CTP (S3E115) What AARP Won't Tell You About Saving Social Security

CTP (S3E115) What AARP Won't Tell You About Saving Social Security
Exploring more of the fascinating intersection of Activism, Community Engagement, Faith / Religion, Human Nature, Politics, Social Issues, and beyond   
America's Social Security system is being undermined by fraud and misrepresentation, while organizations like AARP push misleading narratives about how to save it.
• Not everyone collecting Social Security has paid into it, including legitimate recipients like widows, orphans, and disabled citizens
• Social Security was created as a safety net specifically for American citizens
• Current system contains rampant fraud, including implausible cases like 300-year-olds collecting benefits
• Simple verification processes could eliminate obvious fraud without harming legitimate beneficiaries
• Non-citizens who haven't contributed are draining resources intended for American citizens
• Means testing would ensure those solely dependent on Social Security receive full benefits
• Wealthier recipients with substantial other income could receive proportionally reduced benefits
• The program can be saved without raising taxes through fraud elimination and means testing
• Left-leaning organizations consistently propose tax increases rather than addressing structural problems   

Chapters

• 0:00 Welcome to CTP Podcast
• 2:11 AARP's Misleading Social Security Ads
• 5:59 Who Social Security Is Really For
• 9:23 Tackling Fraud in the System
• 13:03 The Case for Means Testing
• 16:34 Closing Thoughts and Book Promotion

Transcript

Speaker 1: 0:19

Welcome to the Constitutionalist Politics Podcast, aka CTP. I am your host, joseph M Leonard, and that's L-E-N-A-R-D. Ctp is your no-must, no-fuss, just-me-you-can-occasional-guest-type podcast. Really appreciate you tuning in. As Graham Norton will say, let's get on with the show. Hello gang, welcome to Season 3, episode 115,.

Speaker 1: 0:59

115 in the Saturday Monologues Numbering Scheme, with midweek guest show drops and specials, as they're called, while around 250 total episodes since 2023. When I started, I don't do Monday through Friday. I do usually Saturday monologues Occasionally a guest will appear on Saturday too and mid-week drop specials, usually Wednesday, sometimes a Tuesday, thursday In the case of back in February. Health weeks, there were several drops. In the case of going back to was it March, I think? Music weeks, I did Monday through Friday for three weeks. So it all depends on the specials, but more than 250 episodes At any rate.

Speaker 1: 1:52

I didn't bring you here to talk about that. Tv ads, right? I mean I'm not talking the Sydney, if you saw last week's episode, right? That's not Sydney. On my book. I talked about beauty in the eye of the beholder last week. The TV ad Sydney Sweeney has great genes kind of helps formulate.

Speaker 1: 2:16

I'm not talking about commercial ads like that to sell you a product. I'm talking AARP. Have you seen the ad about social security? Right Starts off. Politics is divisive and blah, blah, blah, blah blah, followed by a lie. No, we do not all pay into social security. In regards to people who are currently collecting social security and I've done a show on this before, I'll probably do one again and, of course, go to beforeitsnewscom and sub stack I've got several pieces on social security the reality. Not like AIARP. They support leftist politicians who support illegals who have not paid into Social Security, collecting Social Security and all the amount of fraud in the system. That doge.

Speaker 1: 3:41

And one good part of the one big beautiful bill I called it the one big fraud bill it's still pork laden. All kinds of pork. Yes, it had to pass for the good things, but please spare me. Whole kinds of pork. Still in there.

Speaker 1: 3:58

Still near a $2 trillion deficit for the year and the debt going to soar to over $40 trillion, possibly $45 trillion by the end of Trump's term. Sorry, not sorry ideal. In reality, he never vetoed a single spending bill in his first term and there's no threat he'll veto any of them now, unless Democrats take control of the House and the Senate in 2026. Then he might finally finally threaten to veto a spending bill because it will be the Democrats that put it together. But the one big fraud bill which still contained some of Biden's In production act spending still in there. He was eager to sign it. More green, new scam spending that not one Republican voted for. The bill Extending of that spending still in the one big fraud bill he's eager. He was eager to sign it. So spare me right.

Speaker 1: 5:07

Growth policy yes, needed Good Tariffs bringing in money. Yes, but it's still the spending. Stupid. Growth alone didn't work under JFK, with tax cuts and growth. Reagan. Jfk with tax cuts and growth. Reagan GW, trump's first term. And growth policy alone won't work now. No-transcript. We have to take a pause.

Speaker 1: 5:41

This is a Christian show, constitutionalist politics. We believe in wanting to take care of widows and orphans. Yes, so not everyone on Social Security has had to pay in. My mother never worked a day to pay into Social Security. She was a stay-at-home mother. If that can happen, that's a good thing. A stay-at-home mom, stay-at-home dad whatever Spousal benefits she didn't pay in, she got Social Security. She got dad's survivor benefits collecting Social Security under his years of paying in. Right, if a child's parents at age eight die in a car crash. We want that child to be taken care of. They haven't paid in. They may pay in later, after they turn 18, or they may never pay in. Or someone born with birth defects to a point that their disability means they're handicapped and have a hard time finding work, may never find work, they may never pay in. Do we want them taken care of? Yes, we do so.

