should get it... but he should also be paying more into it.

raise the cap.

[Blue_true]

23. He has the option of not taking SS.

He would still have to pay in. The choice to not receive it is a personal choice that a person makes, a rich person like him can easily make that choice. I believe that the choice is reversible to some extent, so if a person falls on hard times and need the money, they can retire and payments restart (although they don’t recover years that they chose not to receive it).

[Blue_true]

22. From what I understand, a person can "un-retire"

Then pay back all the Social Security that has been received as part of that process. That asshole gets $36,000 per year, even if he has gotten that for two decades, he only has to pay back $720,000, why doesn’t he just in-retire if he is so rich?

[MichMan]

26. He doesn't even have to do that. He can voluntarily write a check to the treasury for any amount

[Blue_true]

27. Yes, that too. nt