Ok, You Can Shut UP About Social Security and Medicare

[Mr Natural]

Nobody's going to force you to take it when your time comes.

Stick by your principles and opt out.

 

[Vandalshandle]

By all means, trust Morgan Stanley, instead of the government. They have such a stable track record, and are right on the forefront of innovations in investments. As I recall, they were the very first to be bailed out by the government during the financial institution meltdown. Very few of their executives have actually been convicted and sentenced to prison...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/16/garth-peterson-morgan-stanley_n_1792556.html

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservatives want to get rid of Social Security all together, we get that. Newt Gingrich made that clear when he said he wanted Medicare to "wither on the vine". Oh, they pretend to care and say they want to "save" it. But what they really want to do is destroy the only programs that keep MILLIONS of elderly out of poverty, so you really ain't fooling anyone.

And it’s not only retired persons, but millions of disabled Americans who worked hard their adult lives and are now unable to work through no fault of their own. There are also surviving children and spouses who rely on Social Security.

In addition, millions of Americans in their 50s and early 60 who lost their jobs as a consequence of the December 2007 recession also lost all of their savings and retirement funds while unemployed; they don’t have enough working years left to replenish their retirement savings and will need Social Security and Medicare when it comes time to retire.

The December 2007 recession was exactly the type of economic disaster the Social Security program was designed to address.

Last, there are millions of Americans who simply don’t earn enough in wages to realize sufficient savings to remain out of poverty come retirement. The right has contrived this myth that if only Americans were ‘free’ from Social Security taxes they could save for retirement on their own. This demonstrates the ignorance of conservatives as to the economic reality of low and middle income working families.

Social Security and Medicare are sound and successful programs, and conservative opposition to these programs and their desire to do away with them is yet another example of how reckless and irresponsible the radical fiscal right actually is.

 

[petro]

No one is saying that SS needs to be eliminated.
We are talking about how it should be reformed.

Exactly. Besides the interest on the national debt, these programs are the governments biggest expenses. There can be no real budgetary balance until these programs are reformed. The OP states that we put into this fund all our lives, but the problem is that you will use up all that you paid in within two years of withdrawals upon retirement, including interest. At the time the baby boomers were putting into the fund you had 15 people contributing for every person who collected, now that ratio is more like 3:1.
Think of the math. Retire and say you collect 20,000 per year for the next 30 years to a total of 600,000. I highly doubt that the OP will contribute 600K during the course of their work years. The math just no longer works. People live longer now and less are contributing into the system as the birth rate dropped after the boomers.
So yes, it has become an entitlement, not a pension fund.

 

[Agit8r]

It's really hard to believe when they use Fascist Chile as their example for "reform"

the fact that privatization pays less to those who opted out, than paygo, should be warning enough.

"At sixty his labour ought to be over, at least from direct necessity. It is painful to see old age working itself to death, in what are called civilised countries, for daily bread."
-- Thomas Paine; from 'Rights of Man, Part The Second' (1792)

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Nobody's going to force you to take it when your time comes.

Stick by your principles and opt out.

I was injured by a forklift on the loading docks about 15 years ago when picking up a load. Workmens comp fought the medical bills which were LARGE. I took them to court and the judge offered to give me partial disability for life.

I DECLINED

 

[healthmyths]

My problem with SS is the program not the people on it. It is a FORCED program that is not fully funded and the people forced into it often take out FAR MORE than they contribute.

OK.. first where is your "proof" they take out far more then they contribute?
You are making a statement that is a cliche. A meme. A falsehood when you take your statement and put it into a spreadsheet oK?

Starting at age 25 a person works for 40 years and retires at 65 living to say 75 OK assumption?
Starting salary $30,000 increasing every 5 years @ 20% last year age 65 $98,000.
Over the 40 years the employee AND the employee pay in 12.4% (not including Medicare..) of salary or $306,883.
At age 65 retired employee receives $1,647 per month for 120 months (age 75 dies) or $296,460

So when you subtract from what was paid in by employee/employer of $306,883
What is paid out over 10 years (dies age 75!) of $296,460 the amount PAID in exceeds the benefits by $10,423!
Based on those assumptions the Retired person and employer paid in more then was paid out!


