Bernie Moreno and Elizabeth Warren: Our Plan to Save Social Security

cigaretteman

All-Conference
May 29, 2001
3,004
3,656
113
By Bernie Moreno and Elizabeth Warren
Mr. Moreno, a Republican, is the senior U.S. senator from Ohio. Ms. Warren, a Democrat, is the senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts.

One of us is a Republican from Ohio who built a business that generated hundreds of jobs. The other is a Democrat from Massachusetts who built a career protecting consumers from financial tricks and traps.
We don’t agree on everything, but here’s one thing we do agree on: Congress must act now to save Social Security for generations of Americans to come.
Social Security is a core component of our nation’s promise — a covenant between the federal government and Americans who pay into it throughout their working years so they can retire with dignity.
That promise is at risk of unraveling. For years, seniors in Ohio and Massachusetts have told us how concerned they are about the future of Social Security. A new report from the trustees who oversee the Social Security Trust Funds shows they are right to worry: Unless Congress acts, the fund from which most Social Security beneficiaries are paid will be significantly depleted by late 2032. After that, Social Security benefits could be cut by more than 20 percent.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT


That’s just six years away. Instead of cutting benefits for the retirees who count on Social Security, we need to take bipartisan action to protect those benefits, reward work and restore fairness.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
That starts with a common-sense solution: lifting the Social Security payroll tax cap.
For 2026, the payroll tax cap, or taxable maximum, is $184,500. Workers and their employers each pay 6.2 percent on wages up to that amount (self-employed individuals pay 12.4 percent). Today, the maximum Social Security withholding for one worker is $22,878, or 12.4 percent of $184,500. Not a penny more, even if an individual’s salary far exceeds $184,500. Since the vast majority of Americans make less than that, most people are paying Social Security taxes on 100 percent of their earnings while the highest earners are paying on only part of theirs.
Why should a middle-class nurse pay a larger share of her paycheck than a wealthy corporate lawyer? This is doubly unfair in an economy in which top earners’ wages, over time, have pulled far ahead of those of the average worker.
According to one estimate, eliminating the payroll tax cap would inject around $3 trillion into the program over the next 10 years. Lifting the cap so that all income is treated the same would generate substantial revenue that would extend the solvency of Social Security for another generation.
Our plan would also help to safeguard Social Security’s earned-benefit structure, in which workers make contributions to the program from their paychecks. This structure has delivered a basic level of retirement certainty for generations. One 2025 poll found that 65 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of Republicans support lifting the cap, “including a significant majority of respondents with annual household income over $200,000.”



This is a no-brainer: The wealthiest Americans, who have benefited the most from America’s opportunities, should contribute the same percentage of their income as a factory worker in Chillicothe, Ohio, or a teacher in Worcester, Mass.
Most Americans work into their 60s or 70s. Throughout their working lives, they pay into Social Security with the understanding that it will help them support themselves in retirement. With rising prices and artificial intelligence causing economic uncertainty for the future, Social Security must remain a stable foundation to help retirees afford life’s basic necessities.
Social Security was created by overwhelming bipartisan congressional majorities. Today, members of Congress from both parties must come together again to save it. That’s why the two of us are working together on legislation to remove the cap on Social Security taxes and extend the solvency of our retirement system. Americans deserve nothing less. Preserving the American dream for our children and grandchildren depends on it.


https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/23/opinion/moreno-warren-social-security.html
 

baltimorened

All-American
May 29, 2001
7,113
5,268
113
By Bernie Moreno and Elizabeth Warren
Mr. Moreno, a Republican, is the senior U.S. senator from Ohio. Ms. Warren, a Democrat, is the senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts.

