Social Security should only go to those who NEED it

[pls5286]

But your ticker says UNTIL not SINCE.

I don't know how to go in to the old place where I changed it. I sailed On Oct 5 2008. I am on the Wonder Cruise Meets. Go check. I did not put a year in when I made it.

If you do the exact Math, the DCL ships do not even sail when my ticker says we will be sailing. If someone would tell me how to get it off, I would, but I do not know how to.

 

[wall*e2008]

I don't know how to go in to the old place where I changed it. I sailed On Oct 5 2008. I am on the Wonder Cruise Meets. Go check. I did not put a year in when I made it.

If you do the exact Math, the DCL ships do not even sail when my ticker says we will be sailing. If someone would tell me how to get it off, I would, but I do not know how to.

OK. You can just delete it then.

 

[pls5286]

Why can't the kids get their insurance from their father's insurance policy? All the kids I know whose parents divorce must be covered by the father's insurance.

I see your post two about this that says the boys dads (not sure if they are the same dad or different) are suppose to carry the insurance. Get in contact with your state to get them to enforce the agreement. How could you lose your support by enforcing the insurance requirement?

I go thru Child Support Enforcement and because they are paying support, they will not go after insurance, even though it is court ordered. As long as they are doing something, they leave them alone. It is infuriating. My kids have different dads. As far as my DD's dad goes, his DD that lives with him is on peach and the only way to get my DD on his policy is to sign custody over to him, which I am not willing to do. With my son's dad...he has never been in my son's life, and begrudgingly pays child support. I leave well enough alone. I do not want to mess with the order in fear that he will try to come into my son's life after 12 yrs. It is a choice I have had to make.

 

[pls5286]

OK. You can just delete it then.

Thank you.

I thought I had to figure out where I made the original ticker at.

 

[GeorgeG]

Is this meant to be a real question?

Well, he did ask why I was entitled to collect. I got the impression he thinks savings should be shared with those less fortunate. I thought I'd give him an example.

 

[portocall]

Although the personal savings accounts sound fantastic, my grandparents (who don't collect SS just GF pension) have lost over 50% of all their assets in the last few years, starting with Enron... they lived to save, and now are too paralyzed to change anything (it had worked for 60 years... been through bad times before). I have a feeling that everytime a CD matures, they have been cashing it out and stuffing their mattresses. The problem with personal savings accounts at the moment is that they would turn into the same as SS... banks lend the money, might not get it back, based on the stock market and their crisis of the moment, my 401K hasn't earned a cent in the last year, and I just started losing money, so I moved it all to the cash markets, the only area that is losing quarterly at the moment. I through money at it just to hold somewhat steady, and I don't see that being a great retirement vehicle at the time, and I put the same into that as I do SS... I personally don't see that as the savior some people do. Whether or not I can collect SS, that is up in the air and will be seen when and if the time comes, but I won't feel guilty about taking it since I did work for it.

 

[Charade]

Because it was my investment for over forty years, not very different than someone's 401K or other savings, and it was mandatory. How would you feel if when it came time to draw from your 401K, or any other savings, the government decided you didn't need it and gave it to someone else?

Trust me on this... nobody is going to live comfortably on Social Security alone. It's a nice supplement to other savings and pensions. Contrary to what many politicians would like us to believe, Social Security is a government mandated savings plan and is funded by working individuals and their employers for the contributing individual. I don't care if I have billions of dollars, you have no right to give my savings to somebody else.

So, I'm retired and you're still working and probably making more than I am. How much of your paycheck are you going to give me?

But you're not saving for your retirement. When you work, you're paying for those already in retirement. When you retire, someone else is required to contribute to supplement your retirement. SS is not a savings personal savings plan.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Well, he did ask why I was entitled to collect. I got the impression he thinks savings should be shared with those less fortunate. I thought I'd give him an example.

Oh, he doesn't think that you saved anything (and he is correct). He was just pointing out that SS is not a private plan. You were not paying for your retrement when you paid in - you were paying for those already retired in the hope that America would still be willing and able to do the same for you. The question that we are now faced with - what happens when America is no longer willing or able to continue this ponzi scheme?

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

But you're not saving for your retirement. When you work, you're paying for those already in retirement. When you retire, someone else is required to contribute to supplement your retirement. SS is not a savings personal savings plan.

You beat me to it...

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Well, he did ask why I was entitled to collect. I got the impression he thinks savings should be shared with those less fortunate. I thought I'd give him an example.

I asked to see if I would get the expected answer and I did. As others have already said, it isn't a very compelling answer. Your generation has imposed on current workers an unfunded mandate to pay your retirement benefits. You may have been paying into a system, but the system has very little of what you contributed left.

You may feel entitled to the money, but it is not yours and you are not guaranteed to get it. You and your elected representatives already spent almost all of what you contributed. All that remains is $2,366 brillion according to the trust fund managers. I think that you will get the money because the current generation is magnanimous enough to give it to you. Perhaps they do that in the hopes that future generations will be as kind to them. Perhaps they do it because they feel an obligation to to those that left them a great country. Perhaps they do it out of kindness.

