Is Social Security Welfare?

[ClydeCoulter]

Everyone is falling for the BIG LIES.

You can't talk about how to fix this without talking about inflation, monetary policy, etc...

Yea, you kids are paying devalued dollars and we (I'm not drawing yet, but soon) will be getting back devalued dollars (worth a lot less than it was when we paid).

The government stole the money, but they bailed out the banks instead of paying SS back. Now they/we are paying interest on it.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

That would be the irony of ironies if anyone tried to do that...."How can you be so greedy that you won't let me take your money and give it to someone else?!"

It's the opposite. The people fighting to keep SS are greedy (they're the ones thinking they're entitled to other peoples' money), and they need to be called out at every opportunity. This needs to happen until SS isn't the third rail of politics any more, but instead is so unpopular that people would be ashamed to defend it.

Winning post, sir! +rep

 

[UpperDecker]

That would be the irony of ironies if anyone tried to do that.....

That already happened.

The societal impact of the elimination of SS will be huge. There are a lot of people who need the payment to live, they will be screwed. Folks like myself and those who saved for retirement will in essence be getting a massive tax increase by the elimination of the payments. Where do you think that extra 50K per year is going to go?

You see what I am saying here. Many people who receive SS pay taxes still, or the SS payments wash out their tax liability. We aren't living large because of the gov't check. All it does for many is offset the taxes on their pensions, annuities and other investments.

I don't think people are saying to just end it right now. We know that it is impossible to end it and stop sending money to those already on SS, so we need to find a way to begin phasing it out.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

This is the kind of propaganda that we need to defeat.

When the government stops taking money from someone else and giving it to you, that's not an increase of your taxes. It's not taking anything at all from you. It's leaving the money with the people who earned it. Those payments never were yours.

My tax liability for 2012 will be around 250K. We received 50K in SS payments throughout the year. Take away that 50K and instead of paying the gov't 200 net, I'll pay them 250 net. And since we all know SS is paid from the general fund (ie there is no special account), I am through my taxes paying a lot of people's SS.

Class envy much?

 

[heavenlyboy34]

This is the kind of propaganda that we need to defeat.

When the government stops taking money from someone else and giving it to you, that's not an increase of your taxes. It's not taking anything at all from you. It's leaving the money with the people who earned it. Those payments never were yours.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to erowe1 again.

 

[erowe1]

The government stole the money, but they bailed out the banks instead of paying SS back.

This myth gets repeated so often. Where does this idea even come from?

There never was any "paying SS back." Nothing the government ever spent money on was "instead" of that.

The day SS started, it took money from some people and gave it to others. Today, that's still what it does. It was welfare then, and it's welfare now.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Noone is taking money one and giving it to the other, it's a fucking racket, that's why we are going into debt. We are all being stolen from.

 

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

This myth gets repeated so often. Where does this idea even come from?

There never was any "paying SS back." Nothing the government ever spent money on was "instead" of that.

The day SS started, it took money from some people and gave it to others. Today, that's still what it does. It was welfare then, and it's welfare now.

Definition = Ponzi Scheme when they pretend that people are "investing" and then pay them with the proceeds from new "investors." Welfare, sure, but this is a more specific crime that is prosecuted.

 

[erowe1]

My tax liability for 2012 will be around 250K. We received 50K in SS payments throughout the year. Take away that 50K and instead of paying the gov't 200 net, I'll pay them 250 net.

Great point. This is another thing we need to hammer on. SS isn't just welfare, it's a special kind of welfare that redistributes wealth from those who have less to those who have more. All that talk about old people living in poverty is such rubbish.

And since we all know SS is paid from the general fund (ie there is no special account), I am through my taxes paying a lot of people's SS.

Another good point. You shouldn't be paying a lot of other peoples' SS. And there's only one way for you not to. That's if the government stops giving it to them. That's your money. If you want to give it away to others who need it, more power to you. But it should be up to you to decide to do that and in what way you go about it.

 

[James Madison]

Why do people on fixed income need SS? Because of excessive taxation and monitary inflation. Why do we have excessive taxation and monitary inflation? Because people on fixed income need SS.

'Round and 'round we go...

 

[erowe1]

Definition = Ponzi Scheme when they pretend that people are "investing" and then pay them with the proceeds from new "investors." Welfare, sure, but this is a more specific crime that is prosecuted.

