Marti Oakley(c)copyright 2011 All Rights Reserved
___________________________________________
Social Security is an investor funded program that has also been used to fund the government, it is NOT an entitlement program nor was it intended to be any form of welfare. The “entitlement” the government speaks of would be more aptly applied to them; they feeling they are entitled to avail themselves of our investments and use that money for whatever they choose to.
_______________________________________________
A long coveted cut to Social Security and Medicare is going to happen. This will occur for reasons none of the politicians in the District of Criminals will ever speak about publicly. There is far more at stake here than what the District terms an “unfunded liability”. When you hear those in the District speak about this liability, you need to understand what they are really saying. This is an intra-governmental debt, meaning; a debt accrued within the government. It is a liability to the federal government because it is owed to “you” and they have no way of paying it back without taxing you more heavily. You are the “full faith and credit” of the United States corporation. That means government runs up the bills and we pay it.
The federal government now includes Social Security in its debt portfolio, not because the program is insolvent or ever was, and not because the Federal government has to fund it in any sense (SS is funded by your investments) but because the Federal government has stolen so much money from the fund, then sold special treasury securities on those stolen funds to countries like China to finance the massive debt accruing across the board. Since there is no chance the national debt can ever be repaid, the Fed is now in the position of finagling the discharge of internal debt from the books. Look at it as a form of back door bankruptcy.
The federal government DOES NOT fund Social Security! Social Security funds the federal government.
Since the Johnson Administration of the 60’s, the S.S. fund has been plundered and the surplus from the fund used to finance wars and the daily operations of the federal government. This came as a result of Johnson declaring that these surplus funds would be added to the general fund. Once there, the funds could be used for anything and everything.
As only one example: The Bush2 Administration had to cover the loss of revenues from the welfare tax cuts to the upper 3%. It was imperative that the administration be able to cover up the loss by showing a presumed increase in revenues that was supposed to have resulted from this preferential treatment of the uber wealthy. Surplus funds were stripped from SS, along with any unused funding from any other program, then added to the general revenue column as though these increases were generated as an actual result of the welfare tax cuts. These stolen funds with their new designation as “revenue” were then used as proof that these welfare tax cuts were beneficial. Its all a lie, and one the middle and working classes are about to pay the bill on.
Every administration has, without exception used the same tactics to hide preferential treatment of their buddies; to cover up expenditures for things most of us would find highly objectionable.
Most of the American public is totally clueless as to the deceptive accounting practices being used to fool them, and most still have no idea that the budget presented to the public is the simplified budget and only includes carefully presented revenues and expenses meant to portray a specific picture of the nations financial dealings. And many more of us are totally unaware that there is another budget referred to as the “unified budget” which shows all revenues from every source and every expense of any kind and a budget which, if we were to view it and understand the true implications, would most likely scare the beetlejuice out of most of us.
Note** Even the unified budget does not itemize, contain or otherwise acknowledge the funds diverted to “black ops”…no one can know that for some reason. Black ops are the clandestine operations performed by various organizations within the government and usually the CIA and are said to cost the country billions each year.
The stolen SS funds are now approaching 3 trillion. That is 3 trillion dollars of FICA taxes gleaned from generations of workers for a specific purpose that the federal government stole and then sold special treasury notes on. This is a debt owed by the federal government (USA Corp) to the investors (all you workers) that they never had any intention of paying back and is why it is referred to as an “unfunded liability”. It is a massive cash liability for a debt owed to generations of working Americans. As the amount stolen from the investments of workers grows so does the unfunded liability incurred.
At this point, one or more things must happen to protect the thieves.
In what can only be described as a another case of nationalizing the losses and privatizing the profits, we have the District career criminals calling for raising the age of retirement as one option to curtail the number of people able to access their investments in Social Security. This means fewer people leaving the job market and conversely, fewer jobs available to those entering the job market. A really crappy idea considering the millions out of work now and only one job available for every five applicants.
Another option proffered is cutting the amount of benefits. This one is really sneaky! You are supposed to think that by cutting benefits this will somehow offset any future shortfalls in Social Security. Here’s what it really does: It increases the amount of SS surpluses accrued because it lowers the amount being paid out of the fund and increases the funds available to the ongoing theft of your investment. While millions are out of work and not investing in Social Security, this scam will reduce payouts while maintaining virtually the same level of surplus the Federal government is going to steal.
The favorite of course is to collapse Social Security altogether.
