1 It's all heading in that direction.  It's just a matter of time, really.

2 For better or worse, we now live in a "as long as I get mine" nation where no one will sacrifice their own welfare-check in service to a higher ideal.

You realize you're talking for yourself, right? Don't even presume to speak for the rest of us.

3 Tragedy of the commons.  If I give up mine, someone else will get it, so I better not give it up.

4

??? Who exactly is bemoaning cutting Federal spending? This constant harping by Ace & staff is more appropriate to Cap'n Squishy over @ HA.

Look - pointing out that it's easier to see out than in isn't exactly breaking new ground. The reality is that one could heavily cut the various programs (back to say, 1998 levels) w/o taking away a single "wage" (you do know that Congress isn't obligated to pay one $.01??), thus "solving" 99.99% of the nation's budget problems in one fell swoop.  Won't happen, though, sorry to say...

5 It seems as though this thread hasn't been properly noticed yet.

6 Amen, Rob.

7 Just keep the juice running and I'll cope with whatever else comes down the pike.
Lights flickering.......

8 Anderson Cooper could have saved himself a beatdown if he had yelled FOX instead of CNN, nevertheless they didn't beat him enough. *spit*!


Morning boys and girls.

9

Anybody know more about this? Sorry to go O/T but this could be a big problem for some people.

The Texas energy regulator Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) has declared an emergency and asked utilities to begin rolling blackouts throughout the state. In a message left on voice mail system for ERCOT public relations, spokeswoman Dottie Roark said the order came after several power plants had to be shutdown over night.

“We have a power emergency at this time,” Roack said in the statement left on ERCOT’s phone system. “We don’t know how long those blackouts will last… It’s due the loss of several units over the night because of the of [garbled] weather conditions.”

10 I think it'll be interesting to see what happens to Social Security once the Gen-Yers and later start gaining some political power. As a member myself, We've never expected SS to be available to us anyways. For us it won't be so much "losing money" as it is "stopping old people from stealing all our money"

11 I'm with Rob. I'm within 5 years of collecting SS and I believe in means testing and raising the retirement age - both of those thing would directly affect me.

12
It is going to be interesting to observe whether Americans will be as childish as say, the Greeks.  To your point Monty, it is no longer (and never really has been) a question of whether we should or could curtail entitlements, it is an immutable law of economics.  To protest your individual "sacrifice" is tantamount to a child wailing about falling of the rain or the dark of night.  It will happen, the question is whether you manage the inevitable or simply sit impotently moaning; in the dark, wet and miserable.

13

People begin to think its their born right to abuse the system.

http://tinyurl.com/4n4vm5f

 

14 The old Brit phrase says it right to the point:

"F*ck you, I'm all right, Jack!"

15 It would take a truly extraordinary individual to get the people to understand that sacrifices must be made by them to avoid oblivion.

And even then, the media would paint them as the Antichrist.

So, oblivion it is, then.

16

#10 - Indeed.

FWIW, much of this moaning seems to be from the "lamest generation" ensuring that they "get theirs" whilst pillaging the rest of us...

17 Only to a point.  We (who worked for decades) put in a lot of money to SS and Medicare.  I don't want MORE than that back, but I do want that back.  Getting back what I put in (for those programs) is not "welfare".  I was forced to "save", by government coercion.  I should very well get something back from my "savings".  I'll let an actuary figure that out, but it is not zero, I can tell you that.

18 As a member myself, We've never expected SS to be available to us anyways. Almost everyone under the age of 50 that I know feels this way. I'm still struck by how many people think of SS as a savings-account or pension rather than a federal benefit that can legally be cut or eliminated at any time. It's the "I paid in, so I should get money out" argument. Never mind that SS is a tax, and just about every dollar put in immediately goes right back out; the popular perception of the plan as some kind of "savings account" persists.

19 I would gladly decline any future claim to SS benefits if they agree to stop forcing me to give them money now

20 I'm 53 years old and have been paying into Social "Security" since I was 15. Back then, when it was first explained to me what these "FICA" deductions were on my paycheck I realized that it was nothing more than legalized theft and that I would not see a dime of that money. If we're going to get past this mess people my age, and younger, are just going to have to accept the fact that their government has robbed them.

21 Start lowering expectations with a sliding scale. Or, let inflation do the dirty work on SS. Hell, unleash inflation on all of government until things become viable. Now, give me my 566 hp Government Motors V-Wagon. The earth's not going to heat itself!

