Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (48862)	6/5/2004 6:18:11 PM
From: Lane3	Respond to of 793914

Speaking of "our," I don't personally find senior programs a benefit but rather a disadvantage. I wish I could opt out. But I know that they have been the difference between poverty and a decent life for many. What I doubt is that they're a good thing for the country, at large.

To: JohnM who wrote (48862)	6/5/2004 11:41:50 PM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793914

despite my quarrels with the regressive character of social security taxes, I consider it, along with medicare, the great safety net for the elderly. Changed their lives. Much, much for the better. Well, given my years, I should say "our." John, I am happy that you are able to use social security as a safety net and to change your life. We all know about those meager professor pensions. You have been talking about social democrats recently...perhaps that made you speak to social security. Aside from yourself, do you expect it to serve the same purposes for your kids and grandkids? Have you ever looked at the transformation of social security? "Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised: 1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary, 2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program, 3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year, 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, 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income. 6.) And that soldiers' and sailors' pay would be exempt from SS taxation. Eisenhower changed that in 1957. when recruit pay was around $65 per month. 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..and they did just that? 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 U.S. Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants? A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive SSI Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it! Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and violation of the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it! Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election year!"