General Discussion

RB TexLa

(17,003 posts)

13. No one is going to advocate that.

Reply to CK_John (Original post)

Wed Feb 5, 2014, 09:35 PM

Feb 2014

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

64 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Whoever advocates to lower SocSec to 50 will win the nomination in 2016, but... [View all] CK_John Feb 2014 OP

Kick for the jobless. CK_John Feb 2014 #1

We won't have a nominee then... former9thward Feb 2014 #2

By then it will be the self evident solution. I'm worried Mitt will advocate it. CK_John Feb 2014 #3

Still flogging this? It ain't gonna happen. Throd Feb 2014 #4

It has to happen. CK_John Feb 2014 #7

I've seen you state your case several times, but I still don't see any merit. Throd Feb 2014 #9

You have the POTUS begging corp to hire long term unemployed, you have million going homeless CK_John Feb 2014 #10

OK - that covers the why leftynyc Feb 2014 #40

Would probably have to lift the cap and madville Feb 2014 #5

Triple wouldn't do it. joeglow3 Feb 2014 #29

So people can become irrelevant in this society earlier? frazzled Feb 2014 #6

We have millions begging the senate to renew jobless benefits why not give them a respectable CK_John Feb 2014 #8

Simple solution...keep working if you please. TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #11

Not so easy: when you redefine "retirement age" down ... frazzled Feb 2014 #12

That is already the way it is because 50 year olds have experience, obligations, and time in TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #32

May I ask how old you are? frazzled Feb 2014 #33

You may ask. I don't think 60 is ancient or anything, it seems right around the corner. TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #42

Will be 74 next month. CK_John Feb 2014 #44

So what? What you're argument boils down to "fuck the people already down, Egalitarian Thug Feb 2014 #14

Not what I said, Thugmeister frazzled Feb 2014 #22

No one is going to advocate that. RB TexLa Feb 2014 #13

That is the most incredibly stupid thing I've ever read on DU. Coyotl Feb 2014 #15

Then you were not here to see the poo-savers. AngryAmish Feb 2014 #16

That's actually a good idea Coyotl Feb 2014 #18

"And everyone would save their poo for collection." name not needed Feb 2014 #20

LOL ... great gif! Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #35

I have cataract surgery Fri morning but your vision is a lot worse. CK_John Feb 2014 #17

I don't agree with your political prediction, but TOTALLY agree with LOWERING Social Security age Matariki Feb 2014 #19

Pass the idea along to your Congress critters and to your favorite talking head. Let know CK_John Feb 2014 #21

Here's a clue: NOBODY will advocate lowering retirement to 50... brooklynite Feb 2014 #23

Because Mitt might or another GOP candidate who knows it is needed and needs to happen. CK_John Feb 2014 #25

1) Mitt's not running...2) what shred of analysis tells you a Republican would advocate this? brooklynite Feb 2014 #28

They want to win. CK_John Feb 2014 #45

How do we pay for this idea? taught_me_patience Feb 2014 #24

The same way we pay for a dacade of war. Money happens when needed. CK_John Feb 2014 #26

So, borrow from china? joeglow3 Feb 2014 #30

I think the age should be lowered, but not to 50 Renew Deal Feb 2014 #27

Don't let perfection get in the way of the possible. CK_John Feb 2014 #31

I'm actually more in line with between 58 and 62 but TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #34

I think 62 is doable ... again. Wasn't that the age originally ... ? Tuesday Afternoon Feb 2014 #37

Yes, add a bunch of retiress because TPP will displace them from the workforce, right? X_Digger Feb 2014 #36

Boring... CK_John Feb 2014 #46

Yes, your continued flogging of this bullshit is boring. n/t X_Digger Feb 2014 #56

Maybe. Provided we require schools to stop offering math classes in the meantime. lumberjack_jeff Feb 2014 #38

50 is too young. I take it you are still fairly young. SomethingFishy Feb 2014 #39

Being eligible for benefits and mandatory retirement aren't the same thing. TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #43

It would be choice, just it is now and you can also work while on SocSec. CK_John Feb 2014 #47

I predict that nobody will advocate that at all. MineralMan Feb 2014 #41

It will be the self event solution, I would like for us to get out ahead of it.. CK_John Feb 2014 #49

Actually, it's not self-evident at all. MineralMan Feb 2014 #50

If Sen Sanders is a real socialist, he should jump on this. But I fear he is just a gas bag. CK_John Feb 2014 #52

Is that what you fear? C'est pour rire. MineralMan Feb 2014 #53

That will never happen and personally I think 50 is too young. MoonRiver Feb 2014 #48

No, I think that is going in the wrong direction, sadoldgirl Feb 2014 #51

The wrong direction? Productivity is at all time high trending with unemployment. Ed Suspicious Feb 2014 #55

I know it's hopeless but: show me the math Proud Public Servant Feb 2014 #54

Don't expect a cogent answer. X_Digger Feb 2014 #57

How did we pay for over 10 yrs of war. At the national level money is a concept and will appear when CK_John Feb 2014 #60

So the candidate who says Proud Public Servant Feb 2014 #63

That's my opinion, The candidate who brings up reducing SS age to 50yr will win. CK_John Feb 2014 #64

What is the current SS retirement age? DURHAM D Feb 2014 #58

I took SS at 62., 65 for most but months have been aidded in the last couple yrs. CK_John Feb 2014 #61

After two days, you haven't convinced anyone, and nobody's convinced you... brooklynite Feb 2014 #59

I just had cataract surgery this morning and have a new outlook on this problem. CK_John Feb 2014 #62