SS and Medicare depleted sooner than expected

[Iriemon]

If you're sitting around waiting for money to fall into your lap, then you're pretty damn stupid. You work, you be responsible, you plan and budget, and you save for your own future. It's really quite simple. You don't rely on everyone else in society who has done just that to save your sorry ass from your own incompetencies.

There are exceptions to that for people who are unable to do so, but it should be a very small percentage of society, and not need an entire bureaucratic government-run system worth billions to support that small percentage of people who are 'unable'.

Thanks for the lecture. Anything relevant you wanted to add?

It tells me all I need to know about you when you can't agree with that.

And it tells me all I need to know about you that you assert that I can't agree with that when I said no such thing.

 

[Iriemon]

SS isn't insurance ... it's a forced collection for retirement.

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Really ... um ... then I still should get my money back because they didn't make in voluntary, and insurance is voluntary.

Insurance is not necessarily voluntary. Here in Florida you have to have collision insurance or you can't drive, for example. SS is not voluntary, and that fact does not change the fact that it is insurance in nature. No taxes are voluntary, and you don't get them back.

 

[KittenKoder]

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Really ... um ... then I still should get my money back because they didn't make in voluntary, and insurance is voluntary.

Insurance is not necessarily voluntary. Here in Florida you have to have collision insurance or you can't drive, for example. SS is not voluntary, and that fact does not change the fact that it is insurance in nature. No taxes are voluntary, and you don't get them back.

Yes it is, if you don't want auto insurance you simply choose not to drive, simple. Also, even in instances in which you are suppose to (many people still choose not to) you get to choose where and who handles it, thus the risk is all on you. With SS the risk of the financial stability of it is not in our hands, proven by the government raiding it regularly. Since we have no control over it, it's not insurance, it's either robbery or forced retirement investment. As an investment I can understand, but unless they return it, it should have been voluntary from the beginning, period. So, it's really just robbery.

 

[Iriemon]

Really ... um ... then I still should get my money back because they didn't make in voluntary, and insurance is voluntary.

Insurance is not necessarily voluntary. Here in Florida you have to have collision insurance or you can't drive, for example. SS is not voluntary, and that fact does not change the fact that it is insurance in nature. No taxes are voluntary, and you don't get them back.

Yes it is, if you don't want auto insurance you simply choose not to drive, simple. Also, even in instances in which you are suppose to (many people still choose not to) you get to choose where and who handles it, thus the risk is all on you. With SS the risk of the financial stability of it is not in our hands, proven by the government raiding it regularly. Since we have no control over it, it's not insurance, it's either robbery or forced retirement investment. As an investment I can understand, but unless they return it, it should have been voluntary from the beginning, period. So, it's really just robbery.

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

It's absolutely like insurance. How did you ever get the idea that somehow you were entitled to your money back? Who said that?

It's not supposed to be an investment. It's a social insurance program so that as a nation, we don't have hordes of old folks, disabled people and orphans living under freeways begging at stoplights because they have no assets to live on.

And it works great. Could you image what the country would be like without SS?

Its no more robbery than any other tax. Its the cost of being a US citizen. You don't have to pay US taxes, SS or otherwise, by moving out and revoking citizenship.

 

[Newby]

You don't get your money back when you pay for insurance, sorry.

SS isn't insurance ... it's a forced collection for retirement.

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Your family does not get benefits, only if you have a surviving spouse, and at that it's only a small fraction of what the benefits should be. Your children get nothing unless they're underage, and again it's a pittance compared to what has been paid in.

What I'd like to know is why you're all about taking people's money by force and thinking that it's your God given right to do so?

 

[Iriemon]

SS isn't insurance ... it's a forced collection for retirement.

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Your family does not get benefits, only if you have a surviving spouse, and at that it's only a small fraction of what the benefits should be. Your children get nothing unless they're underage, and again it's a pittance compared to what has been paid in.

That is why it's like insurance. If you die leaving a wiife and small kids, they will receive cumulative benefits far more than you paid in. For many it can be the difference between living in the car or not.

What I'd like to know is why you're all about taking people's money by force and thinking that it's your God given right to do so?

It's not my God given right. It's the Govt's constitutionally given right as desired by the majority.

