Social Security

[Duhduh]

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years. Our Senators and Congressmen & women do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it. You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt that they should have a special plan for themselves. So many years ago, they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no congressperson has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan. For all practical purposes their plan works like this: When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die, except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments. For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (That's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of their lives. This is calculated on average life spans for each. Their cost for this excellent plan is $00.00, Nada, Zilch. This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come directly from the General Funds our tax dollars at work! From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay(or have paid) into every payday until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer)- we can expect to get an average $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000 monthly benefits for 68 years and one (1) month to equal Senator Bill Bradley's one (1) year benefits. Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. That change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us...then sit back and watch how fast they would fix it. If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.

[patrick_dont_fret]

Dizzzang. I read that to my momma just now, and she is just as mad as I am. And I mean :mad: . So basically, when she retires in 25-30 years, she will starve til she has to find another job. By the time I retire (I'm 18), there will be no SS left. There will be NO RETIREMENT for me, or anyone after me. These dirty communists make me so :evil: :mad: sometimes.

[Wow]

Here is how it breaks down. When SS started there were 40 people paying taxes for every 1 person collecting SS. That means 40 people are paying for 1 persons retirement. Sounds fair. NOW, with all of the "baby boomers", there are 2 people paying for 1 persons retirement(BIG PROBLEM). That is 2 people pay for 1 person to retire. Do you know the burden that SS is on the tax payer now? What do we do? 1. Lower benefits (They cant go any lower). 2. Raise taxes (the problem is growing to fast) CHANGE THE SYSTEM. That is the answer. Now, I dont have an answer to this and dont claim to, but if one was to put their SS payment(Taxes) into a account , then the account could draw interest. You make money while you sit on it. The current system pays back 1 1/2 percent on the dollar. That is, every dollar YOU pay into SS means you will get 1 1/2 pennies back when you retire. If I said to you, give me a dollar and for every dollar you give me , I will give you 2 pennies back, how long would you give me money?

[patrick_dont_fret]

[quote] C.M. said to me: [b]If I said to you, give me a dollar and for every dollar you give me , I will give you 2 pennies back, how long would you give me money? [/b] [/quote]I wouldn't. But, of course, we don't have any choice in the matter. Unless you want to not have a job for your whole life. Or only do tax free work, like raking peoples' yards...which is actually really good money. And as long as their not there when you are working, you can be drunk/ stoned or whatever. Good times.

[Anifa]

[b]BEFORE ANYONE GETS THEMSELVES WORKED UP OVER THIS...... TAKE A LOOK AT THE FACTS[/b] The information provided above concerning the pay and benefits of Senators and/or Congressmen/women is inaccurate. Please refer to the following URL to read the full article relative to the clip that I'm about to post extracted from it. [url=http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/aa031200a.htm]Salaries and Benefits of U.S. Congress Members - About.com[/url] [quote] Congress: Benefits Members of Congress receive retirement and health benefits under the same plans available to other federal employees. They become vested after five years of full participation. • Members elected since 1984 are covered by the Federal Employees' Retirement System (FERS). Those elected prior to 1984 were covered by the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS). In 1984 all members were given the option of remaining with CSRS or switching to FERS. • As it is for all other federal employees, congressional retirement is funded through taxes and the participants' contributions. Members of Congress under FERS contribute 1.3 percent of their salary into the FERS retirement plan and pay 6.2 percent of their salary in Social Security taxes. [/quote][b]NOTICE THE LAST LINE[/b] As has ALWAYS been, the only person eligible to receive a lifetime salary after serving in a political office is the President of the United States, and this plan was adopted due to the Term Limits clause as they can ONLY serve a maximum of TWO terms throughout their lifetime. Unless more current laws have overwritten that of the President, it should still be in place. Congressional employees are treated the same as ALL other Federal employees and they DO pay into Social Security or Civil Service.

[Duhduh]

How can the money we put into SS lose money over 40 years? Is that where "Surplus Cash" comes from? If every tax payer in the US, say 500,000,000 people put $100 a month into one big account every month for forty years at 2% interest compounded annually, that would add up to about $36,241,189,908,445!!! Thats an investment of $48,000 that would return $72,482! How the HELL could the government lose that kind of money!!

[Duhduh]

[quote]Originally posted by Anifa: [b] Members of Congress under FERS contribute 1.3 percent of their salary into the FERS retirement plan and pay 6.2 percent of their salary in Social Security taxes. [/quote][b]NOTICE THE LAST LINE[/b] [/b][/QUOTE] OK. Thats true. But who do you think pays the salaries from where those contributions come from?