Speaker 1: 7:37

Aarp, and your ads lie. It's not all about those and only about those who pay in. But it sure as hell sorry gonna say it again, sure as hell ain't for non-citizens, who paid in or not. You're a non-citizen. Social Security was created for you as citizens. So spare me, aarp. We can all agree on Social Security and them during the Trump first term. You're still blocking them now, during Trump's second term.

Speaker 1: 8:34

To remove illegals from the program who are not entitled to it, to get rid of the fraud People. Again, if you go behind the scenes video, bitchute, brideon Daily Motion, rumble, youtube, I know for sure. There's a social security segment video there People on the books, age 300, collecting social security. And that's not either. Okay, potentially an error. Maybe the birth date is wrong. It's not onerous to then demand someone who's collecting social security that the database says is 300 years old in 90 days. You're cut off under fraud, waste, fraud and abuse doge efforts unless you provide a birth certificate, so age 89 and should be collecting. Show the birth certificate. We'll correct the records and you'll keep collecting your Social Security. There's nothing overly demanding in that a fraction of a percent of those collecting Social Security show proof they should be collecting Social Security.

Speaker 1: 10:11

The left always protecting waste, fraud, abuse, putting illegals something they're not entitled to social security or welfare. You're not entitled, you're not a citizen, and I'm getting beyond sick and bleeping tired of this stuff. So no, aarp, we don't all agree on your left-wing delusional answer to everything. Oh, let's just raise the Social Security tax. We don't need to raise the FICA, which includes Medicare and Social Security in the FICA. We can reform the program to get illegals and fraudsters off it and the program will be. Then what's the term? Not solid solvent, solvent right, that's the word for more decades and also means testing. Also means testing.

Speaker 1: 11:22

My dad was a former GM. He had a pension. Why should someone who's got a good pension collect the same Social Security as someone who didn't have a chance? You know, perhaps only work minimum wage jobs their whole life, didn't have a chance to build a 401k, sure as hell, didn't have a pension provided to them and they are solely dependent on social security. Man's tested. My mom and dad shouldn't have got as much as the next door neighbor much as the next door neighbor. This is a story right. But a neighbor who may have worked only a minimum wage job their whole life and is now a senior and solely dependent on social security. They should get more and my mom and dad should get less. And a millionaire who's had plenty of time to save all kinds of money probably has both a pension and 401k revenue coming in should get less and it can adjust.

Speaker 1: 12:36

If you get a pension and the pension goes away, then okay, your Social Security readjusts up some. If you had a 401k and it goes dry, then your Social Security can go up some and that's completely different than the whole concept of social security as a safety net. You have no other income, you have no other way to sustain yourself. But the left refuses to deal in the reality of why and how the program was created and exactly how easily we can solve it without raising anyone's taxes. But AARP, the people they support, the people they donate to. Like Schumer, the answer is always steal more money from people to give to other people. It doesn't need to happen.

Speaker 1: 13:48

I've laid it out very simply. The simple math that saves Social Security first and foremost, get people who are not entitled to it off. And then also means testing. Simple basic means testing. Do leftists love tax the rich? Tax the rich, then. Why should a rich person who may have a billion dollars of other income coming in a year still collects social security by your usual definitions? They don't need it. They don't deserve it. They've got to pay their fair share. In this case, they paid in, so they are entitled. They have to get something, but by law it doesn't have to be the same amount someone who has no other income coming in. We can means test it.

Speaker 1: 14:52

Okay, at any rate, I apologize. I was more savaged and filtered Raging Joe today on Chris Dittusio's podcast than my usual G-rated show here, and I try to be a lot more calm. Right, you kind of got savaged and filtered Raging Joe today. Maybe, I don't know, should I put a PG-13 warning on. I only said hell a couple times, right? If that's a problem for you, then you've got a whole lot of other problems to worry about than my. Having said that right, sometimes a word like that's got to be tossed in for emphasis. At any rate, thank you all. Take care, god bless. Can we please use our brains, you independents who fall for the leftist idiocy, and vote for them? Can we vote? Can you please finally vote for people who are offering solutions that work, not just steal more money from people? Answer the left always has. Take care, god bless. God bless.

Speaker 1: 16:15

Thank you for having tuned in for Chris D'Attusio's Politics Show. If you haven't already, please check out my primary internationally available book, terror Strikes, coming soon to a city near you, available anywhere. Books are sold. If you have locally run bookstores still near you, they can order it for you. And let me remind, over time the fancy high-production items will come. But for now, for starters, it's just you as a very appreciated listener by me. All substance, no fluff, just straight to key discussion points. A show that looks at a variety of topics, mostly politics, through a Christian, us constitutionalist lens. So again, thank you from the bottom of my heart. Take care, god bless. Like and subscribe to Constitutionalist Politics Podcast and share episodes. We need your help.