 

[KittenKoder]

Insurance is not necessarily voluntary. Here in Florida you have to have collision insurance or you can't drive, for example. SS is not voluntary, and that fact does not change the fact that it is insurance in nature. No taxes are voluntary, and you don't get them back.

Yes it is, if you don't want auto insurance you simply choose not to drive, simple. Also, even in instances in which you are suppose to (many people still choose not to) you get to choose where and who handles it, thus the risk is all on you. With SS the risk of the financial stability of it is not in our hands, proven by the government raiding it regularly. Since we have no control over it, it's not insurance, it's either robbery or forced retirement investment. As an investment I can understand, but unless they return it, it should have been voluntary from the beginning, period. So, it's really just robbery.

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

It's absolutely like insurance. How did you ever get the idea that somehow you were entitled to your money back? Who said that?

It's not supposed to be an investment. It's a program so that as a nation, we don't have hordes of old folks, disabled people and orphans living under freeways begging at stoplights because they have no assets to live on.

And it works great. Could you image what the country would be like without SS?

Its no more robbery than any other tax. Its the cost of being a US citizen. You don't have to pay US taxes, SS or otherwise, by moving out and revoking citizenship.

You missed the key point, YOU get to choose who you place the risk in. With the government you don't. Now look at what's happening, they raided it, it's failing, and all of our money is vanishing. Also, no, we do have thousands of homeless in every city now, they aren't outside thanks to social programs which ultimately cost more. Many are denied SS because of some loophole. It IS robbery, and you are falling for it blindly. If given the opportunity would you have handed them the money you earned in hopes that it will be there when you retire now? It sounded so great when I first started working, and I was naive enough to think that the government could be trusted with it, now I know different, I want to move my account, but that option isn't available is it? Unless there is some strange and unknown way to avoid paying it without breaking a law. Since it's a law it's forced, and since they are spending the money for their pet projects instead of using it for it's intended purpose it's robbery. If they were an insurance company there would be a way to fight it and get your money back with interest for retirement benefits. But since they are the ones holding the guns, we can't sue them. That's the worst kind of robbery.

 

[Newby]

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Your family does not get benefits, only if you have a surviving spouse, and at that it's only a small fraction of what the benefits should be. Your children get nothing unless they're underage, and again it's a pittance compared to what has been paid in.

That is why it's like insurance. If you die leaving a wiife and small kids, they will receive cumulative benefits far more than you paid in. For many it can be the difference between living in the car or not.

What I'd like to know is why you're all about taking people's money by force and thinking that it's your God given right to do so?

It's not my God given right. It's the Govt's constitutionally given right as desired by the majority.

You have a complete lack of understanding of what insurance is then my friend. If I buy insurance, I decide how much I want, I decide who my beneficiary is, and that beneficiary gets the full face amount of that insurance as a lump sum or in installments regardless of their age or income. Social security does not fall into any of those categories, it is not insurance. It's a government scheme to take in as much money as it can from it's citizens with no real apparent obligation to pay it back. What insurance have you ever heard of that doesn't have to pay anything out upon death? If an older person passes away without a spouse or any children under age 18, who gets their money?

I wonder if there's a study anywhere that shows how much the government has taken in but never paid out to the person who contributed it or to any 'beneficiary', i.e. just pocketed the entire amount? I'll have to look into that one.

 

[Newby]

Yes it is, if you don't want auto insurance you simply choose not to drive, simple. Also, even in instances in which you are suppose to (many people still choose not to) you get to choose where and who handles it, thus the risk is all on you. With SS the risk of the financial stability of it is not in our hands, proven by the government raiding it regularly. Since we have no control over it, it's not insurance, it's either robbery or forced retirement investment. As an investment I can understand, but unless they return it, it should have been voluntary from the beginning, period. So, it's really just robbery.

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

It's absolutely like insurance. How did you ever get the idea that somehow you were entitled to your money back? Who said that?

It's not supposed to be an investment. It's a program so that as a nation, we don't have hordes of old folks, disabled people and orphans living under freeways begging at stoplights because they have no assets to live on.

And it works great. Could you image what the country would be like without SS?

Its no more robbery than any other tax. Its the cost of being a US citizen. You don't have to pay US taxes, SS or otherwise, by moving out and revoking citizenship.

