The TRUTH about American Social Security

[AVG-JOE]

The best news for Social Security came in 1984 when Reagan signed a law requiring all federal workers hired after 1984 to be on Social Security, effectively doing away with Civil Service Retirement. This includes your CongressCritters...

Once the leadership in congress is selected from employees hired after 1984, they will have a vested, personal interest in "fixing" Social Security.

As if you needed another reason to vote out the old white-haired dudes that have been haunting DC since the 70's...

Timeout- perhaps younger members of Congress do pay into social security, BUT they still have their ultralush congressional pension.

I think you're wrong - federal employees hired after '84 are on Social Security and Civil Service is being phased out as pre '84 hires retire and loose elections. If you can provide a link to information about a tax-payer funded retirement program for CongressCritters that is in addition to regular old SSA like the rest of us participate in, I will eat my words and be in your debt.

 

[auditor0007]

There is nothing wrong with Social Security. Currently, it has enough money to pay FULL benefits for the next 28 years.

After that? The reduction will be to 78 percent, and will go on indefinitely.

Today, Boehner stated that he wants to privatize Social Security and take away the Wall St. restrictions.

Could you imagine what would happen if Social Security was privatized and another Wall St. meltdown happened?

According to one source:
"The Trust Fund will gradually be drawn upon to cover the difference between tax receipts and benefit payments. It will be completely depleted by 2042 (according to the Social Security Administration) or 2052 (according to the Congressional Budget Office)."

I would suggest that the US Government impose an special tax on all goods sold in the USA that are manufactured in China. The proceeds from this tax would be contributed to the Social Security Trust fund to pay benefits to AMERICAN workers when they retire. After all, one of the reasons that employers transferred jobs to lower paid workers overseas was so that they could avoid paying the employer's own Social Security contribution of 6.2% of the American employee's wages to the Trust Fund!

While the money needs to come from somewhere, I find this idea very interesting. Basically, who buys cheap products made in China? Everyone does to a certain extent, but the poorer you are, the greater percentage of crap you probably purchase from China as a percentage of your income. So basically, this would be a tax on the poor, a bit like alcohol and cigarettes. Just another sin tax, but this one is for sinning by purchasing Chinese made products.

 

[Douger]

The best news for Social Security came in 1984 when Reagan signed a law requiring all federal workers hired after 1984 to be on Social Security, effectively doing away with Civil Service Retirement. This includes your CongressCritters...

Once the leadership in congress is selected from employees hired after 1984, they will have a vested, personal interest in "fixing" Social Security.

As if you needed another reason to vote out the old white-haired dudes that have been haunting DC since the 70's...

Makes no difference. They're all millionaire corporate whores. SS is chump change and they could care less.
Vote out the rich.

 

[AVG-JOE]

The best news for Social Security came in 1984 when Reagan signed a law requiring all federal workers hired after 1984 to be on Social Security, effectively doing away with Civil Service Retirement. This includes your CongressCritters...

Once the leadership in congress is selected from employees hired after 1984, they will have a vested, personal interest in "fixing" Social Security.

As if you needed another reason to vote out the old white-haired dudes that have been haunting DC since the 70's...

Makes no difference. They're all millionaire corporate whores. SS is chump change and they could care less.
Vote out the rich.

Yet ANOTHER reason to vote out the old white-haired dudes we tend to forget are our "leaders".

 

[Madeline]

Luissa, if your child has a "disabled" diagnosis already, he's qualified for SSI but the award will be governed by your income....if you make too much, he won't be eligible. Your local Social Security Office should be able to help you apply.

Paulie is correct, and few people seem to realize this. The bad old system of Aid To Families With Dependent Children is largely dead. However, the new Supplemental Security Income system has replaced it to a large extent. Living on less than $700 a month is unattractive as hell...but what if you have six kids and all of them are "disabled"?

Does anyone besides me think it's odd we're paying benefits to children to replace....what, exactly? Were they ever expected to be wage earners? Does anyone besides me think it's odd that after this change in the law, diagnoses of childhood disabilities sky-rocketed? How about whether it's irrational to be granting cash awards to the families of poor disabled kids but not to the families of poor healthy kids?

SSI: The Black Hole of the Welfare State

SSRN-Transitions from Afdc to Ssi Prior to Welfare Reform - Policy Brief by David Wittenburg, David Stapleton

Disability, Welfare Reform, and Supplemental Security Income

Children Receiving SSI, 2006 - Table 8

 

[Madeline]

The SSI program is tantamont to offering poor women tens of thousands of dollars to have a sick baby. Anyone want to guess what evil effect that has had? At least AFDC did not reward women for damaging their kids.