One of us is a Republican from Ohio who built a business that generated hundreds of jobs. The other is a Democrat from Massachusetts who built a career protecting consumers from financial tricks and traps.
We don’t agree on everything, but here’s one thing we do agree on: Congress must act now to save Social Security for generations of Americans to come.
Social Security is a core component of our nation’s promise — a covenant between the federal government and Americans who pay into it throughout their working years so they can retire with dignity.
That promise is at risk of unraveling. For years, seniors in Ohio and Massachusetts have told us how concerned they are about the future of Social Security. A new report from the trustees who oversee the Social Security Trust Funds shows they are right to worry: Unless Congress acts, the fund from which most Social Security beneficiaries are paid will be significantly depleted by late 2032. After that, Social Security benefits could be cut by more than 20 percent.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT


That’s just six years away. Instead of cutting benefits for the retirees who count on Social Security, we need to take bipartisan action to protect those benefits, reward work and restore fairness.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
That starts with a common-sense solution: lifting the Social Security payroll tax cap.
For 2026, the payroll tax cap, or taxable maximum, is $184,500. Workers and their employers each pay 6.2 percent on wages up to that amount (self-employed individuals pay 12.4 percent). Today, the maximum Social Security withholding for one worker is $22,878, or 12.4 percent of $184,500. Not a penny more, even if an individual’s salary far exceeds $184,500. Since the vast majority of Americans make less than that, most people are paying Social Security taxes on 100 percent of their earnings while the highest earners are paying on only part of theirs.
Why should a middle-class nurse pay a larger share of her paycheck than a wealthy corporate lawyer? This is doubly unfair in an economy in which top earners’ wages, over time, have pulled far ahead of those of the average worker.
According to one estimate, eliminating the payroll tax cap would inject around $3 trillion into the program over the next 10 years. Lifting the cap so that all income is treated the same would generate substantial revenue that would extend the solvency of Social Security for another generation.
Our plan would also help to safeguard Social Security’s earned-benefit structure, in which workers make contributions to the program from their paychecks. This structure has delivered a basic level of retirement certainty for generations. One 2025 poll found that 65 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of Republicans support lifting the cap, “including a significant majority of respondents with annual household income over $200,000.”



This is a no-brainer: The wealthiest Americans, who have benefited the most from America’s opportunities, should contribute the same percentage of their income as a factory worker in Chillicothe, Ohio, or a teacher in Worcester, Mass.
Most Americans work into their 60s or 70s. Throughout their working lives, they pay into Social Security with the understanding that it will help them support themselves in retirement. With rising prices and artificial intelligence causing economic uncertainty for the future, Social Security must remain a stable foundation to help retirees afford life’s basic necessities.
Social Security was created by overwhelming bipartisan congressional majorities. Today, members of Congress from both parties must come together again to save it. That’s why the two of us are working together on legislation to remove the cap on Social Security taxes and extend the solvency of our retirement system. Americans deserve nothing less. Preserving the American dream for our children and grandchildren depends on it.


https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/23/opinion/moreno-warren-social-security.html
I don't think there will be much disagreement on the need...and I doubt most would disagree with this proposal as a solution. It's a great starting point...
 

Rifler

All-American
Jan 26, 2011
5,001
5,828
113
I don't think there will be much disagreement on the need...and I doubt most would disagree with this proposal as a solution. It's a great starting point...

Reasonable starting point,.. not a solution.
 

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
By Bernie Moreno and Elizabeth Warren
Mr. Moreno, a Republican, is the senior U.S. senator from Ohio. Ms. Warren, a Democrat, is the senior U.S. senator from Massachusetts.

One of us is a Republican from Ohio who built a business that generated hundreds of jobs. The other is a Democrat from Massachusetts who built a career protecting consumers from financial tricks and traps.
We don’t agree on everything, but here’s one thing we do agree on: Congress must act now to save Social Security for generations of Americans to come.
Social Security is a core component of our nation’s promise — a covenant between the federal government and Americans who pay into it throughout their working years so they can retire with dignity.
That promise is at risk of unraveling. For years, seniors in Ohio and Massachusetts have told us how concerned they are about the future of Social Security. A new report from the trustees who oversee the Social Security Trust Funds shows they are right to worry: Unless Congress acts, the fund from which most Social Security beneficiaries are paid will be significantly depleted by late 2032. After that, Social Security benefits could be cut by more than 20 percent.
Advertisement
SKIP ADVERTISEMENT


