Who destroyed Social Security?

eflatminor

Classical Liberal
Joined
May 24, 2011
Messages
10,644
Reaction score
1,666
Points
245
Is this the idea of a political "promise"?:

When FDR introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary


2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000


3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible


4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent


5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
 

DiamondDave

Army Vet
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
18,169
Reaction score
2,824
Points
183
Location
MD, on the Potomac River
Who destroyed it??

Government, with it's tendency to keep expanding for ever increasing power..... and it's been across numerous government persons and parties
 

peach174

Gold Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2010
Messages
26,246
Reaction score
6,761
Points
290
Location
S.E. AZ
To be fair, both parties took the surplus from the funds, of which was never suppose to happen.
But is is the Dems who have destroyed it the most.
 

DontBeStupid

Look it up!
Joined
Jun 23, 2011
Messages
4,463
Reaction score
429
Points
48
Location
Los Angeles, CA
You can talk all you want about what the Democrats did. But, if you ignore the fact that 11 years ago we were looking at budget surpluses that were to be used to re-pay the Trust fund, and a GOP President decided to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead, well, if you ignore that, then you're just being a partisan hack.
 

StevenC

VIP Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
964
Reaction score
189
Points
80
We are largely to blame. We elect those that set the policies, and then reelect the same people over and over again. Also when people pull from SS even though they don't need it, that is a problem. I know it is supposed to be our money but if you don't need it you shouldn't take it. We need serious means testing on it.
 

StevenC

VIP Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
964
Reaction score
189
Points
80
You can talk all you want about what the Democrats did. But, if you ignore the fact that 11 years ago we were looking at budget surpluses that were to be used to re-pay the Trust fund, and a GOP President decided to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead, well, if you ignore that, then you're just being a partisan hack.
Both parties are equally to blame. Bush needed dems to support the tax cuts also.
 

MiddleClass

Moderate American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
362
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Delaware
The Democrats wanted social programs and the Republicans only would allow them if they borrowed to pay them from Social Security Fund. Both Parities are to blame for what would be a completely funded Social Security if a lock box had been placed on it.
 

MiddleClass

Moderate American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
362
Reaction score
81
Points
28
Location
Delaware
You can talk all you want about what the Democrats did. But, if you ignore the fact that 11 years ago we were looking at budget surpluses that were to be used to re-pay the Trust fund, and a GOP President decided to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead, well, if you ignore that, then you're just being a partisan hack.
Both parties are equally to blame. Bush needed dems to support the tax cuts also.
Yet, the majority of Dems voted against Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.
 

DiamondDave

Army Vet
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
18,169
Reaction score
2,824
Points
183
Location
MD, on the Potomac River
You can talk all you want about what the Democrats did. But, if you ignore the fact that 11 years ago we were looking at budget surpluses that were to be used to re-pay the Trust fund, and a GOP President decided to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead, well, if you ignore that, then you're just being a partisan hack.
Both parties are equally to blame. Bush needed dems to support the tax cuts also.
Yet, the majority of Dems voted against Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy.
Yawn... tax cuts were not only for 'the wealthy'

Nor do tax cuts cause spending problems or increased spending
 
Joined
Oct 8, 2009
Messages
50,337
Reaction score
10,053
Points
0
You can talk all you want about what the Democrats did. But, if you ignore the fact that 11 years ago we were looking at budget surpluses that were to be used to re-pay the Trust fund, and a GOP President decided to give tax cuts to the wealthy instead, well, if you ignore that, then you're just being a partisan hack.
If the money had not been stolen from the fund, there would be no reason to 're-pay' it. I couldn't give a shit which party did what.... I care that - again - both fucking parties prove beyond a reasonable doubt (to anyone with an IQ over room temperature) that they cannot be trusted with taxpayers money.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
60,755
Reaction score
15,474
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
If it were a PRIVATE insurance fund with no assets, no accountibility for pilfering the premiums, and noted for OVER-charging the least able to afford it --- you just KNOW -- the lefties would use it as a principle example of corporate immoral behaviour.

We should NEVER abandon the concept of UNIVERSAL protection for ALL workers by means testing or raising the cap to a point where fewer people actually see a benefit. Because if we go there -- we're redefining Soc Sec into another welfare entitlement. You wanna do that? Let's start from scratch.. Because otherwise the politicians are just gonna pump the heck out of it.