“Therefore, Obama’s commission may recommend a variety of tactics to strip the program: instituting benefit cuts, increasing the age in which benefits are received, and introducing a limited option for personal accounts. Also possible is the implementation of a tiny, ineffectual tax on the rich to give the illusion that everybody is making sacrifices.”
I am always amazed at the hyperventilating of those who scream “It’s a ponzi scheme!”. I have news for you; so is the stock market and so are your insurance policies. You invest in each of these with full expectation of reaping more than you sowed. In each of these situations, a system of perpetual funding is devised with a promise of future profitable expectations by you. The difference is this; Social Security is not operated with the intent to profit, but the insurance company and stock market is.
Social Security is NOT an unfunded liability. Social Security is very well funded by American workers. The federal government is the unfunded liability but covers this liability by stealing the retirement investments of workers. Yet there are those out there who are now trying to reframe this issue by claiming that there never was a Social Security trust fund, and, that FICA taxes collected to cover your investment in that fund aren’t really investment taxes..this is just an additional tax levied on you for some vague reason and therefore its quite alright for the federal government to seize these funds for other purposes.
Many people believe that Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is the same as Social Security. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes). http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/ The program is administered by the Social Security administration so that the costs of administration are shifted to SS, but the funding for claims is not from your investment in Social Security.
Those who are beating the drums for ending social security as they allow themselves to be consumed by political rhetoric that bears little resemblance to the truth, need to do some real research on the actual benefits of this program as opposed to allowing those doing the talking to paint this program as an “entitlement” and some form of welfare that was unearned. Social Security is an investor funded program that has also been used to fund the government, it is NOT an entitlement program nor was it intended to be any form of welfare. The “entitlement” the government speaks of would be more aptly applied to them; they feeling they are entitled to avail themselves of our investments and use that money for whatever they choose to. This amounts to a second and third round of taxes as many of our payees are forced to pay taxes on their benefits each year after being taxed over their working lifetime to fund their investment. The third tax is exemplified in the theft of surplus funds the government can’t pay back.
Extra demands are put on Social Security as illegal aliens are granted access to the fund without actually having contributed to it to any degree. An illegal alien from Mexico, can come here, work under an admitted assumed name, work as little as three quarters and return to Mexico and make a claim against Social Security. The summary of the GAO report contained this statement:
“Under the Social Security Act, all earnings from employment in the United States count towards earning social security benefits, regardless of the lawful presence of the worker, his or her citizenship status, or country of residence. Immigrants [both legal and otherwise] become entitled to benefits from unauthorized work if they can prove that the earnings and related contributions belong to them. However, they cannot collect such benefits unless [or until] they are either legally present in the United States [hence the Administration’s Guest Worker Program], or living in a country where SSA is authorized to pay them their benefits. [Hence an SSA office in Mexico City] Mexico is such a country.”
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03993.pdf
The upshot of all of this is: Social Security is not only paying for wars, government expenses, and other non-related purposes, it is also covering the loss of revenues resulting from the welfare tax rates given to the uber wealthy and to fund illegal immigration, an activity that is bankrupting communities across the country. At the same time it is still producing a surplus above and beyond all claims of any kind made against it, although if a real effort isn’t made soon to create and secure jobs here in the US, many things along with Social Security are going to disappear.
And many of you think this would be just great as long as long as you are left untouched by it all, and many of you for some reason believe you will somehow be exempt; that your life will be unaltered or unaffected. I have news for you: No one will be spared.
_____________________________________
Resources:
Mexico Totalization Agreement
http://www.tscl.org/NewContent/Totalization_Agreement.pdf
GAO pdf.
Proposed Totalization Agreement with Mexico Presents Unique Challenges
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03993.pdf
SSI Fund
Special Treasuries Securities
Social Security funds stolen by government
https://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/social-security-money-stolen-by-government/
The Drive to eliminate Social Security in America
https://ppjg.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/the-drive-to-eliminate-social-security-in-america/
The real unfunded liability —the federal government 2008
https://ppjg.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/the-real-unfunded-liability%e2%80%a6the-federal-government/
In case you didn’t understand the first time: Social Security is not an “entitlement” program | The PPJ Gazette
Mar 17, 2017 @ 10:20:45
Anonymous
Apr 27, 2015 @ 22:33:24
A man with blue eyes, extremely light skin tone, and light brown hair was mocking the system few weeks ago while I was at the airport, saying he had worked for less than a year but will be able to collect government benefits from his country (not Mexico).