You missed the key point, YOU get to choose who you place the risk in. With the government you don't. Now look at what's happening, they raided it, it's failing, and all of our money is vanishing. Also, no, we do have thousands of homeless in every city now, they aren't outside thanks to social programs which ultimately cost more. Many are denied SS because of some loophole. It IS robbery, and you are falling for it blindly. If given the opportunity would you have handed them the money you earned in hopes that it will be there when you retire now? It sounded so great when I first started working, and I was naive enough to think that the government could be trusted with it, now I know different, I want to move my account, but that option isn't available is it? Unless there is some strange and unknown way to avoid paying it without breaking a law. Since it's a law it's forced, and since they are spending the money for their pet projects instead of using it for it's intended purpose it's robbery. If they were an insurance company there would be a way to fight it and get your money back with interest for retirement benefits. But since they are the ones holding the guns, we can't sue them. That's the worst kind of robbery.

He's not naive, he knows perfectly well what he's advocating. He's all about government control, I'm guessing he works in the government or is affiliated in some manor. He somehow benefits from the government robbing its people, I don't see how any sane person could hold the beliefs that he appears to hold, unless you believe in communism. He doesn't seem to believe in individual rights unless it's abortion and taking drugs.

 

[Iriemon]

Yes it is, if you don't want auto insurance you simply choose not to drive, simple. Also, even in instances in which you are suppose to (many people still choose not to) you get to choose where and who handles it, thus the risk is all on you. With SS the risk of the financial stability of it is not in our hands, proven by the government raiding it regularly. Since we have no control over it, it's not insurance, it's either robbery or forced retirement investment. As an investment I can understand, but unless they return it, it should have been voluntary from the beginning, period. So, it's really just robbery.

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

It's absolutely like insurance. How did you ever get the idea that somehow you were entitled to your money back? Who said that?

It's not supposed to be an investment. It's a program so that as a nation, we don't have hordes of old folks, disabled people and orphans living under freeways begging at stoplights because they have no assets to live on.

And it works great. Could you image what the country would be like without SS?

Its no more robbery than any other tax. Its the cost of being a US citizen. You don't have to pay US taxes, SS or otherwise, by moving out and revoking citizenship.

You missed the key point, YOU get to choose who you place the risk in. With the government you don't.

I get it. I disagree with your contention that is a key point in the characteristics that make SS insurance and not an investment. Irrespective of the fact that it is a mandatory program, SS is an insurance for the reasons I said. It's not an investment were you get your money back or if you die it goes to your heirs.

Now look at what's happening, they raided it, it's failing, and all of our money is vanishing.
Also, no, we do have thousands of homeless in every city now, they aren't outside thanks to social programs which ultimately cost more.

Yeah, and SS is a biggie.

Many are denied SS because of some loophole.

No that I'm aware of. If you meet the conditions, you get it.

It IS robbery, and you are falling for it blindly.

Robbery is unlawful taking. SS is lawful.

If given the opportunity would you have handed them the money you earned in hopes that it will be there when you retire now? It sounded so great when I first started working, and I was naive enough to think that the government could be trusted with it, now I know different, I want to move my account, but that option isn't available is it? Unless there is some strange and unknown way to avoid paying it without breaking a law. Since it's a law it's forced, and since they are spending the money for their pet projects instead of using it for it's intended purpose it's robbery. If they were an insurance company there would be a way to fight it and get your money back with interest for retirement benefits.

How do you do that when the insurance company is bankrupt? Oh yeah, get the coverage from the Govt.

But since they are the ones holding the guns, we can't sue them. That's the worst kind of robbery.

It's the government. If you don't like the way they've stolen the SS trust monies to finance the tax cut deficits, vote for someone else. I didn't vote for Bush.

But it's not robbery, because its quite legal.

 

[KittenKoder]

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

It's absolutely like insurance. How did you ever get the idea that somehow you were entitled to your money back? Who said that?

It's not supposed to be an investment. It's a program so that as a nation, we don't have hordes of old folks, disabled people and orphans living under freeways begging at stoplights because they have no assets to live on.

And it works great. Could you image what the country would be like without SS?

Its no more robbery than any other tax. Its the cost of being a US citizen. You don't have to pay US taxes, SS or otherwise, by moving out and revoking citizenship.

