January 13, 2009 04:45 PM
When I pay into Social Security
...it becomes a right. I know because I got that notice in the mail that gives me the breakdown of my work history and outlines what I will receive. It's pretty freaky looking at my life on a print out by the way.
"Entitlement" is such a loaded word and is a perfect fit for the Frank Luntz/Bill O'Reilly's of the GOP. They turn my social security, the greatest program ever implemented in our country and the bedrock of the New Deal into a dirty word.
I like dirty words.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I object to liberals calling themselves progressives because they think the right has made "liberal" into a dirty word. Entitlement is not a dirty word. The right thinks the idea behind entitlement programs is dirty, hence the way they sneer when they pronounce the word. Amato is reacting the way the Family Values paper did by programming its computer to print "homosexual" every time the word "gay" was encountered. Thus the headline "Homosexual Wins at Olympics." If you are entitled to it you got a right to it in my book.
"I mean Romney is the most conservative on illegal immigration and I don't think Ronald Reagan could get elected in California today."
Ann "Clipped" Coulter
Social Security, a Ponzi scheme.
even Madoff's initial investors got payoffs....the later one's?
eh.
is a major component of the social contract.
Here it is called a right, that may be slightly off the mark.
It is the social contract that says the most vulnerable of our citizens, the young and the old should not fall into dire poverty.
That they should always have a minimum standard.
It is a pay as you go system. Deductions made today pay benefits today. To describe it as a ponzi scheme is to fall prey to the Corporate mentality.
The system is going to have problems. Our entire country is going to have enormous problems.
This is the contract, the social contract that Ronald Reagan was determined to break.
It is the contract that the Corporate trained seals, in our corrupt congress and the front people of our government's executive, have been seeking to destroy by promoting the culture of unbridled self interest over everything. The rapacious Predator Corporate State.
To them, the only thing that matters is how much they can accumulate. There is not a calculus for the well being of one's fellow citizens.
Our fellow citizens, most of whom are the exploited of our PREDATOR CORPORATE STATE.
Here are a series of posts I made on the problems of social security.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
"Those who do not know when enough is enough, can never have enough."
"Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of Stupidity" - Frank Leahy
Sounds like a Miller Lite commercial.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
'Entitlement' is a Raygunomics frame that immediately biases the discussion. Every American has paid in all their lives to program. It is, indeed, a right to expect to get paid back from it. Drop the term from usage and force a change in the debate.
The thing reichwingers don't understand about social security is it ain't a bank account. If you pull a significant younger group of workers out of the system, it is not them losing or gaining their money, but the generation preceding them who are now retiring losing out, years after paying money to their preceding generation.
Otherwise, why should the government put two dollars in for our every one? It's like interest on money we loaned the government.
Diabolus est Deus Inversus
I draw it. $260 a month. Not much but I earned it. I paid in to it when I was working, which wasn't much if I could help it.(just kidding) Many of the jobs I had in my youth were jobs that were paid "under the table" like seasonal work or even some waitress work. Then there are all the jobs like Go-Go dancer in a bar called The Cage in New Orleans. I got money tucked into my garter or skirt or tights...
Yup. I earned it alright and if anyone touches it or messes with it or tries to "privatize" it they will be nutless.
I read an article yesterday about people in Italy that had their social security in the stock mark lost a lot of money. They are outraged now the government is trying to find a way to give them their money back. I pray they don't touch social security in the states. That is one of the best programs ever. When you are young you don't think about it. But believe me you will when you get old and that is all you have because you never made enough to put away in a savings account. My dad retired from the military and worked as a civilian. He died suddenly at the age of 50 living my mother who was a homemaker with 2 small children under the age of 11. Between the army retirement and his social security my mom was able to take care of her children. My sisters and I help out living at home paying rent. Now next year is coming up and I will be 62 yrs old and I will apply for my early retirement. I have medical problems and tried to get security early but they turned me down. I know if I fight I could get it. But I can't afford a lawyer and Oct 09 I can apply and I will. I earned that money and what little I will make will help my family. Social security is the best program and so is medicare. I won't be eligible until am 65. But I have a good insurance so from my husband's military insurance.