That’s just six years away. Instead of cutting benefits for the retirees who count on Social Security, we need to take bipartisan action to protect those benefits, reward work and restore fairness.
Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. Get it sent to your inbox.
That starts with a common-sense solution: lifting the Social Security payroll tax cap.
For 2026, the payroll tax cap, or taxable maximum, is $184,500. Workers and their employers each pay 6.2 percent on wages up to that amount (self-employed individuals pay 12.4 percent). Today, the maximum Social Security withholding for one worker is $22,878, or 12.4 percent of $184,500. Not a penny more, even if an individual’s salary far exceeds $184,500. Since the vast majority of Americans make less than that, most people are paying Social Security taxes on 100 percent of their earnings while the highest earners are paying on only part of theirs.
Why should a middle-class nurse pay a larger share of her paycheck than a wealthy corporate lawyer? This is doubly unfair in an economy in which top earners’ wages, over time, have pulled far ahead of those of the average worker.
According to one estimate, eliminating the payroll tax cap would inject around $3 trillion into the program over the next 10 years. Lifting the cap so that all income is treated the same would generate substantial revenue that would extend the solvency of Social Security for another generation.
Our plan would also help to safeguard Social Security’s earned-benefit structure, in which workers make contributions to the program from their paychecks. This structure has delivered a basic level of retirement certainty for generations. One 2025 poll found that 65 percent of Democrats and 62 percent of Republicans support lifting the cap, “including a significant majority of respondents with annual household income over $200,000.”



This is a no-brainer: The wealthiest Americans, who have benefited the most from America’s opportunities, should contribute the same percentage of their income as a factory worker in Chillicothe, Ohio, or a teacher in Worcester, Mass.
Most Americans work into their 60s or 70s. Throughout their working lives, they pay into Social Security with the understanding that it will help them support themselves in retirement. With rising prices and artificial intelligence causing economic uncertainty for the future, Social Security must remain a stable foundation to help retirees afford life’s basic necessities.
Social Security was created by overwhelming bipartisan congressional majorities. Today, members of Congress from both parties must come together again to save it. That’s why the two of us are working together on legislation to remove the cap on Social Security taxes and extend the solvency of our retirement system. Americans deserve nothing less. Preserving the American dream for our children and grandchildren depends on it.


https://www.nytimes.com/2026/06/23/opinion/moreno-warren-social-security.html
So I get to pay more taxes to keep a program around that I don't want to be a part of. Nah, cut the benefits or allow people to opt out.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Tom Paris

fskillet

All-Conference
Mar 26, 2026
534
1,473
93
I don’t think you understand how that’s going to work. God, we are an entitled selfish populace. I got mine, eff everyone else. Such Christ-like thinking.
It's an incredibly stupid and selfish argument. There are plenty of things we pay into that we don't personally benefit from. So many in our country have completely abandoned the principles of community that were so prevalent back during the "golden age of America" that MAGA likes to wax poetic about.
 

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
I don’t think you understand how that’s going to work. God, we are an entitled selfish populace. I got mine, eff everyone else. Such Christ-like thinking.
No, I haven’t gotten mine. I am 42. I am going to have to pay more now to keep the system going and pay for other peoples retirement. No, I don’t want to do that. Retirement is not a biblical principle, and I don’t trust the government to use the money wisely.
 

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
It's an incredibly stupid and selfish argument. There are plenty of things we pay into that we don't personally benefit from. So many in our country have completely abandoned the principles of community that were so prevalent back during the "golden age of America" that MAGA likes to wax poetic about.
I would argue that things weren’t bad before Social Security was started. It forced people to really be accountable to their fellow man.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Tom Paris

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
We are 9 missed meals away from a violent revolution. You'll be fine paying for it
Oh, I think we have a major problem brewing. The boomers created this problem and they need to feel some pain in solving it, not just getting the Millennials to kick in more money on top of the debt burden we already have.
 
Last edited:

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
134,855
22,548
113
No, I haven’t gotten mine. I am 42. I am going to have to pay more now to keep the system going and pay for other peoples retirement. No, I don’t want to do that. Retirement is not a biblical principle, and I don’t trust the government to use the money wisely.