But who's pretending that? The government isn't. It's just the SS defenders who keep telling themselves that.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

I guess I could live in a trash can.

http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/04/h...ever-perpetrated-against-the-american-people/

 

[erowe1]

I don't think people are saying to just end it right now. We know that it is impossible to end it and stop sending money to those already on SS, so we need to find a way to begin phasing it out.

I absolutely am saying to end it right now.

Don't get me wrong, I don't pretend that could happen. But that's what ought to happen. And when we come to the negotiating table, we should be clear about that.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

But who's pretending that? The government isn't. It's just the SS defenders who keep telling themselves that.

It's not SS defenders, it's pissed of people who have been screwed, made by force to pay into something that will likely return very little. Now, the young are falling for the lies that are meant to divide.

Look, I'm not going to take back much, I paid a goodly sum, and will probably die long before I see much of it since the average lifespan for a male in my family is 72.

 

[UpperDecker]

I absolutely am saying to end it right now.

Don't get me wrong, I don't pretend that could happen. But that's what ought to happen. And when we come to the negotiating table, we should be clear about that.

If there was any possibility of it working out to where it doesn't leave people to die I would be all for it, but I think that would do too much harm right now. Wouldn't we have to pay for them anyway when they have to go to the hospital or things like that?

 

[dinosaur]

The societal impact of the elimination of SS will be huge. There are a lot of people who need the payment to live, they will be screwed. Folks like myself and those who saved for retirement will in essence be getting a massive tax increase by the elimination of the payments. Where do you think that extra 50K per year is going to go?

You see what I am saying here. Many people who receive SS pay taxes still, or the SS payments wash out their tax liability. We aren't living large because of the gov't check. All it does for many is offset the taxes on their pensions, annuities and other investments.

The societal impact of the elimination of ss can be absorbed if we band together. Tough times aren't necessarily the worst of times. And the tough times that you are describing are nothing compared to the tough times ahead if we don't change.

As to the taxes, taxes and spending should both be cut. I know that people aren't living large, but we need to perform some surgury, and live a little leaner if we want to save the country. I believe that if americans could see the need for this surgury, that they would also be willing to make sure that people in their immediate communities who could no longer work and who didn't have families would be taken care of. It's just what we have to do.

 

[erowe1]

If there was any possibility of it working out to where it doesn't leave people to die I would be all for it, but I think that would do too much harm right now. Wouldn't we have to pay for them anyway when they have to go to the hospital or things like that?

Yes. We would have to pay for them anyway. And we would pay for them. Get the government out of the equation. That can't happen fast enough.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Definition = Ponzi Scheme when they pretend that people are "investing" and then pay them with the proceeds from new "investors." Welfare, sure, but this is a more specific crime that is prosecuted.

The Ponzi scheme analogy is pretty good, but not quite right. With SS, the dollar is depreciating and costs are rising at the same time, so no one actually "wins" the scheme as happens in traditional ponzi scams. Pretty sad when your scam is not even honest enough to be compared to a pyramid scheme. lolz.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

The societal impact of the elimination of ss can be absorbed if we band together. Tough times aren't necessarily the worst of times. And the tough times that you are describing are nothing compared to the tough times ahead if we don't change.

As to the taxes, taxes and spending should both be cut. I know that people aren't living large, but we need to perform some surgury, and live a little leaner if we want to save the country. I believe that if americans could see the need for this surgury, that they would also be willing to make sure that people in their immediate communities who could no longer work and who didn't have families would be taken care of. It's just what we have to do.

Agreed, but we are so far from that at this point. Let's start with the Pentagon, the Fed, the litany of unconstitutional depts we have and cut, cut, cut. At the same time structure a system where we can phase out SS entirely. Though I do not think we have to "live a little leaner" the simple reduction of taxes and spending will kick start the economy and we will be just fine. The biggest drain on our economy is the govt - the only people that have to live leaner is the Feds

 

[erowe1]

The Ponzi scheme analogy is pretty good, but not quite right. With SS, the dollar is depreciating and costs are rising at the same time, so no one actually "wins" the scheme as happens in traditional ponzi scams. Pretty sad when your scam is not even honest enough to be compared to a pyramid scheme. lolz.

If you want to use the Ponzi scheme analogy, then the people who started getting paid SS back in 1935 were the winners.

But again, it never was the case that anybody paying into SS was investing for their own future. I don't think the government ever told that lie.