LikeLike
The New CRAP-italism: Amnesty traded for killing Social Security « The PPJ Gazette
Nov 30, 2012 @ 16:56:20
pletcherfwb
Aug 29, 2012 @ 05:53:47
Metaforer kan vælge at nøgne og også betydet. En ny hvirvelvind fra Indstillinger kan beskrives som grundlæggende metafor. Alt resultater regnede om din ex kæreste, Hendes have det sjovt syndet når nogensinde han eller hun undersøgt pigen, sammen med Hendes stukket min egen ondt Er normalt betød metaforer. Betød metaforer kan lide ved hjælp af digtere sammen med personer omkring at simple personer. da de vil være konstant konstrueret med verber, disse carry eksistens foruden opstemthed med en sætning. Alligevel, dybest set eller Foreslået, alle metaforer er som regel overused eller blot Over bruges foretrækker anden good stuff. nike free tilbud Af denne grund hvor skal du tænder? Alle connect den slags svage punkter direkte. Men hvis dit merchandise kan opkræves forhold til konkurrenterne, egen op dette ordentlig i begyndelsen. Så igen giftes heraf spørgsmål ved at have en komplimentere høj. Hvordan kommer er a emne mere dyrt? Hvad er det præcist færdigheder indarbejde , der vil større prisniveau? Hvad præcist argumenter er det muligt forsyning potentiale kunder så du kan omsorgssvigt større værdi sammen med koncentrere sig om supplerende sundhedsmæssige fordele disse mennesker vil ikke have ved at have en billigere stridende system ?
LikeLike
Congress Robbed Social Security And Doesn't Want To Pay It Back - Page 15
May 14, 2012 @ 15:00:49
Dennis
Dec 23, 2011 @ 22:32:39
Have you turned your back on history? Or, are you so anti govt. and anti tax that you can’t see the forest for the twig.
LikeLike
topsailusmc
Oct 15, 2011 @ 06:52:48
@ Andrea Lawrence-Stuart
You are actually part of this little problem. Just because you’ve been brainwashed into thinking all things bad are Republican, maybe you better do some research on your own instead of having your nose buried in MSNBC. There hasn’t been one balanced budget since Eisenhower (since party matters to you, he was a Republican). Social Security funds became fair game to govt during LBJ’s administration (since party is important to you, he was a democrat). Some like to believe Clinton left a surplus, however they do forget to take away the money he removed from Social Security to make it appear that way. And of course, you should know that Clinton was a democrat.
This isn’t party related Andrea! You are under the false impression, drilled into your head by the left wing propaganda machine, that Republicans don’t care about the poor, the homeless, the sick. And yet I can prove to you that if that were true, then it holds true for democrats as well. Name one time the poor were pulled out of poverty because of a democrat. Just one! You can’t, because the poor will remain poor. So what’s the difference?
Republicans want to help people stand on their own, to be self sufficient. Democrats want to help people but only as long as they are dependent on govt to help them.
With the Republicans, someone is going end up homeless and hungry, simply because they don’t want to work. They would rather have the free handout and stay home to watch their programs on their big screen TV. Google Sharon Jasper.
With Democrats, many will drop below the poverty level, simply because they will be handed what they need. They will be cared for, but chances are they will never do better than just survive at the American poverty level. This is socialism at its finest! Make the people dependent rather than independent.
My point? For every damaging statement you can make about conservatives, I can give you one or two back about liberals, complete with proof. Why? Because this is NOT party dependent! Until the people wake up and see this, we will continue to see our govt with more power than what was intended and more dependence from the people who have to fund the govt. Keep in mind, the govt has NO MONEY! They don’t plan a budget like we do. They figure out how much they WANT to spend and then force people like you and me to pay for it.
Republicans tell people to stand on their own and expect family, friends and communities to help each other. Democrats throw money at the problem and hope it goes away. If it doesn’t, well that just means they need more money! RAID SOCIAL SECURITY! Then both parties raise taxes because baby boomers are retiring and EXPECTING their investment back! And rightly so. As Marti stated, Social Security is NOT an entitlement. We paid for it, in CASH! Our employers paid into it on our behalf instead of giving it to us in our paychecks. CASH!
That is an investment that should have grown well beyond a mere 5%. And yet if that’s all you got from your SS investment, a person who averages $30K a year over their lifetime, would receive $26,787.60 per year for 30 years before it dried up. It would last you until you were 95 years old! But that isn’t what people get. Someone making 80K a year, who paid into SS their entire working life, will receive between $18K and $21K per year. In addition, they will pay taxes on a portion of that money, a large portion! SS was not supposed to be taxed.