42 also. This proposal would cost my family 10s of thousands of dollars per year. And it’s a dumb program to begin with a horrible ROI for responsible contributors. We should be weening the country off of it, not pouring more money into it.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Tom Paris

Tom Paris

Heisman
Oct 1, 2001
143,359
18,381
113
No, I haven’t gotten mine. I am 42. I am going to have to pay more now to keep the system going and pay for other peoples retirement. No, I don’t want to do that. Retirement is not a biblical principle, and I don’t trust the government to use the money wisely.
That’s why the government needs to leave it alone. Unless they want to write me a check for $103,000 which I have paid into it. We just live in the country where we don’t want to take care of each other. Only country in the World Cup without Universal healthcare. Truly incredible.
 

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
That’s why the government needs to leave it alone. Unless they want to write me a check for $103,000 which I have paid into it. We just live in the country where we don’t want to take care of each other. Only country in the World Cup without Universal healthcare. Truly incredible.
I am on board with healthcare changes. Universal payer system maybe. I just think Social Security has been grown by politicians who have kicked the can down the road and now I/we get to save it?
 

fskillet

All-Conference
Mar 26, 2026
534
1,473
93
I would argue that things weren’t bad before Social Security was started. It forced people to really be accountable to their fellow man.
I mean, SS was enacted during the great depression. You could argue it was implemented to help the retired citizens make ends meet in the event of another major crash or economic crisis. Like half of the US population senior population was destitute before SS was implemented
 

Tom Paris

Heisman
Oct 1, 2001
143,359
18,381
113
in that light I just read where Americans donated $617 Billion to charities in 2025, a 3% increase.

So not sure how the selfish part fits here
Oh you’re right about that part. I would bet that some of those charities…like the St. Jude Hospital commercial airing as I type this, shouldn’t even be needed. Other countries don’t have parents of children with cancer asking for donations…because they have universal healthcare. Americans have to try Go Fund Me when they get sick. It’s sad and millions of Americans who would benefit from UHC try to convince us it’s bad. Insurance companies thank those people for their service.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger

Tom Paris

Heisman
Oct 1, 2001
143,359
18,381
113
Oh, I think we have a major problem brewing. The boomers created this problem and they need to feel some pain in solving it, not just getting the Millennials to kick in more money on top of the debt burden we already have.
It’s the billionaires. The wealth gap is incredible. Each generation is getting stepped on worse and worse. Gen Z can’t afford decent homes in decent neighborhoods.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flotiger

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
It’s the billionaires. The wealth gap is incredible. Each generation is getting stepped on worse and worse. Gen Z can’t afford decent homes in decent neighborhoods.
The billionaires did not create the social security issue.
 

Tom Paris

Heisman
Oct 1, 2001
143,359
18,381
113
I am on board with healthcare changes. Universal payer system maybe. I just think Social Security has been grown by politicians who have kicked the can down the road and now I/we get to save it?
Again, billionaires who don’t take a paycheck don’t contribute. They don’t care because they don’t need it. They have none of the worries the rest of us do. Again I know I always go to Healthcare like other countries because when I retire that’s going to cost me 10K a year. That’s money that I would prefer to use to travel here and PUT BACK INTO LOCAL ECONOMIES, across America. That’s just me. For others that would allow them to buy a house. Or a car that runs. Or to go out to eat…helping the economy.

I recently looked up what I contributed to SS in my working life and it pisses me off knowing Republicans want to get their hands on that too.
 

Tom Paris

Heisman
Oct 1, 2001
143,359
18,381
113
The billionaires did not create the social security issue.
They certainly aren’t adding to the pot. Why are y’all willing to give away YOUR MONEY? You paid into it. You can get rid of it but let’s see how you feel down the road when we have universal income. Hell, even Elon says it’s going to happen.

You want to end SS? Write me my $103K check. Not you…Republicans who want to end it. That’s MY money.
 

kidmike41

All-American
Dec 29, 2005
3,530
5,857
113
They certainly aren’t adding to the pot. Why are y’all willing to give away YOUR MONEY? You paid into it. You can get rid of it but let’s see how you feel down the road when we have universal income. Hell, even Elon says it’s going to happen.

You want to end SS? Write me my $103K check. Not you…Republicans who want to end it. That’s MY money.
We can’t all be apart of the Federation.
 