Just as it was within the legal power of prior generations to create the social security scheme and start giving away workers money to retirees, it is perfectly legal for them to stop it. There is no constitutional bar on discontinuing social security no matter how heavily you were taxed to support it. I don't think this wouldn't be covered under the 5th amendment's prohibition against taking "private property for public use without just compensation.

While the social security system was set up with good intent and has served to help a great many people, I don't think that the unbalance generational transfer was set up in a very ethical fashion. Unintentional though I'm sure it was, the originators set up a system that benefited themselves at a great expense to future generations.

Like an investor of Madoff that realized the truth, each succeeding generation must ask itself whether it should perpetuate this system in the hopes of minimizing their own generation's loss or whether they should make a huge sacrifice and move to a more equitable system. It's not a pretty picture. Then again, it's still a lot better than inheriting an economic system like Russia's or China's.

 

[Planogirl]

It's not fair to say that anyone's generation has done anything! The government has mandated this with the explicit promise that there would be funds later upon retirement.

I hear so much about socialism but this is way beyond that IMO. Some of you advocate taking money from individuals by force based on a promise and then breaking that promise simply because of mismanagement. Nice.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

It's not fair to say that anyone's generation has done anything! The government has mandated this with the explicit promise that there would be funds later upon retirement.

I hear so much about socialism but this is way beyond that IMO. Some of you advocate taking money from individuals by force based on a promise and then breaking that promise simply because of mismanagement. Nice.

Think about it this way - the baby boomer generation (the politicians certainly, not necessarily the people) knew that they were spending the SS surpluses that they were paying into the system. They knew that the government was spending that money on programs that they were taking advantage of every day. So they have already been paid back - just not with SS checks. They have taken advantage of all of the programs which drained the "trust fund".

That money was spent on programs passed by the baby boomers. Now the baby boomers (again, the politicians) want to have their cake, too. They paid into an account, spent all of the money in that account, but they want the next generation to fill that account for them again. Oh yeah, and continue with all of the other programs that they put in place which drained that account.

These are the facts. So who should suffer? Those that they ask to refill their coffers or they, themselves? An honorable person would never ask another to pay their debt - especially their own children or grandchildren.

Tha baby boomers have the money in their hands to make this right. Something tells me that this thought never crossed their minds. They just want their entitlements.

These are the children of "The Greatest Generation". And we are their children, trying to hold it all together...

 

[Charade]

It's not fair to say that anyone's generation has done anything! The government has mandated this with the explicit promise that there would be funds later upon retirement.

I hear so much about socialism but this is way beyond that IMO. Some of you advocate taking money from individuals by force based on a promise and then breaking that promise simply because of mismanagement. Nice.

Maybe we just need to fund it in a different manner. Perhaps it should be modeled after the income tax system.

 

[Cool-Beans]

I hear so much about socialism but this is way beyond that IMO.

This is exactly that.

I can't even understand the person who believes that they should get other people's money. What it is about them that they feel makes them so special, so deserving and, in fact, entitled to other people's money...I just don't know.

Whining because people get to keep their own money and don't have to give it to you is selfish and spoiled. Grow the hell up. Life isn't Kindergarten. Everyone doesn't have to share their treats with you. Even if you really, really want them and are planning to throw a temper tantrum because you don't have them.

I really wish more people would raise their children to be adults and not whiny, selfish, demanding brats.

 

[Northstar]

Think about it this way - the baby boomer generation (the politicians certainly, not necessarily the people) knew that they were spending the SS surpluses that they were paying into the system. They knew that the government was spending that money on programs that they were taking advantage of every day. So they have already been paid back - just not with SS checks. They have taken advantage of all of the programs which drained the "trust fund".

That money was spent on programs passed by the baby boomers. Now the baby boomers (again, the politicians) want to have their cake, too. They paid into an account, spent all of the money in that account, but they want the next generation to fill that account for them again. Oh yeah, and continue with all of the other programs that they put in place which drained that account.

These are the facts. So who should suffer? Those that they ask to refill their coffers or they, themselves? An honorable person would never ask another to pay their debt - especially their own children or grandchildren.

Tha baby boomers have the money in their hands to make this right. Something tells me that this thought never crossed their minds. They just want their entitlements.

These are the children of "The Greatest Generation". And we are their children, trying to hold it all together...

Well, if you feel THAT way about it, maybe you should be tucking a little extra check in with your tax form this year... dedicated to paying off the national debt. Or if you're due a refund, contribute that back into the system. So your kids won't have to pay so much debt off when you're dead and gone.

Seriously. If people don't accept their SS checks, but turn them back to the government, do you think that does any good? The government is not going to tuck that check away in a savings account for the next generation. They're going to spend it now, just like they do with all the tax revenue.

I don't see that it's any more unethical to accept your SS check if you don't need it than it is to accept your tax refund if you don't need it. It's all the same money, money that we let the government spend too much of.