22

Ok, we do need to cut entitlements, across the board (that means SS and Medicare/Medicaid).  However, we need to do it in such a way that 1) we don't make drastic cuts all at once; 2) we bolster our society's ability to create things, thus jobs and wealth, alongside the cuts -- that way we can afford the gradual cut back, heck, maybe even continue to be able to keep a small safety net in place; 3) we give incentive to private entities to supply charity to help take up the slack; 4) we don't target any particular group that truly does need the entitlement over and above any other group: right now the big thing is to cut spending on veterans and active duty...that is not bright for all manner of reasons.  Is it a case of "getting mine"? No, I tried to stay away from doctors when I was on TriCare, and my husband and I try really hard to stay away from the VA; we haven't used up our GI Bill benefits either (may have to -- might as well "get ours").  There are some that have to use them though -- and I remember as a child what those VA hospitals were like...I don't want my brothers and sisters to have to go through that again, and I'll be mighty pissed if they get treated to that all for some damn civilian to "get theirs".

And that is where it stands: cut graft, corruption, and fraud (in fact, the damn politicos need a show of confidence and cut the salaries, bennies, etc. for themselves, their families, and their hangers on); don't target one particular group (or you get the above); make it gradual; try to take care of the people while this happens.  But it must be done, or else.

23 I am depressed at how many people put themselves into this kind of modern vassalage to the various governmental agencies, but it amounts to crying over spilt milk at this point. For better or worse, we now live in a "as long as I get mine" nation where no one will sacrifice their own welfare-check in service to a higher ideal.

Isn't this part of the liberal's grand design, to get people so dependent on government money as to put the masses into this very mind-set and situation?  In this regard, they have already won.

The whole situation will have to come to complete collapse and ruination before the scales fall from our eyes and we see the seductive lie of governmental welfare for what it was all along.

In the end, there will be only chaos.

But...eventually, as happened once before, order will emerge from the chaos after the end is complete. 

24 They would do better just explaining to the "worker" tha the SS tax was a mandatory donation to support old people.

25 We (who worked for decades) put in a lot of money to SS and Medicare. I don't want MORE than that back, but I do want that back. Getting back what I put in (for those programs) is not "welfare". I was forced to "save", by government coercion. I should very well get something back from my "savings". I'll let an actuary figure that out, but it is not zero, I can tell you that. Posted by: Randall Hoven at February 02, 2011 10:28 AM (goI7h) Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you (and I and everybody else) were paying all those years was not "savings" it was a TAX. And the government is not compelled to return taxes.

26 No question these systems are being abused - which is the main reason they're out of control, I think - but there's a significant aspect of this that complicates the philosophical equation.

Many, many people have been paying into a system all their lives that is not what they've been mislead to believe it is. IIRC, Social Security, in particular, was barely declared constitutional precisely because the feds do NOT maintain an 'account' that most people believe is sitting in a bank somewhere, accruing interest, waiting to be dispersed as an annuity.

This points up a fundamental flaw in socialism, i.e., that socialist welfare programs can not exist in an economy supported by capitalism and free enterprise UNLESS the State, lies about the nature of the program, whether tacitly or overtly (and we've seen both).

So it's not as simple as "as long as I get mine" in a lot of cases. Better to characterize at least some of the reaction to cost-cutting as "what happened to the tens or hundreds of thousand$ I PAID INTO the system??"

27 This is as old as mankind.  The old expressions, "no dog in this fight." ,  "my ox being gored" etc. show that.  No one likes to change and give up what they have, even when they can afford it with no real danger of going without, and when they know it is necessary.  It's just human nature.

28 You young whippersnappers had better not even think about touching my Social Security! I've earned it, by cracky!!

Put that in your "iPhone" and smoke it, you little punk. And get the hell off my lawn!

29 But...eventually, as happened once before, order will emerge from the chaos after the end is complete.

Wait...words of hope from Kratos?

Next he'll be endorsing decadence.

That, or my last brain cells have decamped for Tahiti.