It doesn’t matter what party is in office when it comes to Social Security. BOTH parties have stolen funds. Not borrowed, STOLEN! All thanks to LBJ and his buddies who passed a law saying it was ok to steal. Forget the stupid 2 party system! They are destroying this country bit by bit with Progressives, aka Obama, Reid, Pelosi, etc, are on the fast track to destruction while Democrats and Republicans destroy us much slower.
LikeLike
John
Sep 23, 2011 @ 12:34:28
This is a great blog post full of good stuff. I agree with much of what the original blogger said, but Sarah Miller some great points as well. Like it or not, social security is a socialist mechanism, but there’s nothing wrong with that. People have made “socialism” some sort of evil word, not to be uttered here in the US, and that’s nonsense.
LikeLike
Andrea Lawrence-Stuart
Aug 26, 2011 @ 20:23:51
To Republicans, especially those who are working poor, retired poor, and on Social Security and Medicare, even Medicaid: The last time I looked in the dictionary, entitlement meant we are entitled to something. We all paid into the fund which is just that. It is supposed to be left alone and not taken from those who paid and are still paying into it. So do not make “entitlement” a four letter word or a synonym for “welfare.” It is a right, it is an account, “Social Security Account.” You poor, disabled, and Republicans who receive (and stand to lose, just like us Democrats) Social Securitym, are so gullible and, it seems to me, unaware, of the fact that you are just as vulnerable to being screwed by those they elected by the tax cuts to the wealthy and cutting your entitlements so you will be on the streets with us Democrats. Not all Republicans are rich. Are not some of you ready to admit that you need government assistance as much as we do. Government is not evil, Tear your eyes away from your Fox TV pundits and stop listening only to one side of things. Do not believe everything you hear from fanatical pompous porcine Limbaugh and that other self-serving Glenn Beck, who fill your heads with trash about government control. You keep voting for your own denouement as long as you keep choosing people like Perry and his thugs. You are as vulnerable to being kicked out on the street by those you elected. So get with it, get a clue. You Republican poor and middle class are in the same boat as the Democratic poor and retired and middle class. You are not exempt. You do not get a pass, either. And you are ENTITLED to anything you worked for and paid into, so realize you are going to be a victim of your so-called god fearing legislators who couldn’t care less about you if you are poor. You are nothing to them but a vote. Join us, become caring, and for the sake of your loved ones, take a listen to the other side, who cares about all of the poor and those who worked hard and paid into all their — proud to say it: entitlements.
LikeLike
Social Security: The efforts to demonize this invested insurance « The PPJ Gazette
Aug 23, 2011 @ 20:42:27
Paul Medis
Aug 04, 2011 @ 10:35:41
The House of Representatives is trying to make you think Social Security is an entitlement program. Don’t believe them they are converting Liberty into socialism again.
LikeLike
Jim
Aug 02, 2011 @ 22:57:12
Sarah Miller shows us why accountants are not qualified to do much except standard accounting. (Remember, accounting is fifth grade arithmetic applied to inputs and outputs, called debits and credits, that are defined by some rules determined by the particular accounting system.) The reality is that retirement plans are NOT set up to just pay out only what you put in. Some will get more, others less. It is why actuaries, not accountants, set up retirement plans. It is based on probability and expectations of return on investment as well as expected years to live from certain ages (NOT general life expectancy which is badly skewed by childhood mortaility, for one thing). But then I never met an accountant who understood statistics, much less probability.
LikeLike
Mark Breheim
Feb 24, 2011 @ 23:37:33
Social Security is not an investment.It is another direct tax on your labor just like the income tax.There is no property right to social security it can be legislated away at any time they choose .The united States supreme court ruled in 1960 Flemming v Nestor that there is no property in social security.In the original act Congress reserved “the right to alter,amend or repeal any provision” of the Act. Next time you pay your income tax please look at the back of your check when it is returned to you.It says paid to the Federal Reserve.Your money is going to a private central to pay the interest on the debt.Slaves we all are.
LikeLike
Psssst. Social Security. Can You Spare The Gov Another Trillion? « The PPJ Gazette
Feb 21, 2011 @ 20:14:21
Tweets that mention Social Security is not an “entitlement” program « The PPJ Gazette -- Topsy.com
Feb 20, 2011 @ 03:05:11
ppjg
Feb 20, 2011 @ 01:10:02
Actually she is quite accurate except on the issue of the Accord with Mexico. Those americans living in Mexico were used as the excuse to open the SS offices there, which has now been expanded to include porvisions of the Acord. Marti
LikeLike
steve mccormick
Feb 20, 2011 @ 00:58:14
LIKE IT OR NOT……The comments by SARAH MILLER are right on.