NOW here is the major problem with what the DEMOCRATS are accusing GOP of doing...CUTTING SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE!
THEY ARE LYING!
NOT ONE GOP suggests ANY changes to SS/Medicare for ANYONE over age 55!
NOT ONE GOP suggests anyone UNDER AGE 55 HAS to discontinue the current program... Those that opt out and want to stay
in the current plan.. CAN! But Democrats have LIED and fear mongered this total LIE!

WHAT GOP offers to those that OPT in to the alternative is this!
The employee has the same amount deducted and the Employer contributes the same amount as today.
BUT instead of going to the government it goes WHERE THE EMPLOYEE determines.
AND NOT the "risky stock market" as the lying Dems keep cliching!!
But a simple deposit in the local bank paying over 40 years an average of 3% on deposits accumulates TO THE EMPLOYEE:$506,233!

This is the EMPLOYEE's money!

Now if of the $506,233 the employee puts into a $350,000 annuity a $1,850 payment for the life of the person. With $156,000 for health expenses.
But if the employee put the payments into a RISKY stock market that has over 70 years average 6% appreciation (not counting dividends!!) the
employee now has $924,335 and annuity of $600,000 pays for life $3,171 per month for life leaving $324,335 for health expenses.

Assuming the employee dies at 75 spending $200,000 for health expenses left $124,000 estate for family!

What is wrong with that scenario???

 

[hortysir]

I get tired of RW'ers that try and accuse elderly people of being "on the government dole" and "welfare recipients" when all they are doing is collecting benefits that they've paid into all their lives.

Conservatives want to get rid of Social Security all together, we get that. Newt Gingrich made that clear when he said he wanted Medicare to "wither on the vine". Oh, they pretend to care and say they want to "save" it. But what they really want to do is destroy the only programs that keep MILLIONS of elderly out of poverty, so you really ain't fooling anyone.

But guess what? Social Security and Medicare are here to stay and to the conservatives that don't like that I say "Fuck you very much".

Solved: 10 Social Security Mysteries

Mystery #1: Will Social Security be there for me? Social Security can pay 100% of all promised benefits until 2033. After 2033 it can pay about 75% of promised benefits. There are numerous options to extend solvency indefinitely with a mix of tax increases and/or benefit cuts. If you're a pessimist, subtract 25% from your SSA benefit estimate.

Mystery #2: Is Social Security a good deal? Social Security is a complete package of worker benefits, including retirement, disability and life insurance. The average worker earning $43,000 with a non-working spouse would need to save over $700,000 to duplicate their retirement payments, plus buy additional disability and life insurance. The Social Security Administration's administrative overhead is a low 0.8%. Social Security payments are at least 15% tax-free.

Mystery #7: Can family members receive Social Security after I die? Yes. Payments to your survivors are possible whether you die before or after your own Social Security eligibility.

.Your widow(er) or surviving former spouse can be paid up to 100% of your payment if they are at least FRA, or a reduced amount as early as age 60.
. .Your widow(er) can be paid 75% at any age, if caring for your child under 16.
. .Your unmarried child can be paid 75% if they are under 18, under 19 and in high school, or any age if totally disabled since youth.
. .Your parent over 62 can be paid if they were dependent upon you.

Solved: 10 Social Security Mysteries - Yahoo! Finance

So the bottom line is.....It is an "entitlement program" because we are entitled to collect something we paid into all our lives. Nobody's interested in your fucking vouchers, privitatization or any other bullshit way you come up with to take away something I've earned the right to collect.

Selective memory much?

The way I remember it, Liberals were mocking TEA Partiers for protesting 'entitlements' while receiving SS and MC

 

[healthmyths]

People who make investments always get more out than they put in. It's called interest. If you put what you put into social security into a stock portfolio instead of the government's "savings" you would be a millionaire several times over after 40 or 50 years of working.

