Check out some similar questions!

Wondergirl · Nov 18, 2013, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Big government... there is nothing private about the Social security program.

Our friends in Congress?

smoothy · Nov 18, 2013, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Our friends in Congress?

Don't blame congress alone... the Senate and the White House share in the blame.

Wondergirl · Nov 18, 2013, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Don't blame congress alone... the Senate and the White House share in the blame.

Senate is part of the Congress. Who took what?

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2013, 01:12 PM

Originally Posted by talaniman

You have already picked your poison, and you like it.

Yep, I'll take freedom over government coercion any day.

talaniman · Nov 18, 2013, 01:22 PM

Government must not be so bad if you have your freedom AND the poison you have chosen.

speechlesstx · Nov 18, 2013, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:
Let's review, shall we??

excon

FYI, current polls don't show a whole lot of approval for Obamacare. In fact, Rassmussen has it at its highest spread ever - 38 for and 58 against. What were you saying?

smoothy · Nov 18, 2013, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Senate is part of the Congress. Who took what?

They have been taking a specific tax out of every working persons paycheck for their entire working lives in the promise of providing a certain level of support in your old age...

SO they waste it on anything BUT that purpose... then say "sorry, we are out of money, so get a tin cup and stand on the street".

If anyone else charged you for a service then failed to provide it after they cashed your check... there would have been a crime committed.

And its been Happening since Johnson was in office.

That 14% is more than most people have to set aside for their own savings... so it's a not an insignificant fraud.

If it had actually been in that "Lockbox" they lied about for so many decades......there would be more than enough.

talaniman · Nov 18, 2013, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

They have been taking a specific tax out of every working persons paycheck for their entire working lives in the promise of providing a certain level of support in your old age...

SO they waste it on anything BUT that purpose... then say "sorry, we are out of money, so get a tin cup and stand on the street".

If anyone else charged you for a service then failed to provide it after they cashed your check... there would have been a crime committed.

And its been Happening since Johnson was in office.

That 14% is more than most people have to set aside for their own savings... so it's a not an insignificant fraud.

If it had actually been in that "Lockbox" they lied about for so many decades......there would be more than enough.

Where are the victims of this robbery and fraud?

smoothy · Nov 18, 2013, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by talaniman

Where are the victims of this robbery and fraud?

Everyone that's paid into the SSI system during their working years... and everyone that's going to have the benefits they paid for reduced or refused altogether in the very near future.

talaniman · Nov 18, 2013, 05:01 PM

Not if democrats stop the republicans from doing so. Wait a minute, aren't you a Republican? Didn't you vote for the Ryan plan?

paraclete · Nov 18, 2013, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Everyone that's paid into the SSI system during their working years... and everyone that's going to have the benefits they paid for reduced or refused altogether in the very near future.

So what you are saying is social programs cannot change over time

smoothy · Nov 18, 2013, 06:45 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

So what you are saying is social programs cannot change over time

What I'm saying if you are making people make mandatory payments for a program, a significant portion of their income... that money should ONLY be spent on that program. And the people that have peen paying for over 40 years into it... DESERVE to get what they were paying for.

paraclete · Nov 18, 2013, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

What I'm saying if you are making people make mandatory payments for a program, a significant portion of their income... that money should ONLY be spent on that program. And the people that have peen paying for over 40 years into it... DESERVE to get what they were paying for.

Ok by 2030 you will only get 77%, you should live so long and you only need to work for ten years to get it. I like the bit where early retirement costs you money, the assumption that jobs are available. I would say it was designed by a Republican

tomder55 · Nov 19, 2013, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

So what you are saying is social programs cannot change over time

Of course they can change. But what has happened to the Social Security Trust fund may be the biggest theft in world history.

tomder55 · Nov 19, 2013, 10:33 AM

And Obamacare is a Cloward-Piven orgasm... designed to bring down capitalism.

smoothy · Nov 19, 2013, 11:29 AM

I've got no issue with reduced payments for early retirement... and I think you should need a lot more than just 10 years paying into the system to qualify for benefits.

Point of not ebeing I'm 52... I've been paying in since I was 18... I will be working and paying in until I'm 67 before I can collect... assuming I live that long.I'm entitled to that benifit, I've paid for it. (yes we have a seperate tax specifically for that)

If I had the money I paid all those years in a individual retirement account right now... I would have no worries. Even with as many years as I have left to work.

paraclete · Nov 19, 2013, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

Of course they can change. But what has happened to the Social Security Trust fund may be the biggest theft in world history.

Where I come from we have this thing called "consolidated revenue" and the marvelous thing is; all the benefits are paid from it. I suspect the same approach is at the bottom of your evaporating SS

tomder55 · Nov 19, 2013, 03:06 PM

If you mean that they plundered the trust fund and use it as general revenue to pay the debt and hide the full extent of the budget deficit ,then yes .

paraclete · Nov 19, 2013, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by tomder55

If you mean that they plundered the trust fund and use it as general revenue to pay the debt and hide the full extent of the budget deficit ,then yes .

Place what intrepretation upon it you may, but the days of fund accounting are dead, the money goes in, the money goes out, every generation borrows from the future

cdad · Nov 19, 2013, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

where I come from we have this thing called "consolidated revenue" and the marvelous thing is; all the benefits are paid from it. I suspect the same approach is at the bottom of your evaporating SS

I have a question on this. In the U.S. it doesn't really go into an account and it doesn't really belong to you. Lets say as example the retirement age is 65. So to get to the benefits you have put money into you have to first reach that age. If you don't then you get nothing. The money accumulated can not be passed on to your heirs.

Does this "consolidated revenue" that you speak of work in simaler fashion or can it be passed along to your heirs?