Raise the retirement age? So people will sit in jobs and keep younger people unemployed? Means test is needed!. How about not trying to live forever with no meaningful purpose except to destroy the planet?

Same thing Joe unions get money from members dues, so I take it you are for a huge increase in their wages so they will have the money to give the union to give back to them later. Hell Joe even if you did that it that sounds a lot like SS.

Being 60 years old I have worked over 43 years and paid into the system for the same amount of time, so here is a novel idea leave us boomers alone. Over 90% of our politicians are millionaires and except for top CEO they have the greatest retirement and medical benefits in this nation. So if they are concerned about the cost then so some leadership and cut their benefits. Most people who get into their 60s have health issues that makes them come to work in pain and some days it is a struggle to make it through the day. Reality if people of my age group lose their jobs even with degrees is down right tough. McDonald and Wal Mart jobs wont cut it.

"Means testing is just another Republican trick to get people to think about social security as a program for the underclass, rather than what it is, an insurance plan we pay into our entire lives with the expectation that when we are too old or too sick to work we won't be pushed to the gutter."

So, when Donald Trump retires, he should get his full SS benefit so that he won't be "pushed to the gutter"? LOL.

So the plan being discussed here is to remove the salary cap AND take away all SS payments in retirement through means testing. So, in effect, the result would be a 6.2% or 12.4% (partnership or small business) tax increase. Besides the fact that SS was not created as a way to take money from one group and give it to another, how many more disincentives to earning a higher salary can we have in the tax code and in our policy? The "tax the rich" argument is out of control. The top 5% of wage earners pay approx 70% of all tax revenue collected and approx 40% of the working population pays no tax at all. Now we want to take away the salary cap and SS. I think this is a bad idea.

"Means test"! If you pay into Social Security then you are entitled to RECEIVE Social Security. What kind of crap is that! Republicans want to check people's bank accounts to see if you're eligible to get your money back?

Republicans are a bunch of rotten crooks working on a immoral plan to steal money from America's seniors.

Republicans should have never taken our money to send to Iraq in the first place if they knew they weren't going to want to pay us back!

Why don't Republicans figure out how to NOT pay the Chinese back the money they borrowed from China?

For all of you so called Ayn Rand admirers, tthis is EXACTLY what Paul Ryan wants to do and so does Rand Paul. the destruction of social security, mediacer as we know it and ANY kind of social net program. After all they get theirs and maybe they will drag you along but don't count on it. Most of them probably did not even read her books until Paul mentioned them - read hsi memos he truly believes in her brand of economics after all pure capitalism will make EVERYBODY rich right? Even the post hole diggers etc. Oh and by the way Social Security is NOT a governemnt give away program since it is funded from our paychecks. And as far as a 401K, when you are making min wage at Mickey D's you aint got enuff to save left after paying the rent and probably taking a bus to work. Eat s.... and bark at the moon Paul Ryan and Rand Paul and go buy a million copies of the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged and give them away to the Tea Party.

Yes but first remove the cap on the Social Security tax so it applies to all wages instead of giving a break to rich people.

MSNBC LIES!!! This is the first year SS pays more than it takes in because of 20% unemployment!!! The HR Diversity nazis skip over older educated white candidates and a only a fraction is being paid into the system. Now they want to screw older white workers on the other end of the equation too!! Better wake up!

If some one makes more than $250,000 a year, they should be paying taxes at a higher rate than currently.

This will solve the budget issues, and they can leave social security alone!

Simple

Here is the facts on social security, one of the programs the republicans call entitlement. Completely funded at the present through 2037 and with just some mild tweeking, viable for the post boomer generation.

Ya know what? Ive been telling you guys that the GOP caused this debt crisis deliberately---JUST so they could eliminate/privatize SS, Medicare etc! They want ALL that money to go into the hands of private business. But lots of you dont believe it. Ive posted all the proof any reasonable person could need and there is plenty more out there. . Nothing I can do about that. But you can see it all unfolding eright before your eyes. ALL of need to get involved with calling our Reps/Senators and the GOP Rep/Senators AND the White house! We also need to visit various news outlet online and make comments about the various news report on this issue! I KNOW that the political parties are monitoring them, the major ones anyway.

If we do NOT, Then the American that we know, love and at times depend on, will be dismantled before our very eyes! The GOP is ruthless. The endangered national security and our future economy by deliberately running up this obscene debt. All of it was done to accomplish an ideological goal. They dont give a @!$%# about americans..... UNLESS they're quite well off or are corporate cronies! Act now, or forever remain the low people on the totem poll.

MSNBC and the rest of the news media have abandoned their responsibility to accurately inform the people about is happening and why it is happening! A pox on their houses! They're all afraid of the GOP!

These rules should apply to all U.S. Reps, including our overpaid Senators and Congressmen and other Federal Employees.... They should not receive their excessive pensions before the age of 70 either.... they should come under the same rules and guidelines as we regular citizens, especially the new Social Security rules.

No problem.. I run a sewer plant... I can continue to lift and move manhole covers that weigh 125 lbs well into my 70's... NOT.... but then the GOP guys just sit on their butts in the house and think "lofty" thoughts.... ever notice how the millionaires always cut the guys who don't have it?... I say drop the Congress salaries to $0... I'm sure they can all live on the millions that they have salted away....

I'm all for planning for my future, and I can and will do so.  What I have a problem with is the fact that I have been paying since I was 16...for what...for that money to never be returned to me...what was I paying for?  Stop taking SS out of my wages and let me decide how I will fund my retirement, I have no problem with that, but I do have a problem with getting docked pay for something I will never receive benefits from, and then ALSO having to plan/fund for retirement!