Fail

The money being currently paid out is not profit. ITS MY TAX CONTRUBUTIONS.

SS is not an investment, is a scam and it is breaking the bank.

Social security is an insurance company. It collects premiums from people in the form of the payroll tax, it invests that money in US securities, and it draws on that capital plus interest to pay out claims to those who qualify.

NO that's not true!

The payments go into the General fund and here is the proof!



Federal Revenues by Source

The SS payments are counted as general revenue and used to pay for idiotic expenses like THESE!


The USA Federal government spent:
- $2.6 million to make sure prostitutes in China drink less on the job.

- $1.44 million in federal funds estimating the size of the population and examining the “social milieu” of male prostitutes in Hanoi & Ho Chi Minh City,

- Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties

- Studying pig poop. The EPA awarded a $141,450 grant under the Clean Air Act to fund a Chinese study on swine manure

- a $1.2 million grant to the United Nations for clean fuel promotion.

- Conferences for government employees. In 2008 & 2009 alone, the Department of Justice spent $121 million to host or participate in 1,832 conferences.

- U.S. government has spent $1.5 million to preserve some artifacts left during the hostile Indian occupation of Alcatraz Island more than four decades go.
While the State Department saved money on security in Libya, it somehow managed to find $5.6 million in 2011 to support “pressing cultural preservation
needs” in dozens of foreign countries.
Here are some of the dire projects funded by U.S. tax dollars that perhaps could be better spent on securing U.S. embassies in hostile Arab countries.
- Uncle Sam doled out
$750,000 to restore a 16th-century tomb complex in India,
$700,000 to conserve ruins in Tanzania,
$600,000 for the “temple of the winged lions” in Jordan and
$450,000 for the conservation of a 10th century temple in Cambodia. Those were just the big ticket projects.
Hundreds of thousands more went to smaller causes throughout the world.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Fail

The money being currently paid out is not profit. ITS MY TAX CONTRUBUTIONS.

SS is not an investment, is a scam and it is breaking the bank.

Social security is an insurance company. It collects premiums from people in the form of the payroll tax, it invests that money in US securities, and it draws on that capital plus interest to pay out claims to those who qualify.

NO that's not true!

The payments go into the General fund and here is the proof!

View attachment 24827

Federal Revenues by Source

The SS payments are counted as general revenue and used to pay for idiotic expenses like THESE!


The USA Federal government spent:
- $2.6 million to make sure prostitutes in China drink less on the job.

- $1.44 million in federal funds estimating the size of the population and examining the “social milieu” of male prostitutes in Hanoi & Ho Chi Minh City,

- Washington spends $25 billion annually maintaining unused or vacant federal properties

- Studying pig poop. The EPA awarded a $141,450 grant under the Clean Air Act to fund a Chinese study on swine manure

- a $1.2 million grant to the United Nations for clean fuel promotion.

- Conferences for government employees. In 2008 & 2009 alone, the Department of Justice spent $121 million to host or participate in 1,832 conferences.

- U.S. government has spent $1.5 million to preserve some artifacts left during the hostile Indian occupation of Alcatraz Island more than four decades go.
While the State Department saved money on security in Libya, it somehow managed to find $5.6 million in 2011 to support “pressing cultural preservation
needs” in dozens of foreign countries.
Here are some of the dire projects funded by U.S. tax dollars that perhaps could be better spent on securing U.S. embassies in hostile Arab countries.
- Uncle Sam doled out
$750,000 to restore a 16th-century tomb complex in India,
$700,000 to conserve ruins in Tanzania,
$600,000 for the “temple of the winged lions” in Jordan and
$450,000 for the conservation of a 10th century temple in Cambodia. Those were just the big ticket projects.
Hundreds of thousands more went to smaller causes throughout the world.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Fail

The money being currently paid out is not profit. ITS MY TAX CONTRUBUTIONS.

