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: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/15/2008 4:32:51 AM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793891

Nice rant! And unfortunately, there is much there I agree with too....The current generation of Seniors has worked and paid into SS for their entire working careers. Remember when we were 16, we STILL paid into SS, but none of it counted until we were 21...not many of the younger folks knew nor cared about that. SS would be a workable plan IF the Dem Congress several years ago hadn't decided to put the SS money into the General Fund...which they promptly spent for anything they could think of including more and more benefits for the "poor" "downtrodden" etc...To say nothing of all the ILLEGALS coming into the country, and don't forget the Refugees...Those folks qualify IMMEDIATELY for SS upon arrival to this country. In the early years of SS under FDR, SS was advertised as an "insurance policy against old age"....Even was until the late 70's... Another thing to think about....when we put money into SS in our early working careers, our salaries were VERY low, even with a degree. Plus women never made a comparable salary as men in the years between 1955 to 1990.....they still don't, but in the earlier years, there was a huge gap. I want to know several things from this report: 1) Who did the report? 2) How many Seniors did they count, and where did the figures come from? 3) How many of those Seniors put money into their SS fund from the time they were 16 years old? 4) How many of those Seniors have been longtime residents of this country? 5) How many of those Seniors pay for their own Medicare premium? 6) How many of those Seniors are Vets? 7) How many of those Seniors have not worked the full amount of Required Quarters to be eligible? 8) How many children of deceased mothers and fathers have been on SS until they were 18 years old? 9) How many of those Seniors are ILLEGAL immigrants? 10) And how many of those Seniors are the people who don't pay any Federal Taxes, and how many years have they NOT had to do that? 11) How much of the dollars are charged to SS, and how many to Medicare, and how much to Medicaid?????? That last number I would imagine is HUGE....And now, I'm wondering how many people who are on Medicaid vote Democrat....and how many Repubs....? My guess is that Medicaid is heavily spent on the people who for all their lives, think the Government does everything for them. So in essence, again, how many Grasshoppers are there in these programs, and how many Ants?

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/15/2008 5:51:28 AM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793891

Steve, I understand your position. How about we value the cost of the benefits vs the contributions. When the benefits exceed the value earned - perhaps at some income level it should be capped. Hey - I am a right of center Republican. I am looking for rational ways to cut spending. I firmly believe that the concept of SS as an insurance policy is a fallacy for current oldsters. The raised rates over the last decades have made for the baby boomer generation simply a bad deal.

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/15/2008 8:08:34 AM
From: JDN	Respond to of 793891

MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY. America NEEDS people like you, not the GD parasites we are infested with today. jdn

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/15/2008 9:05:14 AM
From: DMaA	Respond to of 793891

I understand your rant completely. But if drastic changes aren't made to entitlements, including SS, your 1.5 million will turn into dung in your hands. And even if that happens, there is more value in you having lived your life honorably and well than all the gold on Earth.

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/15/2008 9:02:42 PM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 793891

Great rant!!!

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/18/2008 5:18:33 PM
From: Neeka	Respond to of 793891

Even the hard working people who saved and invested for old age must receive the SS benefits they contributed, but...............only what they contributed + interest. We should all be able to choose a SS savings plan that kicks in when govt SS investment is exhausted imo. There should be a "How to Save" curriculum that is taught to children in school starting in grade 9 and each and every year thereafter until graduation.

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/18/2008 6:18:51 PM
From: goldworldnet	Respond to of 793891

You definitely struck a chord there Steve and I certainly understand your anger at a system that rewards sloth and punishes hard work. However, whether or not you receive the benefits that are rightfully yours, you have security and those not as prudent as yourself only have a promise from a system that will someday fail. So take heart and know that you have given an example to your children that the government will never be able to equal. * * *

To: Stevefoder who wrote (238769)	2/20/2008 12:07:35 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793891

If people are denied SS because they saved and invested for oil age, then why would they save or invest for old age? Because if they do they can have a much larger amount of wealth than if they rely on social security. If people are denied any specific government benefit because they have more wealth or higher income it discourages work and savings at the margin where the benefit starts to be withdrawn, and this is a problem, but that doesn't mean we should just hand government benefits to everyone. Social Security is looked at as being very different because people make "contributions" to it for years. But those contributions are a tax similar to any other tax. You also make "contributions" to Medicaid, for food stamps, for SCHIP, for farm price supports (which don't cut out based on income, but which most people don't get, and which actually harm most people by making them pay more for food). I am a complete dumb ass. I should have been spending all my money and living it up. Uncle Sam will take care of me. Not as well as your savings and investments will take care of you if you continue to manage them well.