Lee, Graham, and Paul = Rich Pricks.

Just remove the limit on income for tax-purposes from $106,800 so that ALL income is subject to the tax. NOW you have solved the solvency problem into the next century, and the rich will be paying their "fair share." Poof! Problem solved.

I suggest a variation on the Graham-Lee-Paul proposal. They claim that their proposal decreases benefits only for those over a certain average lifetime yearly earnings ($43000).

I propose that we also increase the payment age only for those over that level. If we implement that variation, low-wage people (who often work more physically-grueling jobs) would be able to claim benefits at 65 as always.

I agree with the means testing. But, $43,000 sounds low - especially for themaount of taxes and medical expenses older folks pay for. I believe the means testing should be for: 1st) people who make over $100,000 / year and 2nd) people who already receive government retirement checks (federal/state/county/cities).

The means test should be designed on a graduated scale so that those who make more money receive less in social security. Ex: income of $100,000 has a 10% reduction in SS - income of $150,000 has a 15% redcution and so on.

The moment you means test social security is the moment you lose political support for social security - as it becomes a "welfare program". The reason why social security has such strong support is because it is nearly universal. However, one way around this is to tax back the benefits (by raising the tax rates on the higher incomes). Keep social security UNIVERSAL! Raising the age of retirement will not work - you merely prolong the time a person is in the job force, keeping young people from being able to get jobs who can than pay into the social security system.

The millionaires who made so much more didn't do it on their own, on another planet, in a vaccuum. They made it due to the wealth and hard work of all those other citizens around them. Social Security was intended as a supplement to retirement savings; if you did so well in the U.S. system that you don't need a fed. supplement to keep body&soul together, you shouldn't take it.

Show some class, rich guy!

For all of you suggesting that a 401K is the answer - go ahead - you do that. Then when the stock market crashes 3 weeks (even worse - 3 years) after you retire and your 401K is worth beans, what are you going to do then? No, it can't happen? Wow, you people weren't paying attention the last couple of years, were you? That was the reason the SS system was set up to invest in government bonds, not Wall Street. What are the odds? They still bet with derivatives because nothing was done to stop them. Everyone who bets on a 401K is betting (hoping?) that these masters of the universe won't mess them up (again). And you call yourselves conservatives? I don't trust anyone on Wall Street anymore than I trust the government (less actually). At least the government says it's there for me. Where did I see a guarantee in anything I've ever received from a financial company? They won't and can't. And so I say I won't. My bet will be with the US government because they have less incentive for stealing my money. I count on my Social Security being there when I retire. I count on nothing being there from my IRA. Which is why I haven't put very much into my IRA. It's my betting pool. The odds are about the same as those with Big Lou, the local knee buster.

Go ahead, you people figure it out - Federal minimum wage is $7.25 /hour. So times 40, that is $290.00 /week. Times 4 weeks in a month is $1160.00 a month. I pay $1274.00 / month for my mortgage, taxes and insurance. Maybe I'm paying too much, but it's what I can afford. But if I made minimum wage, I would try to find one of the apartments around town for $600 / month (I'd share it with the roaches). That would then leave me $500 a month for food, transportation, utilities, clothing and anything else I need. I don't think there is much room in there for beer or any other entertainment - especially considering that the figures used don't even take out federal tax, state tax or any other kind of deductions. Then you people think that someone who makes less than the poverty line should put money in a 401K? Reality says that would be damn near impossible to begin with. It doesn't really improve all that much for someone making $12 / hour either. How many people does Walmart employ between $7.25 and $12.00 /hour around the country? How much do the CEOs and owner/family of Walmart make? Billions. Not millions. Billions. When does the allure of money stop? When do you hit a point where you have everything you need? When does greed become avarice? Do the rich really want/need gold toilets and gold laced rugs? Do any of you really think that is what life should be about? Is that what you want? You would make sure that some would die by giving nothing to the old and disabled and children to ensure that these people can have another million on top of their billions already?

Incredible that anyone would defend the excesses of these people over those less fortunate. There is an inherent determination that those who do not have the earnings of those at the top are somehow less deserving or deficient in moral character. That is prejudice in it's purest form. You should feel proud of your lack of compassion.

So if I have this correctly, to save SS we should gradually raise the retirement age to 70, and do some means testing, to help balance the budget we should privatize Medicaid/Medicare eventually reducing benefits and paying higher premiums, we should also cut domestic programs such as education grants, cuts to the EPA the Food and Drug Administration and so on. But in NO case should we raise taxes on anyone, not even those that are making millions and paying a marginal tax rate of about 17%, nor not one dime on corporations or eliminating any of the tax loophole that allow some really wealthy corporations to pay no taxes, and to some of you that seems not only fair but the best way to reduce the deficit. Wow.

"This year is the first year in which Social Security pays out more than it takes in, because people are living longer"

Faulty use of statistics. Yes, if you include the infant mortality rate dropping like a stone in the last century, people are living longer. But retirees aren't. They've always lived this long. If you paid into the system you whole life, why do they turn around and use statistics that include children that never paid or recieved one penny from SS an an excuse to rob you blind? Why is it that the media just keeps repeating the mantra as a fact that has to do with SS?

As far as raising taxes goes, if I pay 8% into SS, why doesn't a millionaire pay the same 8%? He can afford it a whole lot more than I. Why does he get the break? Going after the millionaires is like asking the bank robber why he robbed banks. He answered, "Because that's where the money is!"

The last sentence says it all: "These are the only 2 guys I could find,” he said.

Even members of his own party can't get behind this plan. When pigs fly is correct.