Southern Yankee
He and Mom raised five kids and sent them ALL to college. When they retired they owned a house free and clear worth $17,000 dollars, they had about $20,000 in CD's... and a Social Security check every month. Thank God for those checks.
I can relate. My parents had 6 kids all in one family. The first 4 came early and the last 2 came after a 10 yr of no kids. Mom was in so mad. But hey when our dad died those 2 younger kids helped fill the lonely days. My dad retired from the military after 22 yrs. They rented a row home. We never had a chance to buy a house until after he died. The insurance helped my mom to be able to put a down payment down on a house. The move helped us move up the ladder. Without dad's pension and his social security I don't know what mom would have done because she never worked. She was a stay at home mom. Us kids never wanted her to go to work.
Southern Yankee
The younger people need to look back at history and see why social security was set up in the first place. May senior citizens died because they had no income after they got sick and couldn't work. Do we expect our children who are already being pressure from having older parents and young children. I was in that group for awhile. My mother inlaw got to the point she couldn't take care of herself. She was 89 yrs old. I was having to bath her, put diapers on her and my 1 month old grandchild. It got to be to much for me. Finally we had to put her into a nursery home because she broke her hip and she needed medical attention we couldn't give her. All I can say is thank god for social security and medicare. A lot of people lost money with their 401Ks.
Southern Yankee
"Entitlement is such a loaded word and is a perfect fit for the Frank Luntz/Bill O'Reilly's of the GOP. They turn my social security, the greatest program ever implemented in our country and the bedrock of the New Deal into a dirty word."
Even though it's a word problem it's not hard to do the math: If the party you blindly support has not one single idea amoungst them then how do you get re, and re, and re-elected?
A: You lie about the other parties good ideas and make it seem like your idea is against their idea, when in fact, you never had an idea and you are just nay-saying to anything the other person says.
Hell, the republican slogan would be "GOP: we haven't got a clue what we're doing, but we're still better then the queers and abortionists taking your children from you in the dark of night" if it would just fit on a bumper sticker!
I really don't think we all have to care what the Fox False channel says. Even middle income republicans believe the social security plan was one of the best programs ever to come. God forbid if the ever try to privatize it. I told my son no matter what keep your social security no matter how much they encourage you to put it into the stock market. We saw what happen to peoples 401K.
Southern Yankee
Regarding Social Security (Socialist Insecurity) from 2004, but this article is on point! http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul215.html (Please check your bias at the door, and read this mans words.)
Rothbard > Rothschild
"The greatest threat to your Social Security retirement funds is Congress itself. Congress has never required that Social Security tax dollars be kept separate from general revenues. In fact, the Social Security “trust fund” is not a trust fund at all. The dollars taken out of your paycheck are not deposited into an account to be paid to you later. On the contrary, they are spent immediately to pay current benefits, and to fund completely unrelated federal programs. Your Social Security administration “account” is nothing more than an IOU, a hopeful promise that enough younger taxpayers will be around to pay your benefits later. Decades of spendthrift congresses have turned the Social Security system into a giant Ponzi scheme, always dependent on new generations. The size and longevity of the Baby Boom generation, however, will finally collapse the house of cards."
A CEO that makes $5,000,000 a year has paid the maximum of his cost to SS in about the 1st month of the year. If everyone contributes fairly from their income SS will never have a problem and could be even better.
I am not sure if millionaires contribute to the social security. They should like everyone else. When its time for them to retire than they should collect it.
Southern Yankee
When you count the money I pay into my 401(k), plus my health insurance payroll deduction, plus health care deductible and copays, and add that to my taxes, I probably end up paying more for social services than the average resident of France or Sweden. And there are tens of millions of people like me.