You missed the key point, YOU get to choose who you place the risk in. With the government you don't.

I get it. I disagree with your contention that is a key point in the characteristics that make SS insurance and not an investment. Irrespective of the fact that it is a mandatory program, SS is an insurance for the reasons I said. It's not an investment were you get your money back or if you die it goes to your heirs.



Yeah, and SS is a biggie.



No that I'm aware of. If you meet the conditions, you get it.



Robbery is unlawful taking. SS is lawful.

If given the opportunity would you have handed them the money you earned in hopes that it will be there when you retire now? It sounded so great when I first started working, and I was naive enough to think that the government could be trusted with it, now I know different, I want to move my account, but that option isn't available is it? Unless there is some strange and unknown way to avoid paying it without breaking a law. Since it's a law it's forced, and since they are spending the money for their pet projects instead of using it for it's intended purpose it's robbery. If they were an insurance company there would be a way to fight it and get your money back with interest for retirement benefits.

How do you do that when the insurance company is bankrupt? Oh yeah, get the coverage from the Govt.

But since they are the ones holding the guns, we can't sue them. That's the worst kind of robbery.

It's the government. If you don't like the way they've stolen the SS trust monies to finance the tax cut deficits, vote for someone else. I didn't vote for Bush.

But it's not robbery, because its quite legal.

It is robbery, legal or not. It's taking money by force, period. Only to use the money to benefit yourself. You really are not seeing what it is. Well, all our money that we paid into it will be gone soon, and since we were not given the choice of who maintains and holds our money it's not our fault, but it is yours since you are advocating for it. So, we should be allowed to sue, since an insurance company who does the same thing would also be the target of lawsuits, you are making the government blameless, so you should not be allowed to sue, since you chose it.

 

[Iriemon]

Your family does not get benefits, only if you have a surviving spouse, and at that it's only a small fraction of what the benefits should be. Your children get nothing unless they're underage, and again it's a pittance compared to what has been paid in.

That is why it's like insurance. If you die leaving a wiife and small kids, they will receive cumulative benefits far more than you paid in. For many it can be the difference between living in the car or not.

What I'd like to know is why you're all about taking people's money by force and thinking that it's your God given right to do so?

It's not my God given right. It's the Govt's constitutionally given right as desired by the majority.

You have a complete lack of understanding of what insurance is then my friend. If I buy insurance, I decide how much I want, I decide who my beneficiary is, and that beneficiary gets the full face amount of that insurance as a lump sum or in installments regardless of their age or income. Social security does not fall into any of those categories, it is not insurance. It's a government scheme to take in as much money as it can from it's citizens with no real apparent obligation to pay it back. What insurance have you ever heard of that doesn't have to pay anything out upon death? If an older person passes away without a spouse or any children under age 18, who gets their money?

The Govt. So how can you argue SS is like an investment and not insurance? If it was an investment you'd get your money back, wouldn't you? Of course.

After spending years paying for life insurance, go to your life insurance carrier and ask for you money back. Good luck. SS is the same way as insurance. You only get benefits if a condition happens, and you don't get your investment back.

I wonder if there's a study anywhere that shows how much the government has taken in but never paid out to the person who contributed it or to any 'beneficiary', i.e. just pocketed the entire amount? I'll have to look into that one.

Probably millions. Just like life insurance. You paid premiums all your life, and if you don't die, the insurance company just pockets the entire amount. That is why SS is insurance. You only get it if conditions apply.

If you've only worked a few years and die with a wife and young kids, they get benefits for years, far more than you paid in. If it was an investment, you'd only get back the little bit you put in for a few years and they your wife and kids would be SOL. Here again, SS is like insurance, a life insurance, not an investment. See the difference?

 

[Iriemon]

You missed the key point, YOU get to choose who you place the risk in. With the government you don't.

I get it. I disagree with your contention that is a key point in the characteristics that make SS insurance and not an investment. Irrespective of the fact that it is a mandatory program, SS is an insurance for the reasons I said. It's not an investment were you get your money back or if you die it goes to your heirs.

Yeah, and SS is a biggie.

No that I'm aware of. If you meet the conditions, you get it.

Robbery is unlawful taking. SS is lawful.

