Damn right i’m entitled and not a victim

If you worked 50 yrs, then your about 6 years older than me....
I won't be losing anything....nothing will change for people close to retirement (over 55).
So your rant is a bunch of BS.

Besides, if you don't think SOMETHING needs to be done with SS then your nuts! If it weren't for our government "borrowing" so much of it, giving it out to people who didn't put into it, using it to fund Obamacare, we wouldn't be in this spot. Something has to be done or there won't be anything there in a few years!

Stop your whining.....



$2.5 TRILLION of the national debt is debt owed to the social security administration.

So when the government pays social security to the recipients the Government is not borrowing money, they're PAYING IT BACK to the WORKERS who lent this nation that money in the first place.

Now go read a book and get yourself educated.

The government is indeed "borrowing the money" to cover current payments because that $2.5 Trillion that they owe SS is the OP's money that they have already spent.
Now they are "borrowing" from our children's SS to pay back the money they "borrowed" from the parents.
What used to be insurance is now a government ponzi scheme.

Just wait until the prime rate raises...let's see what happens with borrowing money then.
 
I've known many people who died before they were able to collect social security and it was absolutely passed down to surviving family members.

So you are either lying or the law has changed.

You can't live off social security. So it's totally a scam.
 
I've known many people who died before they were able to collect social security and it was absolutely passed down to surviving family members.

So you are either lying or the law has changed.

You can't live off social security. So it's totally a scam.

The only time SS is given to family members is when the decedant left underage &/or disabled survivors.

In normal operations, a retired husband and wife both collect SS. When one dies, the survivor gets the larger of the two checks, the other, smaller check, stops.


Let's do the math, shall we?
Let's say that you don't have to pay into SS anymore. (I don't mean you, Misty, I mean you, everyone reading this.) You have that extra 7.5% in your check, are you going to put twice that (or more) in the bank and save it for retirement? Probably not.

Let's say you do. Are you going to strictly parcel it out to yourself at the rate of $1000/month + a 3% per year COL increase? Probably not.

So then what? Everyone retires and nearly all of them have to go on welfare. They can't use welfare as a bridge until they get back on their feet, they're RETIRED. They are not going to get back to work.

So then what? Welfare will be stressed to the breaking point by a hundred million recipients who may have paid income taxes, but never added into the fund with payroll taxes, even though there's no question that at some point they'll no longer be able to work.

So welfare will collapse or income taxes will double for everyone else. If welfare collapses, all the old people die. So do the working poor and their innocent, not aborted precious life children.

I think Social Security needs more funding at a much higher interest rate. I think some sort of very light duty work could be created for the seniors (maybe those hospital volunteers could be paid.) But I'm sure that we must keep Social Security.
 
I've known many people who died before they were able to collect social security and it was absolutely passed down to surviving family members.

So you are either lying or the law has changed.

You can't live off social security. So it's totally a scam.

Dependent children (until the reach 18) can collect SS based on their deceased parents' contributions. I believe surviving spouses can also collect. But if you are unmarried or have older children, tough shit...that money's gone.

Survivors Planner: If You Are The Survivor
 
I've known many people who died before they were able to collect social security and it was absolutely passed down to surviving family members.

So you are either lying or the law has changed.

You can't live off social security. So it's totally a scam.

The only time SS is given to family members is when the decedant left underage &/or disabled survivors.

In normal operations, a retired husband and wife both collect SS. When one dies, the survivor gets the larger of the two checks, the other, smaller check, stops.


Let's do the math, shall we?
Let's say that you don't have to pay into SS anymore. (I don't mean you, Misty, I mean you, everyone reading this.) You have that extra 7.5% in your check, are you going to put twice that (or more) in the bank and save it for retirement? Probably not.

Let's say you do. Are you going to strictly parcel it out to yourself at the rate of $1000/month + a 3% per year COL increase? Probably not.

So then what? Everyone retires and nearly all of them have to go on welfare. They can't use welfare as a bridge until they get back on their feet, they're RETIRED. They are not going to get back to work.

So then what? Welfare will be stressed to the breaking point by a hundred million recipients who may have paid income taxes, but never added into the fund with payroll taxes, even though there's no question that at some point they'll no longer be able to work.

So welfare will collapse or income taxes will double for everyone else. If welfare collapses, all the old people die. So do the working poor and their innocent, not aborted precious life children.

I think Social Security needs more funding at a much higher interest rate. I think some sort of very light duty work could be created for the seniors (maybe those hospital volunteers could be paid.) But I'm sure that we must keep Social Security.


I had to pay into Social Security and still managed to fully fund an IRA every year for myself and my wife. I also made the maximum contributions to my 401K, but that was just me. I do agree that a lot of people wouldn't save the money, for example we are on the second year of a 2% cut in Soc Sec contributions for those in certain tax brackets, and I will bet that 2% windfall isn't being saved for retirement.

George Bush tried to privatize 10% of the Soc Sec contribution and the Democrats as well as some Republicans demonized him for even trying. Where would you get the higher interest rate?
 
Last edited:
When I was little banks paid as much as 7% on savings accounts. Those days are long gone, but if the SS accounts got 4% back, it would be a big help.

The money isn't just sitting in a locked room, some of it gets borrowed for things like war funding. It should be paid back at a fairly high rate.

BTW, we have 401Ks and IRAs, too.
 
I've known many people who died before they were able to collect social security and it was absolutely passed down to surviving family members.

So you are either lying or the law has changed.

You can't live off social security. So it's totally a scam.

The only time SS is given to family members is when the decedant left underage &/or disabled survivors.

In normal operations, a retired husband and wife both collect SS. When one dies, the survivor gets the larger of the two checks, the other, smaller check, stops.


Let's do the math, shall we?
Let's say that you don't have to pay into SS anymore. (I don't mean you, Misty, I mean you, everyone reading this.) You have that extra 7.5% in your check, are you going to put twice that (or more) in the bank and save it for retirement? Probably not.

Let's say you do. Are you going to strictly parcel it out to yourself at the rate of $1000/month + a 3% per year COL increase? Probably not.

So then what? Everyone retires and nearly all of them have to go on welfare. They can't use welfare as a bridge until they get back on their feet, they're RETIRED. They are not going to get back to work.

So then what? Welfare will be stressed to the breaking point by a hundred million recipients who may have paid income taxes, but never added into the fund with payroll taxes, even though there's no question that at some point they'll no longer be able to work.

So welfare will collapse or income taxes will double for everyone else. If welfare collapses, all the old people die. So do the working poor and their innocent, not aborted precious life children.

I think Social Security needs more funding at a much higher interest rate. I think some sort of very light duty work could be created for the seniors (maybe those hospital volunteers could be paid.) But I'm sure that we must keep Social Security.

Oh c'mon. That entire statement is born of the notion that people cannot be trusted with their own money. That government has ot take care it for them.
Ok, fine. I believe there may be many millions of people who are incapable of handling their finances. But why make it a captive system? Why not have an opt out for people who can prove they are capable? Why must everything be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator?
"Keep Social Security"? No one is even suggesting it be eliminated. Just changed for the better.
 
When I was little banks paid as much as 7% on savings accounts. Those days are long gone, but if the SS accounts got 4% back, it would be a big help.

The money isn't just sitting in a locked room, some of it gets borrowed for things like war funding. It should be paid back at a fairly high rate.

BTW, we have 401Ks and IRAs, too.

Savings rates or any other interest rates cannot be created out of thin air. The marketplace MUST determine those rates.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top