The difference is, Frenchmen and Swedes have their services guaranteed, whereas when the stock market tanks, well, sucks to be you, bunky. Maybe you can retire when you're 80.
it is guaranteed. That is why you want a union and the resulting pension.
That is why employers don't want it.
Beginning with the Taft Hartley Act, 1947, the first great anti union blow, the move has been on to put you and your money in the same casino as the fat cats, where they want you.
Reagan was the second coming of the RAW DEAL. It has been gaining momentum every since.
Until the New Great Depression. Unfolding as we type.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
...is only guaranteed as long as the guarantor is solvent. The institutions that hold the annuities (which is what most guaranteed pensions are) can disappear in the blink of an eye. If the monetary system collapses - we all go down....
"Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of Stupidity" - Frank Leahy
the pensions fall to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
But you are entirely right, if the entire system goes down, everything falls into a black hole.
Except for the FAT CATS who have pulled their assets in favor of, probably, China.
They will contribute mightily to our collapse. This is typically the scenario in third world countries.
The capital flows out, the country collapses.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
is being crushed in other ways such as outsourcing jobs to slave labor markets limiting young people's ability to pay into a system and also reducing overall health of the economy. Those are things Ron Paul doesn't mention. I think the govt intends to destroy the monetary system by monetizing its massive debts by printing more money. They don't people to know the govt ripped them off....like GH bush "borrowing" $350 billion from the SS fund. Illegal immigration also cuts into the job base with under the table payments further crippling funding, not to mention denying Americans jobs. There used to be a time when doing janitorial work, cutting lawns and painting houses was a decent job, I did em and did just fine and was paid between $6 to $10/hr doing it....20 years ago. Used to make $500/wk painting houses when $500 would actually buy a reasonable car.
Social Security is a payroll tax, not a tax on capital gains or investment income. People who earn wages pay it, and there is a limit on how much tax can be collected from workers. If the limit was raised, or better yet eliminated, the problem with long term stability goes away.
Republicans don't like SS because employers have to match the workers share (that's a saving of about 7% of wages that can go to the bottom line or stockholders or executive bonuses). I believe that their objections to SS are simply that they are selfish and really don't see any need to socially responsible.
SS is the one great program from the New Deal. There are many other good and long lasting programs from that era, but SS is the crown jewel for working people.
Like all the other great Democratic presidents of the last 100 years Obama has the opportunity to create another long overdue reform when he gets universal health care passed. It is sure to tick off Republicans and I hope it gets done soon for all our sakes.
Timing is everything!
Snip - Ida May Fuller worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/hfaq.html
Study the symptoms not the virus...
I found that very interesting.
This one really got my attention. Check out the date on #5
What is your conceptual, continuity?
My right wing friend, he blamed Bill Clinton for taxing SS..and it was his hero..Ronnie Raygun...I'll have a ball with this! Thanks!
Your welcome. I wonder who pushed the idea? I don't know if that makes it better for them or worse? I'd have to check the numbers, though it turns my stomach to learn of their "Public Servant" income and benefits. I tend to believe the S.S. fund has turned into a cookie jar?
Study the symptoms not the virus...
I'm more than willing to trade my mere "entitlement" to a meager Social Security check when I retire for a real public pension that I can actually live on. Until someone's willing to pony that up, they should avoid the subject entirely. There's a reason they call SSI the "third rail" of American politics. As the majority of us get closer to retirement age it's only going to become more politically lethal to anyone who messes with it.
For me am 61 yrs old and come Oct 09 I will put in for my social security. Its my money and I earned every penny. Am not asking for charity. This country should take care of its senior citizens. I would work longer but my health issues prevent me from working. I thank god I have it. I don't know what I would do if I didn't have it.
Southern Yankee
...it becomes a right. I know because I got that notice in the mail that gives me the breakdown of my work history and outlines what I will receive. It's pretty freaky looking at my life on a print out by the way.
Stop fighting on their terms. You cannot win by calling something a right in this time of deep suspicion of rights. Instead, take the fight right to them in their language: you invested in Social Security. Your returns are guaranteed. Wait for the howls of outrage when you've used their reasoning against them.