BTW: I've noticed that the govt is still lying about the Trust Fund. And I've also noticed that a NEW SCAM is brewing.. When they project that the deficits will be covered by transfers of "interest" from the Trust Fund -- they OVERSTATE the amount of money that needs to be drawn from "the trust fund" to cover the deficit in Soc Sec for that year.. That can only mean 2 things:

1) They are "CHARGING" Soc Sec with more debt than it needs to cover it's bills -- thus HIDING debt from the General Budget into Soc Sec which is now "off-budget" ((Sneaky bastards))

2) The EXCESS that they are giving Soc Sec in each of those forecast years is just "recycling" the debt since NONE of that EXCESS is going into "future" SS obligations. ((Major Scam))

Better study this now and see if I'm right -- because the a-holes are STILL using this program as their private piggy bank. I KNOW you'll be seeing this in the news any day now...

They (BOTH PARTIES) have played this thing like fiddle. And now that they don't have an EXCESS to skim profits off of --- THey are using Soc Sec to launder and recycle other govt debt..
 
Last edited:

Big Fitz

User Quit *****
Joined
Nov 23, 2009
Messages
16,917
Reaction score
2,521
Points
48
Is this the idea of a political "promise"?:

When FDR introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary


2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000


3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible


4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent


5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
it's a ponzi scheme. The users destroyed it.
 
R

rdean

Guest
Is this the idea of a political "promise"?:

When FDR introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary


2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000


3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible


4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent


5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
Wow, all those great links gave me the opportunity to see for myself.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
60,755
Reaction score
15,474
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Wow, all those great links gave me the opportunity to see for myself.
__________________
rdean
Whoooa.. You don't KNOW this stuff RDean? (E.G.) That is was Clinton who lobbied for and got increased taxes on SS income?

Actually tho - to be fair -- FDR promised that the premium would never EXCEED 4% of your payroll..

I think his words were -- if it did -- he'd "eat the legislation"..
 

Claudette

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2009
Messages
38,890
Reaction score
9,185
Points
1,330
Is this the idea of a political "promise"?:

When FDR introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,

No longer Voluntary


2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,

Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000


3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,

No longer tax deductible


4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,

Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent


5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed
as income.

Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
it's a ponzi scheme. The users destroyed it.
Carter was a dick of the first magnitude for allowing immigrants who never payed in to SS to draw from it. What an asshole. Boy would I like to get that idiot alone for 5 minutes.

As for blame?? IMO the Dems are the instigators of a lot of it but the Reps had no problem spending the money either.
 

Ame®icano

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2008
Messages
21,692
Reaction score
4,490
Points
280
Location
Michigan
There is no government program that does what originally intended.

CG said: "If the money had not been stolen from the fund, there would be no reason to 're-pay' it." And that's truth. If money is, for whatever reason gone, government will find another excuse to take money from other sources. When there is no money for their programs or wars or anything else, they print it or borrow it... or come up with another way to suck it out from us.

I run into the article in Canada Free Press about things we couldn't know before Obamacare is passed, ie taxes, government access to our bank accounts etc. Once government has an idea, they wont give up on it. If it doesn't pass today, they will wait and try again, and again, until it pass.

I red about ideas of taxing bank transactions, taxing internet purchases, taxing 401(k), taking over control over 401(k)... even though I think, and most of us think those ideas are insane and will be rejected, they will come back to the (bargaining) table until they find the way into some law, all in order to plug the holes in budget (if any) and to pay for campaign promises of robing Peter to pay Paul.

Most of us who are paying taxes and/or having savings or investments are in constant pressure from those who don't, because for them all it matter is how to get it from us and they will keep voting for people who will make it happen for them.
 

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
60,755
Reaction score
15,474
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
General Question.. Someone educate me..

Congress does "zero-based budgeting" -- often called spend it or lose it. Means that NOTHING is carried over year to year. I "thought" I read that the Fed govt is PROHIBITED from stashing a rainy day fund or establishing an actual "savings account" (REAL CASH) for a particular dept or program.

Is this true? Is it Congressional rules or Constitutional interpretation? Is the "lock-box" even legal??
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top