 

[S. C.]

Well, if you feel THAT way about it, maybe you should be tucking a little extra check in with your tax form this year... dedicated to paying off the national debt. Or if you're due a refund, contribute that back into the system. So your kids won't have to pay so much debt off when you're dead and gone.

Seriously. If people don't accept their SS checks, but turn them back to the government, do you think that does any good? The government is not going to tuck that check away in a savings account for the next generation. They're going to spend it now, just like they do with all the tax revenue.

I don't see that it's any more unethical to accept your SS check if you don't need it than it is to accept your tax refund if you don't need it. It's all the same money, money that we let the government spend too much of.

Well said!

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Well, if you feel THAT way about it, maybe you should be tucking a little extra check in with your tax form this year... dedicated to paying off the national debt. Or if you're due a refund, contribute that back into the system. So your kids won't have to pay so much debt off when you're dead and gone.

Seriously. If people don't accept their SS checks, but turn them back to the government, do you think that does any good? The government is not going to tuck that check away in a savings account for the next generation. They're going to spend it now, just like they do with all the tax revenue.

I don't see that it's any more unethical to accept your SS check if you don't need it than it is to accept your tax refund if you don't need it. It's all the same money, money that we let the government spend too much of.

I have served my country in the Army, and have never collected a cent in aid from the government. I have no plan to collect SS, and am living my life as though it will not exist for me. If it does, I seriously doubt that I will take it. I don't want to take.

As for refunds - those who get refunds simply do not claim enough deductions. There is no reason to give the government an interest free loan for 12 months each year.

And I am not one of those who created the problem. I am one of those being asked to fix it, or go bankrupt trying. Not sure why you would be taking this personally...

 

[Planogirl]

I believe that there should be ways to fix this without penalizing those who invested so much of their earnings into this thing for so many years. I don't want to leave our children with a mess either but this is only one tiny slice of the mess that is being created by mismanagement and ineptitude.

It's simply wrong to take anyone's social security, again theirs based on a promise, and use it to bail out anything else. I've personally never liked that.

Social security is also not an entitlement because people have followed the mandated rules and have paid into the system and then expect to receive what they were promised. That does not fit the definition of an entitlement IMO.

 

[Northstar]

I have served my country in the Army, and have never collected a cent in aid from the government. I have no plan to collect SS, and am living my life as though it will not exist for me. If it does, I seriously doubt that I will take it. I don't want to take.

As for refunds - those who get refunds simply do not claim enough deductions. There is no reason to give the government an interest free loan for 12 months each year.

And I am not one of those who created the problem. I am one of those being asked to fix it, or go bankrupt trying. Not sure why you would be taking this personally...

I don't have a problem with you not wanting to accept social security... that's your right and privilege!

But it's not logical to act as if accepting the money due to you, in social security payments, is any different from accepting the lower taxes you pay because the government runs a deficit instead of forcing taxpayers to pay as they go. You are putting debt on your own children as much as boomers are by accepting those lower taxes.

I'm a late boomer. I know that by the time I'm old the next generation will be so fed up with us that they'll be handing out suicide pills at the clinic! I won't be a burden on the US social security system, though I paid into it for enough years to qualify, because I'll be drawing most of my payments from the Canadian old age payment. I don't feel that I created the problem any more than you do... actually, I feel that nobody from any generation, mine, yours, or those who went before us, wanted to hear that we couldn't keep spending without taxing more.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I will offer a simple analogy that will explain why we have a SS crisis coming:

Let's say that everyone in your family works. You all put your money in a joint bank account.

Well, that money isn't just to pay your bills, it is also to pay for your retirement. You have children, but you certainly don't expect them to pay for your retirement.

Now, at some point you decide that you want to live in a nicer neighborhood, so you take some of your savings and pay for that.

At another point, you decide that you all need new cars - and you want BMWs - so you take some money from the account to pay for that.

At another point you decide to help the local church, and you take some money out of the account for that. All very good of you, and all, but still - the money is spent.

and the next thing, and the next thing, and so on, and so forth.

Well, the years go by and you find that you and your extended family are about to retire - but the bank account is empty.

So, what to do?

That is what has happened here. The baby boomers are those who were more than happy to watch America give away trillions upon trillions in social programs, much of it going back into their own coffers in one form or another, knowing full well that the money being used to pay for these programs was coming from their "savings" (see here, SS trust fund). This has been public knowledge my entire life. We have been borrowing from this fund since its inception in 1937. But the government expansion under tha baby boomers changed the depth of that 'borrowing" to something that was never intended.

Now they act shocked that this might be a problem? I have known that it would be a problem for 25 years, but they are just figuring it out? And who is to pay for their excess?

They say that they have paid in, and that is true - but they have also taken out in record amounts. Sorry, the account is in over-draft.

So, what to do?

I don't have an answer. I just pray that someone does, because they want theirs, and they are not willing to start sacrificing now.

I weep for my children...