[T. Ehl]

the whole concept is a sham designed to keep those who do not know arguing about it while those who know realize it has to be this way here is the truth you can not have an underclass rise above marginal poverty and still have a manufacturing work force infrastructure you can not take the high margin profit incentive away from upper percentile investment and still expect a manufacturing base to stay in the u.s. the best you can hope for is to increase the overall standard of living [b]however[/b]consider the notion of who shares the greater burden of taxation as an argument to be turned inside out it is not the burden of taxes it is the burden of having a government in which case a bracketed percentage based on income is not a moral solution weighting the tax burden from 100% equal burden standpoint is but that will never happen

[Wow]

[quote] If every tax payer in the US, say 500,000,000 people put $100 a month into one big account every month for forty years at 2% interest compounded annually, that would add up to about $36,241,189,908,445!!! Thats an investment of $48,000 that would return $72,482! How the HELL could the government lose that kind of money!! [/quote]I did not realize that the U.S. had a half of a billion people, we dont, but maybe you are doing your figures for the future. If you think that return of 72 thousand sucks, that is based on the money actually drawing interest. In the current system, it is not so the return SUCKS even more. I dont even want to list any more numbers , it is to depressing.

[kenglish]

Better take care of our ears....we're gonna need 'em when we're still trying to make a living at 96 years old ;) !

[Rick K.]

[quote]Originally posted by The patrick of Christmas future: [b]By the time I retire (I'm 18), there will be no SS left. There will be NO RETIREMENT for me, or anyone after me.[/b][/quote]The Patrick, First of all, there will be a retirement for you if and only if YOU PLAN IT! At 18, you have tons of time that, with minimal amounts, can grow into plenty for you and your wife to retire on. Don't rely on the gov't to provide this for you. Utilize any 401k's and IRA's to your maximum benefit. Put away and save. This way you won't have to rely on anything from SSI, and be proactive in your own successes. Currently, SSI isn't enough money to retire on decently. It takes planning on your part. Your best factor going for you is your youth and the time you have to save over the long term. Rick

[Wewus432]

[quote]Originally posted by T. Ehl: [b]the whole concept is a sham designed to keep those who do not know arguing about it while those who know realize it has to be this way here is the truth you can not have an underclass rise above marginal poverty and still have a manufacturing work force infrastructure you can not take the high margin profit incentive away from upper percentile investment and still expect a manufacturing base to stay in the u.s. the best you can hope for is to increase the overall standard of living [b]however[/b]consider the notion of who shares the greater burden of taxation as an argument to be turned inside out it is not the burden of taxes it is the burden of having a government in which case a bracketed percentage based on income is not a moral solution weighting the tax burden from 100% equal burden standpoint is but that will never happen[/b][/quote]Well God damn it, if nobody else will say anything then I will. [b]I can't understand what you're saying because you don't use punctuation!!!!![/b] What is the deal here? Is this supposed to be cute or something we just have to deal with? I don't get it. How can you communicate with people when you're not even speaking the same language. [b]English includes punctuation!!!!!!!!![/b] Nuff said.

[PBBPaul]

You said it Wewus! I was just typing the same thing. T. Ehl, you seem to have some good stuff to say. It might be better if we could actually understand it. <--- note the period at the end of a sentence.

[Wewus432]

I've been reading these post off and on for a while and I think, well, ok, I'll play the game, I'll add the puncuation where necessary, BUT, I have yet to really understand anything this person is saying. Why the hell do I have to punctuate someone else's post?

[T. Ehl]

[quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b]What is the deal here? [/b][/quote]it is camoflage besides what is placed on the internet qualifies as english only in the sense that something like the strokes counts as music so really it just means i am too hip for the room you do not need punctuation punctuation is for lamers this is the future do you not see it is only a matter of time before everyone writes like this notice that already people are not bothering with caps and run on sentences are the norm and since when has people used compound sentences here anyhow and just like exposing yourself as being knowledgable by knowing how to play an instrument using punctuation will be very uncool i am just being alternatively progressive that is all

[M Peasley]

therearemorepracticalwaystobecoolandprogressivethananintentionalobscuringoflanguagehowpuerilempeasley

[PBBPaul]

[quote]Originally posted by T. Ehl: [b] [quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b]What is the deal here? [/b][/quote]it is camoflage besides what is placed on the internet qualifies as english only in the sense that something like the strokes counts as music so really it just means i am too hip for the room you do not need punctuation punctuation is for lamers this is the future do you not see it is only a matter of time before everyone writes like this notice that already people are not bothering with caps and run on sentences are the norm and since when has people used compound sentences here anyhow and just like exposing yourself as being knowledgable by knowing how to play an instrument using punctuation will be very uncool i am just being alternatively progressive that is all[/b][/quote]Wow! T. Ehlalalalala? Ooops, I put punctuation in there. :)

[Anifa]

