Try the political quiz

523 Replies

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs

No, this will disadvantage low income seniors whose life expectancy is lower than wealthier seniors

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...6yrs

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs

Yes, but I would prefer to privatize it instead

 @JonBSimConstitutionfrom Kentucky  agreed…5mos

Yes, but I would prefer to privatize it instead

The gov't shouldn't be involved in retirement funds, it's outside their role.

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...6yrs

No, eliminate the income cap on taxable earnings and stop spending current funds on other programs instead

@ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...8yrs

@48RBMZSfrom Maryland  answered…2yrs

NO, and we should transition Social Security funds into privately managed retirement accounts and away from congressional access and IOU's. Social Security withdrawal should be optional so that those who don't need it are not forced to take it, instead they should receive a tax credit for each year that they don't take it.

@5L4VXDNfrom Ohio  answered…2yrs

The retirement age should be based on the health of the senior in question. The healthier the senior, the retirement age should be raised. It should not be raised for seniors who are not healthy.

@48PQCWTfrom Florida  answered…2yrs

The social security program no longer functions as was intended. It was suppose to be a safety net for those whose retirement plans failed. Now people are using it as their retirement plan. They should eliminate it.

@5B6J9Z4from Washington  answered…2yrs

Stop allowing people to collect at age 62. They have stopped paying in at a younger age and this further depletes money from social security. There are too many young retirees

@48MPJZTfrom Florida  answered…2yrs

Social security funds should be distributed at an age based on a formula that accounts for increased age of life expectancy. Future Options should exist not to pay social security and rather invest that money into a personal retirement fund or pay a tax on funds if you choose to cash them in ahead of scheduled retirement age. Not the government's job to make sure there is money for people to retire with, that responsibility should fall to each individual citizen

@48RLWN9from Virginia  answered…2yrs

Social Security was not intended to be a retirement program. Give every child at birth an account worth $5,000 and let it grow toward a retirement nest egg. Do NOT allow the government to be able to spend that money. Taxes would be paid on the original $5,000 when the senior retires and at a reasonable tax rate.

@48QYZ62from Minnesota  answered…2yrs

No - many people are finding it difficult to continue physical labor type work even to the existing retirement age. Raising the retirement age will result in many more people filing for disability instead.

@487BQ3Tfrom North Carolina  answered…2yrs

Social security is a clear and perfect example of a ponzi scheme. This program should be phased out as quickly as possible and retirement planning should be up to the individual. This will increase financial literacy and further promote a strong capitalist marketplace.

@4YMCK9Rfrom California  answered…2yrs

Yes, only if their health is taken into consideration. For those who are not as healthy leave it. For those who are healthy raise it.

@4Z6FCFBfrom New Jersey  answered…2yrs

No, but SS should not be provided if annual income exceeds $75000.00 per year.

@48QD74Hfrom Virginia  answered…2yrs

No, not all at once, since it will take time to convince employers that those over 65 are employable. We have a serious age prejudice and discrimination in corporations, and need to enforce better age discrimination laws before we raise the retirement age; otherwise we simply create a bigger poverty stricken group, sooner.

@48WD9BSfrom California  answered…2yrs

You shouldn't be able to collect social security while still working in your previous career as it is supposed to be for retirement

@48MNYMDfrom Virginia  answered…2yrs

No, this will force companies, schools, and other work places to continue to employ workers who are possibly not as able or as interested in doing their work. Many places don't want employees who are only there for a paycheck.

@5B46NT8from Virginia  answered…2yrs

@48MD684from Texas  answered…2yrs

Regardless, social security should be eliminated because it is an unconstitutional transfer of wealth.

@4Z6FCX2from Louisiana  answered…2yrs

Yes, but only for those currently under age 55. The retirement age for anyone 55 or older should NOT be raised.

@5L56L57from Texas  answered…2yrs

No, living longer and healthier does not mean still able to perform work especially at the age of 70

@48S5J3Hfrom Pennsylvania  answered…2yrs

No, people worked a good bit of their lives keeping the country moving during their workable years. They should be allowed to retire while the Quality of life is still advantage0us. Living longer does not mean having a good quality of life.

@98T4DFK from North Carolina answered…1wk

@98NY4SJ from California answered…3wks

@98NKW2Z from Ohio answered…3wks

I say. You retire when you feel that you have worked long enough that you think you will be able to retire and keep afloat on your own.

@98MSLKY from Mississippi answered…3wks

I think in order to balance the budget Social Security reform is needed it will probably manifest as raising the age, raising the tax, and changing how the system works.

@98L3K26 from Texas answered…3wks

@98KDWJL from Massachusetts answered…4wks

No and decrease funding for Social Security and redirect some of the funding to a universal basic income program.

@Deanfrom Colorado  answered…4wks

@987ZCKBDemocrat from Utah answered…2mos

I think you should be able to get it earlier, but then you would just get a little less, the earlier you took it.

@983JVHZ from Kansas answered…2mos

Raise it for higher income seniors, keep it as is for lower income seniors

@979LZZ6  from Kansas commented…2mos

Why..? If anything, wouldn't it be better to do the inverse: keep the same for high-income and lower it for low-income..?

@97ZW7SD from Kansas answered…2mos

@7YS3KJPIndependent from Arizona answered…2mos

No - though people are living longer, they are not living better, and increasing the age might disadvantage lower-income seniors.

@97WN7XG from Florida answered…2mos

@97N9Y2KIndependence from Georgia answered…3mos

@97KS7QQ from Arizona answered…3mos

Yes, but grandfather in current citizens and have the law not take effect for an extended period of time.

@97F4V4K from Illinois answered…3mos

No, end social security, and make people responsible for their own finances.


The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 


Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...