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 19, 2011 @ 18:00:10
You are confusing SS with SSI..two different programs. SSI is federal welfare. SS is an invested retirement program.
Socialism is the other side of fascism…..both produce the same thing. A class of ruling elite and privileged, and everyone else just cannon fodder.
I don’t consider SS any less socialistic than the welfare tax rates for the upper 3%.
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 19, 2011 @ 17:52:29
What is immoral is collecting taxes for a specified purpose and then stealing those taxes and using them for everything else. Then to continue the theft while now trying to convince those paying the tax that there never was a fund, there never was a program, there never was any intent to use this as a retirement insurance safety net is even more so.
The privte insurance scheme is no different. Whether you pay voluntarily or involuntarily is not the issue…..you are hedging a bet based on your premiums that you will benefit far more on payout than you paid in. You get a payout only so long as there is continued and growing nubmers of those paying in. Its the same system. You seem to think that because you choose a system for your own use that it is somehow better or different. It isn’t.
LikeLike
Gary Barnett
Feb 19, 2011 @ 17:39:24
Confusing a forced welfare program that is a scheme with private contracts is ludicrous.
And as an aside, I want nothing to do with any government program. ALL government programs are forced welfare because government has nothing, creates nothing, and produces nothing; it only takes by force from those who do.
What those advocating this immoral program fail to understand is that stealing from one to give to another who never earned it in the first place, is forced redistribution, which is socialism. It is always wrong.
Private transactions, especially insurance transactions, are paid by the private capital raised by the company via private and voluntary premiums. Social security has never had a dime in any trust fund, and therefore is bankrupt.
If one has even a modicum of economic sense, then it should be obvious that this evil government is spending over 2 trillion dollars more each year than is taken by it from ALL tax revenues, including SS and Medicare. How in the world can one not understand that this is impossible to continue?
It is similar to me earning $100,000.00 each year but spending $200,000.00, while at the same time being in debt to my personal production over $1,400,000.00. You see, the government is in debt 14.3 trillion dollars, and is adding to that debt at a level of 2 trillion dollars a year; this non-compounded. Why don’t some of you wake up and see if you can somehow understand reality, theft, and socialism, instead of believing that you are owed something that does not exist, and can only be distributed at the expense of others. Thinking this is right is certainly immoral!
Gary Barnett
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 19, 2011 @ 17:00:56
i am always amazed at the people who think that everyone can get wealthy, or that that is even possible. How many people do you know that are working, have worked all of their lives, but who live paycheck to paycheck? We have an economic system that is steadily bankrupting every level of our lives.
As far as SS and illegal immigrants……yes they can collect. We have an Accord with them signed during the Bush2 adminstration that allows for this. We have Accords with several other countries also.
This is why there are now several US. SS offices in Mexico. not just one.
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 19, 2011 @ 16:52:33
No it isn’t invalid. Whatever the status of collected FICA taxes, these taxes were implemnted for a specific purpose. Those taxes were held separately from the other revenues of the federal corporation. These taxes were and are accounted for as a specific revenue stream…..and the payouts as separate expense.
If this wasn’t true the fed would have no way of accounting for these funds and could not make any statements about the ratio of revenue/claims.
It has only been since Johnson that these funds were redesignated as general revenue and that was to facilitate the use of those funds for anything and everything. Prior to that, these funds were collected and held separately as they should have been and used solely for SS and could not be accessed for other purposes.
IT is no different than your life insurance or any other insurance….you are betting you will pay less in premiums than what the insurance company will pay out. The insurance company is using past and current premiums to finance the policies they sold. in neither case do they have the funds or assets to cover every policy out there. All of it is dependent upon continued and growing numbers of people to invest. Just like SS
This is exactly what I was talking about: As long as what the Fed does doesn’t land on your doorstep and if it can make you feel like you are somehow in a more protected position, you’re all for it.
LikeLike
Gary Barnett
Feb 19, 2011 @ 15:51:15
PPJG,
Your analogy is completely invalid. When one buys private insurance voluntarily from an insurance company, that premium is commingled with many others. Then the insurance company assesses risk by use of mortality tables. It is a fully funded voluntary written contract, and the company spreads the risk over time.
Social security is taken by force, never funded, and all proceeds are spent immediately for all general purposes. There is no fund, no money, no spreading of risk whatsoever. It is not insurance, it is a Ponzi scheme. 100% of social security payments come only from current and future wage earners. That is why it is pure welfare, and not money returned to the original payor.
Enron and Madoff would be proud to be able to pull off such a monstrous scam as this!