The original concept made sense. A saftey net for one to look forward to in their golden years. The problem has been, is now and will always be Washington D.C.
When questioned on how to save Social Security, Alan Greenspan replied, " Move it as far away from politicians as possible". Why? Because there was never any locked box. The crooks have been dipping into SS to plug holes in the general budget for years. SS is listed as an unfunded liability according to the GAO. There is nothing there other than an I.O.U. to pay future generations via the printing press. More make believe money pulled out of thin air.
Reality is alot different.
Anytime I hear a politician say they are doing something good with our money I laugh. Impossible.
Since when do citizens have to pay for rights? Do you think only the wealthy should have freedom of religion?
Social security is a federally-mandated investment, much like car insurance is required for drivers. You pay something, and you hope to get something out of it. No guarantees in life.
I think it diminishes true human rights to throw around the term like that.
I have been on Social Security disability for over fifteen years. I paid in for over twenty years. In my case, it was an insurance policy. I became disabled and I have the right to receive the SS and Medicare benefits.
It is a good thing and has kept me alive.
It's obvious just from the few postings on this site that many people rely on that social security money. And it's obvious why, now that many have lost their "retirement" accounts in the stock market.
There are a lot of old timers (my grandparents included) who were laughed at for putting their savings in the bank. But as we know, from recent experience, a small return is better than losing your shirt.
We need to remind the politicians how important it is, so they don't place that money at risk.
That said something like 'Im more worried about the return of my money instead of return on my money.'
No I don't think its a laughing matter at all. During our grandparents time it was a little easier to put some money away because the cost of stuff was cheat. Gas was really cheap along with food prices. Today most people in the lower middle class and working poor are having hard times. We try to put money away but maybe the car breaks down and it has to be fixed. Some of us grandparents are helping our children trying to make ends meet. I know my son works hard as a cook. He has worked the same place for years and has gotten raises. He was just told that they won't be giving him a raise again until 2010. He had 2 weeks vacations now they took 1 week away. This is the kind of cut backs they are making where he works. His health insurance is high and his co-pay is high. He hardly can make ends meet with one child. He doesn't waste money and he spends all his off time with his child. They play alot of games. They have a lot of quality time. We have to help him pay some of his bills. He is to proud to ask for help from the government even though he can qualify. But he won't do it.
Southern Yankee
How dare you feel entitled to anything? I mean, old people eating Alpo is the American way, damnit! Who the hell are you to come in with your commie librul latte sipping ways and change it?! Maybe old people LIKE pet food, ever think of that?!
and for those who are slow on the uptake, yes, I was being sarcastic.
Sarcastic yes. Also the truth. I remember read that kind of stuff when I was a teenager. Now am almost 62 and am scared to death that something will be done for me not to be able to collect what is rightfully mine. I think you have been one of the few is recalls the past. I wish people would remember why they brought social security in the first place. To many old people were dying before they started getting social security. I say leave it alone. You betcha that old people pay attention to what goes on in congress. Because if you don't they will send the old people up the river.
Southern Yankee
The government has got to love all the suckers that believe in it. I cant wait until I retire and get my share in 30 years or so... oh wait... I probably will never see it.
I feel like giving big brother a big warm hug. Anybody seen Winston Smith lately?
They replaced our right with IOU's (a.k.a. bonds), I don't care how many rabbits Obama pulls out of his hat, that s**t is gone! Brutal truth but the sooner people wake up to that reality the sooner they will quit expecting it.
Sorry people both parties are lying sacks of stank!
Goodnight, Frau Blücher
I think Social Security payments used to be based on the last 5-10 years, so the chances were that the higher salaries at the end would influence the payout. Now they are averaging salaries over your whole life. So if you had a summer job in high school or college and only made a few hundred dollars and payroll taxes were taken out, you find out in your 50s and 60s that the amount you'd get will be adversely affected.