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
134,855
22,548
113
I recently looked up what I contributed to SS in my working life and it pisses me off knowing Republicans want to get their hands on that too.

Imagine how much money you would have if that same contribution - plus your 6.2% employer match - had been invested in a brokerage account in the market earning compound returns.

Then you should get REALLY pissed off that the government confiscates that money and offers a horrible ROI at the time of their choosing.
 

baltimorened

All-American
May 29, 2001
7,113
5,268
113
Again, billionaires who don’t take a paycheck don’t contribute. They don’t care because they don’t need it. They have none of the worries the rest of us do. Again I know I always go to Healthcare like other countries because when I retire that’s going to cost me 10K a year. That’s money that I would prefer to use to travel here and PUT BACK INTO LOCAL ECONOMIES, across America. That’s just me. For others that would allow them to buy a house. Or a car that runs. Or to go out to eat…helping the economy.

I recently looked up what I contributed to SS in my working life and it pisses me off knowing Republicans want to get their hands on that too.
I understand your thinking, but there are a few on this thread who are concerned about paying in to social security...you're espousing higher taxes for healthcare and counting the $10,000 you'll pay because we don't have universal healthcare. Are you positive your taxes won't go up by $20,000 to pay for the universal care? Or are you expecting to save your $10,000 and have someone else pay for the healthcare?
 

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
134,855
22,548
113
I understand your thinking, but there are a few on this thread who are concerned about paying in to social security...you're espousing higher taxes for healthcare and counting the $10,000 you'll pay because we don't have universal healthcare. Are you positive your taxes won't go up by $20,000 to pay for the universal care? Or are you expecting to save your $10,000 and have someone else pay for the healthcare?

They all want someone else to pay for this stuff. More social security. Free healthcare. Someone else pays for it. What a deal!
 

fskillet

All-Conference
Mar 26, 2026
534
1,473
93
I’m fine paying the govt instead of paying BCBS for my healthcare if they’re gonna cover 100% of it and I don’t have to worry about coverage getting denied.

also, I’m fine paying a little higher taxes to ensure other people aren’t destitute due to poor planning/bad investments/etc when they get to retirement age.
 

firegiver

Heisman
Sep 10, 2007
73,787
20,452
113
They all want someone else to pay for this stuff. More social security. Free healthcare. Someone else pays for it. What a deal!
No actually, as someone who's in the top 5-10%, I'd like for us all to pay for it.
I just don't like the idea of childhood cancer bankrupting a family you know?

On the other side, you hate the idea of paying for a fat person, which i get. I do get that. But if healthcare were universal, fats would be much more likely to go to the doctor and get things corrected.

We have a problem in this country that can be helped by a collective effort. Sorry you will have to pay more taxes but hey, thats the price of business as they say.

Also, lets do the math, would the new taxes be more or less than you pay now for your benefits?
 

LafayetteBear

All-American
Nov 30, 2009
34,240
9,563
113
No, I haven’t gotten mine. I am 42. I am going to have to pay more now to keep the system going and pay for other peoples retirement. No, I don’t want to do that. Retirement is not a biblical principle, and I don’t trust the government to use the money wisely.
I'm 69, so I've been paying into Social Security a whole lot longer than you. (I elected to defer taking any Social Security payments until I reach 70, because I get a bit more per month by waiting.) I fully anticipate and expect to receive Social Security payments starting next year. You can be opposed to it, but you will be outvoted on that, so you should prepare yourself for that disappointment.

Means testing Social Security would turn it into welfare, and effectively kill it. I paid in, so I expect something back. Means testing could mean I get nothing back. That just doesn't work.

Increasing the cap for FICA withholding seems to be the most viable solution. That, and perhaps raising the age for eligibility to receive Social Security payments by a year or two at most. That is less palatable, but possible if raising the cap will not get it done. Even a relatively modest increase in the cap will produce a ginormous amount of additional revenue. The Congress has got to stop raiding Social Security in each year's budget.
 

LafayetteBear

All-American
Nov 30, 2009
34,240
9,563
113
The billionaires did not create the social security issue.
Billionaires did not create the social security issue, but they have much larger incomes and pay the same amount as I do into the Social Security system each year. As a percentage of their income, billionaires pay virtually nothing.

