Social security

[XJawgi]

besides gov't jobs and amtrak... you know of anyone else that has this option?

 

[XJawgi]

Doesnt the gov't have to pay the railroads, so we can drive over them, because the railroads were around before the gov't started making streets?

 

[TRNDRVR]

besides gov't jobs and amtrak... you know of anyone else that has this option?

It's not just Amtrak, I think it's all Class 1 & 2 railroads.

 

[8Mud]

I´ve done just enough book keeping, to get an instinct for whats going on. Seriously, the Government (and many corporations) spend the same money numerous times, really. All the money, that has ever been put into Social Security has probably been spent many times over. The Governement loans themselves, money from the Social Security fund, then takes another loan on the Social Securtiy Funds, they loaned to themselves, using the borrowed funds as assets, to be borrowed against, again and again. Just a guess, but the interest on the monies the Government has loaned itself (same money/numerous times) is probably where much of the money paid into the Social Security system goes, interest. Kind of like musical chairs or maybe a pyramid scheme. Government book keeping in comparison, would probably make Enron seem pretty tame.
Just a guess, but I´m thinking the Social Security fund is already spent (again) on the Iragi war. I think the plan is to supplant the Social Security fund, with another program, because the existing Social Security fund, probably can´t stand the scrutiny. Smoke and mirrors.
Don´t know if anybody has noticed, but the price of gas hasn´t really gone up as much, as the dollar is worth less. Buys less gas and other foriegn currancies. It´s called devaluation. All those lucky bucks held by foriegn governments are worth about 30% less than they were a few years ago. Pretty much the same thing happened in the early 70´s, when the bill for the Viet Nam war came due. Watch the price of Gold go up, in dollars, though not as much, in many other curriencies.
Remember when they went off of the gold standard in the U.S., shortly after the Viet Nam war? Smoke and mirrors. Or when they changed the money to silver certificates and then changed it again. Government makes it´s own rules.

 

[Sarge]

I think by being a 'vested' employee of AMTRAK, he gets a special pension deal that he hasn't privied us up on. Similar deal that the US Reps & Senators get, that is apart from the 'common folks' SS accounts.

Maybe I'm wrong.

Sorry but the reps and senators do pay into social security. Prior to 1984 it would have been true.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/taxes/pensions.asp

Sarge

 

[Darky]

I somewhat agree with the original post in that we need to take care of ourselves here before we make everyone else good. Entirely too much is spent on saving the world in my opinion. One day we're not going to have the resources/power we have now and if the world doesn't learn to survive without us holding its hand (a little bit of exaggeration I know, but many do rely on us) they're all going to be in a lot of trouble.

 

[RichP]

Who? Or what did I tell my employer?

The railroads are covered under a different system. I also only pay on SS up till I hit $65K [I think thats what it is, need to ask my accountant] then it stops].

 

[FitchVA]

Bingo!!!! Railroad retirement. I don't pay into Social Security, nor will I or my wife ever collect it.


Thanks Woody, I was having fun.

:guitar: i'm another railroad retirement lover. i'm loving it! but some POS politicians want social security and RR to merge. i'd be uber pissed if it did

 

[footdale]

If Bush's plan goes into effect, does it mean that the gov't just takes out less than the current 14%, leaving us to theoretically invest the difference? Or will the contribution remain manditory as it is today but now we have control over how it is invested?
A good number of Americans I don't think are capable of properply planning and saving for retirement. So I was just concerned that we could end up with a very large poor elderly population, that will be even a bigger financial burden that SS currently is.

 

[Tom R.]

A good number of Americans I don't think are capable of properply planning and saving for retirement. So I was just concerned that we could end up with a very large poor elderly population, that will be even a bigger financial burden that SS currently is.

That a good number of Americans aren't capable or disciplined to plan & save for retirement is probably true, but it's also not the government's responsibility to make people do this. Of course, if the dems had their way, they would run everyone's life.

 

[Sarge]

I haven't studied the problem enough to have a real good opinion but I have doubts when I see the big companies (think Enron) support the idea of allowing folks to invest their own portion of SS. I sorta side with the post about don't rely on just your SS, it was never meant that way anyway.

Sarge

 

[WrenchMonkey]

It's all well and good to point out that SS was designed as a safety net, not a retirement plan.

But when people pay 1/8 of every dollar they earn their entire working lives, into an "account" that they see paying all of their retired neighbors, they're going to expect their fair share when the time comes.

"Safety net" government programs don't work because people just won't pass up "free" money. If Uncle Sam is willing to write the check, Joe Public is going to cash it.

Don't get me started...
Robert

 

[Sarge]

But when people pay 1/8 of every dollar they earn their entire working lives, into an "account" that they see paying all of their retired neighbors, they're going to expect their fair share when the time comes.
Robert

Those retired folks drawing SS didn't put their money? Why, yes they did. They're getting their money back. And it's fair to expect to get yours back.

Sarge

 

[bchulett]

You are absolutely correct.

I know for fact SS is being abused not only by our goverment, but also by wealthy-ambitious and poor-lazy americans. I have a relative that is a small business owner that's had his wife on the payroll for X years---but never worked a day in her life.

Now, it can be argued the minimum contributions or points were met ... but does it make it right to collect when you don't really need it and didn't actually work ?

The system needs a serious overhaul beginning with closing loopholes as opposed to raising taxes or reducing benefits to vested citizens... or Bush's privatization scheme.

I'm sure some business owners here would like to comment.

"Safety net" government programs don't work because people just won't pass up "free" money. If Uncle Sam is willing to write the check, Joe Public is going to cash it.