SS is not an investment, is a scam and it is breaking the bank.

Social security is an insurance company. It collects premiums from people in the form of the payroll tax, it invests that money in US securities, and it draws on that capital plus interest to pay out claims to those who qualify.

You're delusional. There is NO money in the fund. NONE

It gets paid out and raided as fast as it comes in.

It gets invested in government securities. Just like funds in a money market account that invests in treasuries.

You don't understand how the system works. You shouldn't be trying to talk about it.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

I get tired of RW'ers that try and accuse elderly people of being "on the government dole" and "welfare recipients" when all they are doing is collecting benefits that they've paid into all their lives.

Who does that?

Ever think that people here are tired of you pulling lies out of your ass to troll the board?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Social security is an insurance company..

No, it isn't. It is an inefficient government owned bureaucracy that now pays out more money than it takes in. It's a Ponzi scheme which will eventually dry up if changes aren't made to it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Fail

The money being currently paid out is not profit. ITS MY TAX CONTRUBUTIONS.

SS is not an investment, is a scam and it is breaking the bank.

Social security is an insurance company. It collects premiums from people in the form of the payroll tax, it invests that money in US securities, and it draws on that capital plus interest to pay out claims to those who qualify.

NO that's not true!

The payments go into the General fund and here is the proof!

The SS revenues are LOANED to the general fund. Just as you loan the government money if you buy a treasury bond, or a treasury bill, or a savings bond for your kid.

The money is LOANED so that it can earn interest. That's called investment. That's what you do with money to make it grow.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Social security is an insurance company..

No, it isn't. It is an inefficient government owned bureaucracy that now pays out more money than it takes in. It's a Ponzi scheme which will eventually dry up if changes aren't made to it.

See, now this is one more lie spawned from ignorance. SS did not pay out more than it took in, which keeps getting repeated.

It paid out the payroll tax from the year plus it drew on some of the year's interest income that it made off the treasuries in the Trust Fund.

You now have 5 seconds to forget you just learned that, so you can happily go back to repeating your lie tomorrow.

 

[Political Junky]

Cons are anxious to turn over that Social Security money to their buds on Wall Street. Imagine the finance charges they can skim off that big bunch of money.

 

[Clementine]

I get tired of RW'ers that try and accuse elderly people of being "on the government dole" and "welfare recipients" when all they are doing is collecting benefits that they've paid into all their lives.

Conservatives want to get rid of Social Security all together, we get that. Newt Gingrich made that clear when he said he wanted Medicare to "wither on the vine". Oh, they pretend to care and say they want to "save" it. But what they really want to do is destroy the only programs that keep MILLIONS of elderly out of poverty, so you really ain't fooling anyone.

But guess what? Social Security and Medicare are here to stay and to the conservatives that don't like that I say "Fuck you very much".

Solved: 10 Social Security Mysteries

Mystery #1: Will Social Security be there for me? Social Security can pay 100% of all promised benefits until 2033. After 2033 it can pay about 75% of promised benefits. There are numerous options to extend solvency indefinitely with a mix of tax increases and/or benefit cuts. If you're a pessimist, subtract 25% from your SSA benefit estimate.

Mystery #2: Is Social Security a good deal? Social Security is a complete package of worker benefits, including retirement, disability and life insurance. The average worker earning $43,000 with a non-working spouse would need to save over $700,000 to duplicate their retirement payments, plus buy additional disability and life insurance. The Social Security Administration's administrative overhead is a low 0.8%. Social Security payments are at least 15% tax-free.

Mystery #7: Can family members receive Social Security after I die? Yes. Payments to your survivors are possible whether you die before or after your own Social Security eligibility.

.Your widow(er) or surviving former spouse can be paid up to 100% of your payment if they are at least FRA, or a reduced amount as early as age 60.
. .Your widow(er) can be paid 75% at any age, if caring for your child under 16.
. .Your unmarried child can be paid 75% if they are under 18, under 19 and in high school, or any age if totally disabled since youth.
. .Your parent over 62 can be paid if they were dependent upon you.