Gary Barnett
LikeLike
Paul
Feb 19, 2011 @ 13:37:18
I love all the comments, and I’m sure all are true to those individual posters. However inspite of it all and the awaking of the tea partiers (which I love), most people trust the government to do the right thing. Someone once said the government is always right…it just has to try all the wrong solutions first to get to the right one, which it knew about in the first place.
Medicare and Social Security are here to stay…get use to its problems. Not everyone will be treated equally. But I love the people who insist programs are fixed at the expense of others….take from someone else but don’t mess with mine. Hello, does what is going on in Wisconsin ring any bells!
PB
Memphis, TN
Retired Tax Consultant
LikeLike
Stiri scurte: 19.02.2011 « George Valah Blog
Feb 19, 2011 @ 06:01:35
Sarah Miller
Feb 19, 2011 @ 04:03:33
I am a retired accountant that had my own practice until I retired. There is some information in this piece that is not correct I’m afraid. It will be interesting to see if my comments are posted.
First, you have to pay into Social Security a minimum of
40 quarters, that is ten years before you can make a claim
or get benefits from it. The reason why there is a SSA office in Mexico is because nearly 1/2 million Americans are living in Mexico collecting social security. Illegal immigrants
CANNOT collect social security and don’t because all of them use fake social security numbers, that is fact!
Second, presently those that have been collecting and the baby boomers that are starting to collect, if they add up what they have paid into their social security and the matching employer amount over the years they worked, in every case, they will collect more than they ever paid into the fund by the time they die. This has been proven, if you don’t believe me, add up what you and your employers have paid in for you, then divide it by the amount you will draw each month,you will see you will outlive what you and your employers have paid in. In many cases it is almost double the amount. What caused this problem is the government NEVER changed the method of calculation to compute a retirement amount when they should have many, many years ago and now…well the writing is on the wall.
Yes the article is correct in that social security is not an entitlement which the politicians over the years have named it as such, however because of what I have explained above…it has become an entitlement because it is paying out more than it collects on individuals. That is the reason why they want to extend the retirement age because people keep leaving longer..which means more paid out than what was paid in. When social security was form under Roosevelt, the average life span was only 68 years old America – they never dreamed people would be living into their 90’s collecting social security.
The problem here is through the years, we the voters allowed things to happen as when Johnson started using the Social Security funds, placing IOU’S in it, to fund the
Viet Nam war. We the voters are now complaining when it is our fault we let this occur, we did not pay attention and react to what politicians were doing back then and have been doing no only with this but other things.
The reason why Medicaid was started was because in the 1960’s, there were not enough farm workers to picks the crops – Americans WILL NOT do these jobs. Those that became U.S. citizens, because of their constant migration from farm to farm, could never afford for medical needs, thus the creation of Medicaid and for the disabled and to take care of children born with severe health problems. Currently, there are over 1 million children in the U.S. that are on Medicare costing hundreds of millions of dollars a year in treatment. Babies born with heart defects where surgery is needed cost taxpayers nearly $200,000 for just that one child. Prior to the creation of Medicaid, these people and children born with severe disabilities did not survive, they died because there was no such programs to pay for such things.
Whether you like it or not, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid are a form of socialization for the welfare of the people, because frankly, most people do not know how to take care of themselves financially, especially those with not much education. If you want to do away with these programs for the poor, the disabled, children born with severe disabilities – then there will be a social cost. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say you are tired of all the social programs because if you have that thinking then you are dooming these people and children, or just maybe…we need to look at the quality of life…meaning is a life truly worth living if a child born with disabilities grows into an adult needing constant care at the cost of nearly 1/2 million a year – is this truly quality of life. MY mother had two children that died after child birth. Today if they had been born, they would still be alive because of medical advancements – but at what cost and would they have a quality of life. I know what I am saying is hard to grasp, but we can’t have it both ways.
If you want all the services that government taxes provide, then you have to pay them. That includes highways, programs for the elderly, ( by the way, 45% of the elderly living in nursing homes are on Medicaid, nearly 18 million as of 2009 ) because their children won’t care for them or they have no one to care for them. What would happen to these people if the programs were not there?
How many Americans do you know put at least 5% of their earnings aside in savings through their working years..less than 12% in the last 50 years. Americans do not plan for their retirement because the mentally is…the government will be there with these programs to take care of me, or
they don’t give it any thought at all, that is evident by the sheer numbers on Medicaid in their old age.