How do you do that when the insurance company is bankrupt? Oh yeah, get the coverage from the Govt.

But since they are the ones holding the guns, we can't sue them. That's the worst kind of robbery.

It's the government. If you don't like the way they've stolen the SS trust monies to finance the tax cut deficits, vote for someone else. I didn't vote for Bush.

But it's not robbery, because its quite legal.

It is robbery, legal or not. It's taking money by force, period.

That is not robbery at all. If I lend you $10,000 with a contract to pay me back in a year with interest, and you don't, I can take your money. By force, period. Is that robbery? No.

Only to use the money to benefit yourself. You really are not seeing what it is. Well, all our money that we paid into it will be gone soon, and since we were not given the choice of who maintains and holds our money it's not our fault, but it is yours since you are advocating for it. So, we should be allowed to sue, since an insurance company who does the same thing would also be the target of lawsuits, you are making the government blameless, so you should not be allowed to sue, since you chose it.

I said the Govt was blameless? I guess you haven't read any of my several posts ranting about how the last three Republican administration stole our SS trust fund to finance their stinking deficits to give tax cuts that mostly benefitted the wealthy.

We had a surplus in 2000. The debt was being paid down. Rather than continue that path, the states put Bush into power who ran up huge deficits, borrowing away our SS trust funds. Blame the folks who put him in power if you want to be mad at someone.

 

[KittenKoder]

That is why it's like insurance. If you die leaving a wiife and small kids, they will receive cumulative benefits far more than you paid in. For many it can be the difference between living in the car or not.



It's not my God given right. It's the Govt's constitutionally given right as desired by the majority.

You have a complete lack of understanding of what insurance is then my friend. If I buy insurance, I decide how much I want, I decide who my beneficiary is, and that beneficiary gets the full face amount of that insurance as a lump sum or in installments regardless of their age or income. Social security does not fall into any of those categories, it is not insurance. It's a government scheme to take in as much money as it can from it's citizens with no real apparent obligation to pay it back. What insurance have you ever heard of that doesn't have to pay anything out upon death? If an older person passes away without a spouse or any children under age 18, who gets their money?

The Govt. So how can you argue SS is like an investment and not insurance? If it was an investment you'd get your money back, wouldn't you? Of course.

After spending years paying for life insurance, go to your life insurance carrier and ask for you money back. Good luck. SS is the same way as insurance. You only get benefits if a condition happens, and you don't get your investment back.

I wonder if there's a study anywhere that shows how much the government has taken in but never paid out to the person who contributed it or to any 'beneficiary', i.e. just pocketed the entire amount? I'll have to look into that one.

Probably millions. Just like life insurance. You paid premiums all your life, and if you don't die, the insurance company just pockets the entire amount. That is why SS is insurance. You only get it if conditions apply.

If you've only worked a few years and die with a wife and young kids, they get benefits for years, far more than you paid in. If it was an investment, you'd only get back the little bit you put in for a few years and they your wife and kids would be SOL. Here again, SS is like insurance, a life insurance, not an investment. See the difference?

Not if you die before you get to collect it ... you can't get an investment back all the time, but if those who handle the investment abuse the money they are suppose to invest, you do have legal retribution, same with private insurance companies. You can't with the government, thus it's robbery.

 

[Newby]

The Govt. So how can you argue SS is like an investment and not insurance? If it was an investment you'd get your money back, wouldn't you? Of course.

After spending years paying for life insurance, go to your life insurance carrier and ask for you money back. Good luck. SS is the same way as insurance. You only get benefits if a condition happens, and you don't get your investment back.

I'm not arguing that it's an investment at all. It's not insurance either. It's neither. It's a government program, period. One that takes advantage of its citizens and forces them to participate in something when there should be a CHOICE. You know, that pesky little word that people on your side of the political spectrum seem to love unless it comes to someone keeping their own money.

And you're wrong about insurance, there most assuredly are policies where you can invest your money and start collecting back after a certain amount of time. You're talking about term life insurance, very narrow minded of you.

Probably millions. Just like life insurance. You paid premiums all your life, and if you don't die, the insurance company just pockets the entire amount. That is why SS is insurance. You only get it if conditions apply.