Don't get me started...
Robert

 

[WrenchMonkey]

Those retired folks drawing SS didn't put their money? Why, yes they did. They're getting their money back. And it's fair to expect to get yours back.

Sarge

We're not disagreeing, this is exactly my point. People no longer see it as an insurance policy, they see it as "putting their mooney in" and then "getting their money back."

But that's not how it was designed. It was originally intended as a sort of "old-people welfare," for only those with nothing else to fall back on, so they wouldn't be starving in the streets.

But after decades, hell generations, of watching all seniors draw, it has come to be expected. People now think of it as "their" money.

Which is fine! I mean, hell, I earned it, it should be considered "mine."

And that's what Bush is proposing. "Privatization" is just a fancy-ass government word for "putting your name on it." He wants to let you put a little bit of that 1/8 into a separate pile that actually is your money, and stays your money. And when you retire, you actually will be "getting your own money back."

But the Dems like having that great big slush fund that they can (and do!) dip into for whatever they want. Putting your name on it puts a lock on the piggy bank.

Sorry, you got me started...
Robert

 

[biscuitboy87]

richp i agree.
i think most of us here dont remember the depression. more than 50% unemployment. SS is a result of the uncertainty of america surviving as a people...and a country. a depressed economic system is opportunity for another country to seize power...but it is also a chance for a strong (identity) country to pull itself up by the straps. with the much maligned democrates in power they started a program (very socialist in construction...social security is marxist in nature anyways). SS and public works were vehicles to solve the growing pains problems of the time.
now SS is out dated, but i know many old people (i volunteer my time to fix things in their apts. or houses...moslty for the blind so they dont get taken) who would be totaly destitute if not for SS. not for poor planning, but because they lived much longer than expected. they planned to live to maybe 75 or eighty, but find themselves at 95 to 100. thats twenty years without a salary (who will hire a 95 y/o ???).
IMHO leave SS alone until we are responsible enough to actually do something about it.
G.W. is a take charge kind of president, but he rushes into things (and since he is far from intelligent). if he rushes into SS like the non-existant WMDs then the problem of SS will end up costing more for poor planning than for its present shortcomings.
Billions of dollars a year are being poured into iraq for what? for oil? for democracy? for an outpost in a hostile area?
how about taking that money, letting iraq self destruct (it will if we leave), and useing that money to build america. history has a way of pointing out what makes a culture something to respect, and if we want respect we need to do things that advance the human race as a whole...muslim, christian, semite, bhuddist, animist, whatever...
beside SS isn't as messed up as our tax system. i say FLAT TAX. the rich people (senators and reps. and lawyers and lobbyists) hate the prospect, but it is really the only fair way to tax...rant!
so in conclusion, i agree that we are giving foreign aid to countries and meanwhile our country is floundering. leave SS alone for now, impose flat taxation, and educate the world to the notion that the earth viewed from space is all we have...there is no escape if we screw the pooch.

 

[Yucca-Man]

Better make sure no matter what you do that you will have enough money to keep you secure in your old age. Don't want to end up like this gal:

 

[red91]

Better make sure no matter what you do that you will have enough money to keep you secure in your old age. Don't want to end up like this gal:

stop pimping old ladies with cookies...you should be ASHAMED !

 

[MaXJohnson]

G.W. is a take charge kind of president, but he rushes into things (and since he is far from intelligent).

Billions of dollars a year are being poured into iraq ... how about taking that money, letting iraq self destruct (it will if we leave), and useing that money to build america.

if we want respect we need to do things that advance the human race as a whole...

our country is floundering.

I was actually taking you seriously until you threw out the old "GW is a dummy" line. George Bush managed to scrape up enough brains to own a sports team, become governor of Texas and a two term President, the most powerful man on the planet. He's got me beat. How's your career doing?

Then you suggest leaving Iraq high and dry as an example of advancing the human race.

Considering the state of the rest of the world, I'd say the USA is doing quite well.

 

[RKBA]

Like it or not Social Security has a solvency problem. This is not a matter of debate, it is a fact. It is also a fact that we are stuck with it. If there are not changes to the system, something will have to happen. There will have to be a significant payroll tax increase, the age of benefits will have to be raised, or benefits will have to go down, etc.
The insolvency can be fixed by means other than the Thrift Savings Plan system that the President is proposing. This is what the Democrats have been hinting around as, "tinkering" which is of course raising taxes in Demo-speak.
I currently am participating in the Federal Thrift Savings Plan, and have been earning 16% on my money (this is even over the market down turn of 2000-01). Social Security turns in a paltry 3.3%. W's SS plan is sort of like what I am using and is fairly fool proof and has an "out" if you are just totally terrified of market economics. It's a good system that I urge you to study for yourself at tsp.gov.
To be frank about it, I am sick and tired of paying out so much money for the piss poor planning of the Great Generation and the Boomers. They both lived, worked, and governed during an unprecedented period of economic growth in the United States and apparently have little to show for it. I am 33 years old, and have set myself up with a career that provides a pension, a 401K style plan, investment property, and long term savings. By the time that I am in my 60s I will be living comfortably without worrying about that SS check coming in on the 15th of every month.
I am sad to say that I am excited about the prospect of getting to manage the measly 4% of my payroll confiscation that is being proposed. I would prefer to opt out of SS completely and take care of it on my own, but I'll take what I can get. One reason that you should be thinking about the benefits of this plan is this: when that money begins to filter into the market, it becomes venture capital for American business, where most of you work. This is a win-win for everyone in the long term.