We have got to stop twisting the facts to suit our complaints of what we the American voter expects from our government or has allowed to happen or want from the government. If we want to become a backward third world country – then yes, lets do away with these programs, but if we want them, then we will have to pay the tab that is as simple as it is – and we need to stop the complaining and get on with it.
Yes, I agree the rich have not paid their fair share as well as corporations over the last 50 years—but who did that, if you look at the voting records over the last 50 years – it has been I am sorry to say, Republicans who have protected the rich and corporations from paying the appropriate taxes, and some Democrats, but mostly Republicans…they enjoy holding their power by promising lowering taxes – yet not being truthful with Americans, if you want these services, these programs, then someone has to pay for it. The problem today is — it is catch up time now after all these years.
If there government waste, yes, but again we the American voter have allowed this to happen over the years, we have not made our elected officials accountable because hardly no ones checks on how their elected officials actually vote on issues – they campaign one thing, but once in office they vote another and that goes for both Democrats and Republicans..who is at fault there –we
the American voter – no one else by continuing to re-elect these crooked politicians.
My grandmother who survived the Depression once told me before she died several years ago…it is sad…Americans have become spoiled and it will cost them dearly in not accepting the reality about things and most importantly not being accountable to themselves so that they make politicians accountable.
I hope this information has been useful —
LikeLike
Patriot
Feb 19, 2011 @ 03:22:11
‘When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.’ Thomas Jefferson
REVOLUTION is the Solution!!!
‘God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion…. And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms…. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.’ – Thomas Jefferson, in letter to William S. Smith, 1787
LikeLike
Duane M. Peed
Feb 19, 2011 @ 01:13:03
I am not sure there is anything to worry about – if the current round of social unrest in the world is anything to judge by, our extra taxation IS definitely being put to good effect! Keep the rest destabilized and divided. That is not really Evil – just look at who we are keeping destabilized and divided. They really ARE Evil.
And all these Mexican nationals? Well, we have to HAVE more taxation and who is going to pay for it if we do not suddenly acquire more workers one way or another? I mean, if illiegal immigration was a clear and present danger, we would stop it. Right? All them drugs, too, are a great pacifier for the lower IQ tier of society and a source of revenue. I wonder how much the Mexican Govt is involved, or more pointedly, shares its profits with us? Or… should we say the Drug Lords? Ah, who can say? The world is so murky and confusing. In anycase, you just cannot destablize a partner (who ever they are) by securing the border…
There it is. Turn off CNN.
This whole topic summed-up in two small paragraphs.
Much ado about nothing.
Citizens, you would do well to remember Ecclesiastes – all things have already been done under the Sun before. An uncommon example of this chestnut is this: if something is not being done, it is so because the opposite is actually being done because it has been made policy and is desired. So you are being taxed more. Who cares. Nukes, stealth bombers, fleets and black ops are EXPENSIVE. We are at war. Pipe down some. Things could be worse.
Nuck est Binbidom: Let us Drink.
– Duane M. Peed
LikeLike
Ashley
Feb 19, 2011 @ 00:10:51
Good article. No, great article.
I think the AP Stylebook may be a good read for you. (I’m an editor and while your article is excellent, you could use a good editor. 🙂
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 18, 2011 @ 22:22:11
Oh crap! Now that you identified yourself as a Libertarian HSD probably added your name to their lists of suspects! (-:
that aside…It is wonderful to be in a position to say that you will not participate in any of these programs and I do understand your stance on this. But let me ask you this…….
If you had paid for life insurance all of your life on your wife and she passed…..would you refuse the insurance payout? After all it is highly unlikely that your premiums amounted to any thing other than a small percentage of the value of the policy.
Pay out on the policy would be dependent upon the continued premiums of other policy holders whose collective payments would fund your payout.
Why would this be any different than what people expect from Social Security?
LikeLike
Gary Barnett
Feb 18, 2011 @ 21:33:04
Clifford,
You misunderstood my point. When I said that the program was involuntary, by force in other words, I was speaking to the fact that if I work in this country and collect pay, (my property) then I am forced to pay into this socialist welfare program.
I would never accept social security payments even though I have paid heavily into the government’s pockets for over 43 years. I would also not accept Medicare, Prescription Drugs, CRP, unemployment, workers comp, food stamps, government grants or subsidies of any kind, or any other government payment. I am a purest libertarian in every regard, and don’t believe in benefitting at the expense of another. All taxation in this country is by force, and therefore involuntary.
Please don’t anyone say I can just leave for another country if I don’t like it. That idiotic response never deserves a reply.