If you've only worked a few years and die with a wife and young kids, they get benefits for years, far more than you paid in. If it was an investment, you'd only get back the little bit you put in for a few years and they your wife and kids would be SOL. Here again, SS is like insurance, a life insurance, not an investment. See the difference?

I'm sure it's more than millions.

You're a regular piece of work. You've added on the second paragraph or changed this somehow from the original post that I read. Where the hell do you get that you pay your entire life and the insurance company 'pockets' the entire amount???? Are you serious? The money gets paid out to the designated beneficiary after you die, do you seriously not understand that?

Your spouce only gets a small percentage of what you would have collected, and your children only up until they're 18. And if you die that young, your payments wouldn't add up to much in any case. A life insurance policy pays out the ENTIRE face amount (regardless of how long you've paid for the insurance) of the insurance to the beneficiary upon death regardless of their age. You can't make blanket statements about an investment like that either. It entirely depends on how much you invested and what return you got on it. Social Security has literally NO ROI at all. Your family could be rolling in money if it was a good investment, so how you can say they'd be SOL is ridiculous and not being intellectually honest at all.

 

[Newby]

With private insurance you run the risk of the insurer going belly up.

I almost choked whenever I read that. No sign of the government going 'belly up' anytime soon, is there??

What do you do for a living? How can anyone be such a shill for the government???

 

[Newby]

It's not my God given right. It's the Govt's constitutionally given right as desired by the majority.

You're clueless. Show me where in the Constitution that social security is provided for?

And what's 'the majority' that you speak of?

 

[Iriemon]

You have a complete lack of understanding of what insurance is then my friend. If I buy insurance, I decide how much I want, I decide who my beneficiary is, and that beneficiary gets the full face amount of that insurance as a lump sum or in installments regardless of their age or income. Social security does not fall into any of those categories, it is not insurance. It's a government scheme to take in as much money as it can from it's citizens with no real apparent obligation to pay it back. What insurance have you ever heard of that doesn't have to pay anything out upon death? If an older person passes away without a spouse or any children under age 18, who gets their money?

The Govt. So how can you argue SS is like an investment and not insurance? If it was an investment you'd get your money back, wouldn't you? Of course.

After spending years paying for life insurance, go to your life insurance carrier and ask for you money back. Good luck. SS is the same way as insurance. You only get benefits if a condition happens, and you don't get your investment back.

I wonder if there's a study anywhere that shows how much the government has taken in but never paid out to the person who contributed it or to any 'beneficiary', i.e. just pocketed the entire amount? I'll have to look into that one.

Probably millions. Just like life insurance. You paid premiums all your life, and if you don't die, the insurance company just pockets the entire amount. That is why SS is insurance. You only get it if conditions apply.

If you've only worked a few years and die with a wife and young kids, they get benefits for years, far more than you paid in. If it was an investment, you'd only get back the little bit you put in for a few years and they your wife and kids would be SOL. Here again, SS is like insurance, a life insurance, not an investment. See the difference?

Not if you die before you get to collect it ... you can't get an investment back all the time, but if those who handle the investment abuse the money they are suppose to invest, you do have legal retribution, same with private insurance companies. You can't with the government, thus it's robbery.

Sure you can. It's called a ballot.

 

[Newby]

I said the Govt was blameless? I guess you haven't read any of my several posts ranting about how the last three Republican administration stole our SS trust fund to finance their stinking deficits to give tax cuts that mostly benefitted the wealthy.

Yeah, it's those evil Republicans!!!!

 

[Newby]

I think you have been mislead as to what SS is.

SS is social insurance. Just like insurance, you pay in for it to get benefits if certain conditions apply. You don't automatically get your money back. If you die at age 65, you get nothing. On the other hand, if you live to 120, you get benefits. If you become disabled, you get benefits. If you die, your family gets benefits.

It's not an never was an investment any more than life insurance of health coverage is an investment.

Really ... um ... then I still should get my money back because they didn't make in voluntary, and insurance is voluntary.

Insurance is not necessarily voluntary. Here in Florida you have to have collision insurance or you can't drive, for example. SS is not voluntary, and that fact does not change the fact that it is insurance in nature. No taxes are voluntary, and you don't get them back.

Ah, now we're going to throw a curve out there and pretend that we're discussing auto insurance and that somehow relates to SS and life insurance how???