Solved: 10 Social Security Mysteries - Yahoo! Finance

So the bottom line is.....It is an "entitlement program" because we are entitled to collect something we paid into all our lives. Nobody's interested in your fucking vouchers, privitatization or any other bullshit way you come up with to take away something I've earned the right to collect.

People paying for their own benefits is not welfare, but the only true entitlements. It's the left that has destroyed things. People who paid into social security, as well as their employers, should expect a decent retirement just on the money contributed for their sake. It was supposed to be in a lockbox. How many people died before they ever collected a penny of their social security? Yet, the government tells us it's going broke and it's been used to scare the elderly before every election. Maybe the government should have kept their grubby hands off the money. Maybe the government is handing out the money to those who never contributed and in doing so, ensured that one who did pay may or may not receive the benefits due them.

It's not the right who is messing with things. Initially, social security was supposed to be voluntary, non-taxed and would require only a small percent of income. Most important, the money would be kept safe. All that changed over the years. Where did all the money really go?

I was livid when Obama told senior citizens during the debt ceiling debate that he couldn't guarantee they'd get their social security checks. That was an outright lie considering that the SS fund is separate from the general fund and the debt ceiling should never affect the money people have entrusted the government to watch over. Therein lies the problem. We left the fox guarding the henhouse and now wonder where why we are short on chickens.

 

[jasonnfree]

You can probably find a lot of people receiving social security today that would have opted out when they were young, but today are happy that they weren't able. Its a pretty good program for old age and a republican Ronald Reagan, helped it continue for decades by raising the payroll tax in the 80's. And a lot of people that paid into it died before receiving one penny, so call it what you want, it is like an insurance program.

 

[California Girl]

It's funny when people tell others to 'shut up' on the internet. Really. That's tellin' 'em. You go for it. You are not making an ass of yourself at all. Nope.

*snickers*

 

[healthmyths]

Social security is an insurance company..

No, it isn't. It is an inefficient government owned bureaucracy that now pays out more money than it takes in. It's a Ponzi scheme which will eventually dry up if changes aren't made to it.

See, now this is one more lie spawned from ignorance. SS did not pay out more than it took in, which keeps getting repeated.

It paid out the payroll tax from the year plus it drew on some of the year's interest income that it made off the treasuries in the Trust Fund.

You now have 5 seconds to forget you just learned that, so you can happily go back to repeating your lie tomorrow.

FACTS not suppositions! FACTS not hyperbole!

Despite the interest payments that Social Security receives on the Trust Fund,
the Social Security Administration projects that the Trust Fund will start declining in value in 2013.[48]

* After 2013, the Social Security Trust Fund is projected to decline by a greater amount each year until becoming exhausted in 2033.[49]

* After 2033, Social Security is projected to run deficits every year into the foreseeable future.[50]

A primary cause of the projected Social Security deficits is that the number of workers paying taxes compared to the number of people receiving benefits has fallen and is projected to fall furthe

Increase in life expectancy without a comparable increase in the retirement age:

In 2010, Social Security made roughly $2,722,000,000 in improper overpayments. This was equal to 0.39% of all Social Security payments for the year or enough to pay 194,874 retired workers the average annual old-age benefit of $13,968 for 2010.[69] [70]

The website of United States Social Security Administration states:

"There has been a temptation throughout the program's history for some people to suppose that their FICA payroll taxes entitle them to a benefit in a legal, contractual sense.…
Congress clearly had no such limitation in mind when crafting the law. ...
Benefits which are granted at one time can be withdrawn.…[89]

The assets of the Social Security program include all of the money it has loaned to the federal government.[103] [104]
Even if this money is repaid with interest, it is projected that the Social Security Trust Fund will become exhausted in 2033,[105]
and the program will have deficits every year thereafter into the foreseeable future.[106]

Social Security Basics - Just Facts
Just the facts!!!