Gary Barnett
LikeLike
silentwarrior
Feb 18, 2011 @ 20:34:41
I would like to think all those years I worked and the money that was taken out is mine. I had four boys to maintain and that sum taken out each week sure would have helped. Now after being forced to retire I am made to feel like it is welfare. That is my money that the govt took, and how much did the govt make from all of us in the meantime holding on to it??? This govt sickens me, I have never hated before, but I do now!!! Woe to you pigs who think you should live better than your constituents. Remember who put you there to serve!!! We have done our part but in the name of God we all know these cockroaches have not done theirs!! Revolt- its the only way we will get our country back.
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 18, 2011 @ 20:33:34
In addition: The fact that there is no money to fund these IOU’s is precisely why it is now referred to as an “unfunded liability”.
LikeLike
ppjg
Feb 18, 2011 @ 20:27:29
Whether there exist now or even recently any so-called “trust fund” for SS……the point is, the FICA taxes are made available to the general fund. All claims against SS are then funded from the treasury…meaning the IMF……and all remaining funds left over are just consumed by the government for other purposes.
The accounting gimmicks used and the redesignation of those FICA taxes as “general revenue” does not change the fact that the taxes were created and implemented for a specific purpose: Social Security.
The fact that worthless IOU’s are left in lieu of funds taken…..indicates that a debt is owed.
Socialism/fascism…makes no difference the end result is one and the same. Calling it a socialist program may be a fire-starter in some quarters, but the program has saved many elderly from abject poverty in their old age. Something most of their extended families won’t save them from.
Its very easy to fling words around like socialism and ponzi scheme..etc., and claiming that SS is insolvent because the investments in it (FICA) have been diverted to other purposes is not the same thing as the program not being self sustaining if left alone and the collected FICA taxes secured from further theft or “redesignation”.
LikeLike
Clifford
Feb 18, 2011 @ 20:15:03
Gary:
You are correct that SS goes into the general treasury. And the SC has ruled that the money can be used for any purpose congress desires. There is no obligation to fund anyone’s retirement.
Where you might do further research is where you say the tax is “involuntary”. It is not “involuntary”. Under the First Amendment you have freedom of association, which means freedom not to associate. The federal government cannot force you to associate with any of its programs, it must have your consent (given by filling out an application) per the Declaration of Independence.
The SSA also has a form for you to resign from the program.
You most likely applied for a ssn when you were a minor. No minor can make any agreement legally binding on anyone.
For the best legal research and memorandum of law on the voluntary nature of SS and why you do not qualify for any benefits, unless you are a federal employee, read “The Mark of the Beast” at http://www.famguardian.org
LikeLike
Cat Callahan
Feb 18, 2011 @ 19:17:12
People who believe that social security is not an entitlement should-at age 65-try and collect food stamps, rent monies,etc. JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE 65! Good Luck! But social security CAN be collected no matter who you are. Incidentally, we do not allow the rich to get food stamps simply because they pay into the system, so why allow the ubre-rich to collect social security? The original purpose of Social security was “alleviation of poverty in old age.” There are lots of ss recipients who are not ‘suffering’ any poverty in their old age-only the cashing in of stocks, bonds,etc.
LikeLike
Gary Barnett
Feb 18, 2011 @ 18:54:50
Marti,
While you do make some valid points, you are completely off base when you say that social security is not insolvent and that it is funded by “our investments.”
First, there is not one single dime in any so-called social security trust fund as 100% of all monies collected goes directly to the general fund. Secondly, social security tax is not an investment, as it is involuntary, and is not invested in anything because there is not one cent there to be invested.
Social security taxes, or payroll taxes are simply income taxes, and are treated as such. Even the evil government on the social security site says as much. The so-called trust fund is empty because it only contains worthless iou’s, but the rub is that not one cent exists to fund these promises. Only by raising taxes or printing money out of thin air will the government continue to pay out of future earnings of others property.
In addition, to say that this socialist program is not insolvent is economically ignorant. The government collects about 1 trillion dollars in socialist payroll income tax, and just a little more in conventional income tax each year. It then spends double that amount each year considering current budgets. That means that each year all programs are about 2 trillion dollars in the red. In addition, the country has massive debt. My economic background tells me that the entire system is insolvent, and to a degree unfathomable only a few years ago.
If I make $100,000 per year, and spend $200,000 per year, and have $1,000,000 in debt … I hope you get the point!
Gary D. Barnett
President/Barnett Financial Services, Inc.
Lewistown, Montana
LikeLike
Social Security is not an “entitlement” program | The Global Realm
Feb 18, 2011 @ 18:07:25