When I called my local Social Security office one and a half years ago, the worker called up my records. She noted that I'd made a high-middle income for several years ending 3 years prior. She asked my occupation (software developer).
She immediately became adversarial. She noted that I was applying for early benefits and started questioning me about my current income. I stated it was very little and she wanted to know if (for example) I'd tutor her at minimum wage.
Ultimately, the exchange became so adversarial that I snapped. I asked her, "Why are you in opposition to me collecting the money I have deposited with the government all these years? Do I have to get a lawyer to collect?"
Her response was telling, "I cannot advise you whether or not to get a lawyer. I can advise you that any statements you make better be true or we'll put you in jail."
If I had been frail physically and/or mentally, it seems obvious her bulldog tactics could have discouraged me from claiming benefits. To me, it was clear she was under orders to discourage early claims for ideological reasons.
All things in moderation ... including moderation
is a pay as you go system. FICA deductions go to pay benefits for recipients at that time. You are not 'depositing' money with the SS system.
If you would prefer a private account, then you would like the Reptiles proposal of privatized SS.
Until the stock market crashes, then you would be singing the blues.
See my previous posts.
statusquObama, change you can only pretend in
How hard is that to understand? You can spin, pretend or whatever you want to call it. The government took my money for 42 years on the promise that some of it would be available to me when I turned 62, or at age 65, I could get more.
Spin it however you want. I paid the money as mandated by law. The same law mandated the government would begin paying some of it back to me and age 62 or 65. Which part of that contract do you not understand?
Even our criminal president couldn't get SS linked to the market he and his buddies were busy looting. Therefore, I am entitled to my portion of the SS fund. Yes, I understand my portion may be limited by my earnings which I am obligated to report. I'll do that.
You have a problem with that? Read the law. Even BushCo hasn't invalidated THAT law ... yet.
All things in moderation ... including moderation
I sorta can relate. I applied last year for disability. I knew I was entitled with my medical issues. Alot of people told me you have to reapply because they always turn you down the first time. But I said to hell with it I just turned 61 and come Oct 09 I can apply for my social security then. Why should I have to pay a lawyer. My brother got lung cancer before thanksgiving and he applied for his disability. He died in April the same year. At that point he still had receive one check. His wife got a lump sum after he died. But he worried til the day he died trying to make it from payday to payday. What a way to end life at the age of 39 never smoked a day in his life.
Southern Yankee
They call it an "entitlement"... because we've already paid for it, and therefore we are ENTITLED to the benefits!
Tax the rich - that's where the money is.
If it has been so "successful", why did they have to raise the contribution rate from 2%to 12%? It is a vote buying ponzi scheme, that's all it ever was, and all it will ever be. I've been trying to get any of the SS lovers (and medicare/ medicaid for that matter) to quote the language in the Constitution that authorizes it for years, with no takers. And before you cite the "general welfare" clause, 2 things: That's a reason for a power, not a power in itself; and even more importantly, it refers to the welfare of the SEVERAL STATES, not the people, or any person. I submit the evidence is overwhelming that ss and the others have been extremely harmful to the states
Tell that to the people living on nothing but the Social Security income they EARNED and PAID FOR ... the lack of which would leave them starving instead.
I'm sure those starving old people would be good for a "free market" where only the fittest survive. But, those citizens who don't have inherited trust accounts may not see it as such a social good.
All things in moderation ... including moderation
Thanks for making my point. It is certainly good for the people who pay for 3 years and collect for forty. But still no demonstration of the constitutionality or the welfare of the states. Typical SS apologist.
Whay can't someone just answer my question?
And yes, it has been harmfull to the states, just as it is in Florida right now. Our legislature just had to cut a lot of our budget, including "welfare" programs that are solely within our state (funding and otherwise). They may have been able to save some of that if roughly 10% of all wages earned were not off the table due to these illegal ponzi schemes. As for the illegal part, ponzi schemes, which they certainly are, are considered mail and wire fraud.
Comments are closed on this entry