[quote]Originally posted by TheWewus: [b] [quote]Originally posted by T. Ehl: [b]the whole concept is a sham designed to keep those who do not know arguing about it while those who know realize it has to be this way here is the truth you can not have an underclass rise above marginal poverty and still have a manufacturing work force infrastructure you can not take the high margin profit incentive away from upper percentile investment and still expect a manufacturing base to stay in the u.s. the best you can hope for is to increase the overall standard of living [b]however[/b]consider the notion of who shares the greater burden of taxation as an argument to be turned inside out it is not the burden of taxes it is the burden of having a government in which case a bracketed percentage based on income is not a moral solution weighting the tax burden from 100% equal burden standpoint is but that will never happen[/b][/quote]Well God damn it, if nobody else will say anything then I will. [b]I can't understand what you're saying because you don't use punctuation!!!!![/b] What is the deal here? Is this supposed to be cute or something we just have to deal with? I don't get it. How can you communicate with people when you're not even speaking the same language. [b]English includes punctuation!!!!!!!!![/b] Nuff said.[/b][/quote]LOL, Wewus!!! :thu: I was thinking the same exact thing, but I was trying to be nice by not saying anything. It's definitely a challenge trying to interpret what this guy has to say. His latter defense in stating his reason for using this obscure writing method has kind of soured my taste for taking the time to decipher what he is trying to say. At first I thought perhaps he was a foreigner using a multilingual translator and that he was not familiar with the English Language structure. Now that I know he is doing this deliberately just to express himself; I'll probably ignore his posts from now on. I'm not the greatest with my punctuation anymore because I've been out of school for 25 years and went more into creative writing, but I do attempt to do my best when writing dialog.

[Franknputer]

I like punctuation - I use it all the time! - because it creates dynamics in your language; speed up, pause, go again, stop! Stop really hard!!! avoiding the use of punctuation quickly becomes the english equivalent of a monotonous drone which is okay if thats the sort of thing your into i guess it can be regarded as a statement of sorts but then you have to think about the fact that monotonous is synonymous with boring and it takes on a whole different meaning kinda like when a band plays all their songs the same with the same feel and the same time in the same key and after awhile its like play something else dammit or just shut the hell up

[Duhduh]

[quote]Originally posted by T. Ehl: [b]It is camoflage. Besides, what is placed on the internet qualifies as English only in the sense that something like The Strokes counts as music. So, really it just means I am too hip for the room. You do not need punctuation. Punctuation is for lamers. This is the future. Do you not see? It is only a matter of time before everyone writes like this. Notice that already people are not bothering with caps and run on sentences are the norm. And since when has people used compound sentences here, anyhow? And just like exposing yourself as being knowledgable by knowing how to play an instrument using punctuation will be very uncool, I am just being alternatively progressive. That is all![/b][/quote]Ahhh...That's better! C.M., Yeah, I just rounded up...a lot. For easy math. The US has more like 288,000,000 people.

[T. Ehl]

[quote]Originally posted by M Peasley: [b]therearemorepracticalwaystobecoolandprogressivethananintentionalobscuringoflanguagehowpuerilempeasley[/b][/quote]i am not trying to be cool there is a reason although it is amusing it would be too obvious otherwise

[BNC]

I think the whole SS program is a big steaming load. We would all be alot better off if we did not pay SS taxes, and saved for retirement privatly. Nobody, especially the gov't, cares more or will work harder for your money than you (same as basic principals of entrepenuership, sorry about the spelling).

[GZsound]

Does anybody here realize that there is no actual account or fund that contains social security funds? It is entirely a paper based government guarantee program. Why is it folks complain about social security and yet continue to vote politicians in that want more and more government porgrams? The fraud, waste and corruption in all these big government entitlement programs, medicare, medicaid, ssi, etc. are staggering. So lets keep voting for all these social programs. Here in Orygun our Public Employee Retirement System is billions in debt. Union bargained benefit includes matching dollar for dollar, and a guarantee return of not less than eight percent regardless of the performance of the fund on the market...which has tanked. So, who's to fix it? The legislature? Nope, they all belong. Judges? nope, they all belong. Anybody? Nope, they all belong. Just like social security, just like medicare, etc. Pigs at the public trough..

[M Peasley]

i am not trying to be cool there is a reason although it is amusing it would be too obvious otherwise -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- weak, weak. - M Peasley -

[Wow]

[quote] Does anybody here realize that there is no actual account or fund that contains social security funds? It is entirely a paper based government guarantee program. [/quote]Sure there is, dont you remember Al Gore's "Lock Box"? :D

[miroslav]

[quote]Originally posted by BNC: We would all be alot better off if we did not pay SS taxes, and saved for retirement privately.[/quote]Thought I'm sure some people would actually be able better manage their own... ...MANY would be out on the streets after retirement because they just never would manage to set up a realistic retirement plan. Sort of like credit cards...once you get 'em...most people quickly pile up a huge debt that they will be paying off for the rest of their lives. I have been lucky enough that I was able to completely get rid of all my unsecured debt last year...I don't own anything on any credit cards anymore. I just have my house mortgage which I refinanced to a very nice low rate...and a rather small car payment on my new VW Passat. Ahhhh...feels so fucking good not to owe anything to the credit card companies...as soon as I buy it...I pay for it in full. Anyway...I have a retirement plan similar to the one Anifa describes...part SS...part savings/retirement plan. Even if SS takes a dump by the time I retire...the other plan would cover my ass...but having both when I retire will actually be quite comfortable. All of you 20 year olds...START A PLAN NOW...and STICK TO IT!!! Don't put all you eggs into the SS "lock box"....HAHAHA...yeah, that was a good one by Algore...HEHEHEHE...