Neither did the Boomers create the Social Security issue. Withholding of Social Security taxes from Americans' paychecks started in January 1937. WWII ended in 1945. Add nine months to that, and the first Baby Boomers appeared on the scene in 1946. Most Boomers have been paying into the system since the 60's and 70's, and many of them (myself included) have yet to receive a dime. You? You have been paying in for, at most, 20 years.

I'll concede that the demographic of the Boomer generation, combined with Congress' neglect and lack of courage to address needed reform, have added significantly to the Social Security solvency issue. I have (as a Boomer) no issue sharing some of the financial pain necessary to fix things, but not all of it. I very much want that pain to be a shared burden, with you and other Millennials sharing that pain.
 

scotchtiger

Heisman
Dec 15, 2005
134,855
22,548
113
No actually, as someone who's in the top 5-10%, I'd like for us all to pay for it.
I just don't like the idea of childhood cancer bankrupting a family you know?

On the other side, you hate the idea of paying for a fat person, which i get. I do get that. But if healthcare were universal, fats would be much more likely to go to the doctor and get things corrected.

We have a problem in this country that can be helped by a collective effort. Sorry you will have to pay more taxes but hey, thats the price of business as they say.

Also, let’s do the math, would the new taxes be more or less than you pay now for your benefits?

Not sure a doctor is needed to correct the fatness. Maybe if they hand out GLP-1s? Most just need a lifestyle change including diet and exercise.

I don’t know how much my taxes would go up to pay for universal healthcare. I can’t imagine it will be less than I pay for coverage today though. I also suspect the universal coverage will have limitations and those with means will still need to buy supplemental coverage.

I do know removing the SS cap would cost me tens of thousands and I’ll likely still face means testing on the benefit in retirement. Just a horrible deal.
 

Paw Pad

All-Conference
Oct 22, 2001
490
1,192
42
That's because billionaires create their own charities and give their buddies high paying executive jobs and write off the donations for tax purposes.

It’s the billionaires. The wealth gap is incredible. Each generation is getting stepped on worse and worse. Gen Z can’t afford decent homes in decent neighborhoods.
This blaming the billionaires is so stupid and disingenuous, because there are less than 1,000 billionaires in this country. Are you telling me that less than 1,000 people are the cause of most ofthe govt budget woes, people starving, homeless , and any other problems that YOU, AOC, Bernie Sanders, and Mamdani can fabricate. This is a total lie that dems and dem socialists - NO difference- dream up to try and PUNISH success.
You could confiscate all of the billionaires money and still would not make any difference in peoples lives. Who is going to manage that money: the people who took it or the people who made it?
 

firegiver

Heisman
Sep 10, 2007
73,787
20,452
113
Retirement is A VERY DANGEROUS IDEA!! We need to PUT THIS COUNTRY BACK TO WORK!!! Too many welfare kings and queen lazy bums sitting around!

our greatest generation didn’t yearn for retirement!! We don’t need it either!
My grandfather fought in the pacific and was on disability since he was 52 years old. He never worked again.

My dad was lucky enough to retire at 58. He worked a couple gigs here and there, but never really had to work again.

I've been working since I was 14 and will have to work till im 65 at the least, unless something crazy changes. Likely longer if SS security goes away.

The stock market could continue on this crazy bull streak and I could retire early, but I imagine inflation will effect it worse if thats the case.
 

baltimorened

All-American
May 29, 2001
7,113
5,268
113
No actually, as someone who's in the top 5-10%, I'd like for us all to pay for it.
I just don't like the idea of childhood cancer bankrupting a family you know?

On the other side, you hate the idea of paying for a fat person, which i get. I do get that. But if healthcare were universal, fats would be much more likely to go to the doctor and get things corrected.

We have a problem in this country that can be helped by a collective effort. Sorry you will have to pay more taxes but hey, thats the price of business as they say.

Also, lets do the math, would the new taxes be more or less than you pay now for your benefits?
well remember, with Obamacare there was supposed to be more preventive care and less dependency for people to go to the emergency room. That didn't happen. I would predict the same thing for fat people going to the doctor. Look at Medicaid, lots of fat people in the program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HoggI74