30 I'm with Rob. I'm within 5 years of collecting SS and I believe in means testing and raising the retirement age - both of those thing would directly affect me. Yes, but the devil is always in the details, isn't it? What does "means-testing" mean? Suppose the Feds set a bar at (say) $65K per year -- if you make above that amount (as a single person), you don't get any benefit at all. Under that, it's a sliding scale down to, say, $30K and under where you'd get the full benefit (whatever that is). And this is all regardless of what you paid in. You can set the "bar" at whatever level you like: set it too high, and it won't solve the problem; set it too low, and a lot of unfairness will ensue (and a lot of pushback from people who paid in). I'm not as confident as some that simply raising the retirement age will really help us much -- the largest cohort of retirees will be aging at pretty much the same rate, so raising the retirement age defers but does not alleviate the problem.

31 19 I would gladly decline any future claim to SS benefits if they agree to stop forcing me to give them money now

Posted by: beedubya at February 02, 2011 10:28 AM (AnTyA)

Here, Here or is it Hear, Hear??

I don't mind patting myself on the back and telling folks that I've been maxing out my IRA since I'm 24yrs old. I just worry about the man coming to confiscate it, afterall at 40yrs old I won't be needing it for a while.

  

32

The United States Government gives away billions of dollars in aid to countries and people who hate our guts. 1.3 billion dollars to egypt alone and all we get is "death to America" in return. If the folks in Washington can give away money to the ones who appreciate it the least or will use the money to destroy us then the United States Government can give money to our own who are in need.

Stop funding the folks who hates us for giving them money first.

33 Randall@17:  You weren't forced to save, you were forced to participate in a Ponzi scheme.  They all eventually collapse.

34 Start with getting ride of the four year-period of 'reduced benefits' and only allow people to retire at their specified retirement age

Instead, the Social Security Agency sends out letters encouraging people to retire earlier--telling them they won't be penalized overall and may end up doing better

The job of most government workers is to create and nurture Need

35

FWIW, why use results from leftist pollsters & articles from a dedicated leftist (Larry Bartels) to determine a "conundrum"?  You (Ace & Co.) run smack into this trap time & time again.  Let me clarify this for you - Democrat & leftist outlets would very much like for you (and the rest of us) to believe that most Americans want "theirs" from Uncle Sugar, thus cutting anything would mean that 1) "conservative"/Republican voters are obviously stupid, as they're voting against their best interests, 2) Democrats are the true "heros of the working class", and 3) only increasing taxes on the rich will "solve" income inequality.  BTW, each of those 3 themes are in the linked article.

'Scuse me if I don't take reports of that attitude being prevalent very seriously.

36 Monty, count me in with those of shouting distance of SS and willing to see means testing and age-raising and overall cuts--but it will be much easier to stomach if you can guarantee all the performance artists and state university presidents out there get booted off the dole at the same time.

And institute market reform and immigration reform so that real jobs and real health insurance are waiting for us if our retirement funds disappear through bad luck or bad management.

37 If they quit taking SS money out of my paycheck, then I'll stop complaining.

38 I got my father's W-2 form. Last year he paid 4800 bucks into Social Security, 1200 bucks into medicare and 8400 bucks in Federal Income Taxes. I am pretty much sure that my mother probably won't see a dime of the benefits my father worked for.

39 #29  Wait...words of hope from Kratos?

Mere words mean nothing and hope is for the weak.  Nonetheless, we don't know if this is the end-end, or merely the end of one cycle.

Next he'll be endorsing decadence.

Don't get too ahead of yourself, . 

40 SS is welfare disguised as a pension plan. Every dime you paid in is gone. The Democrats frakked this Country decades ago. It was just a real slow frak. End SS now.

41 Two Words: Death Panels.

They solve so many problems.

42 24 They would do better just explaining to the "worker" tha the SS tax was a mandatory donation to support old people. Posted by: dagny at February 02, 2011 10:30 AM (ZuJDg) This. That is the only way to look at it. Look at it as you supporting your parents and simultaneously decide that you do not want your children to be put in a worse bind to support you. Then let the Ponzi scheme unwind. Oh, and to those who say "I'll give up my benefits if they'll stop taking my money" well you've got it half right- you can give up your benefits, but we're going to have to keep on paying until the Ponzi scheme is fully unwound.

43

"Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you (and I and everybody else) were paying all those years was not "savings" it was a TAX"

There is an interesting point here, though - namely that SS was "sold" as a savings plan, not tax, per se...

44 Mere words mean nothing and hope is for the weak.  Nonetheless, we don't know if this is the end-end, or merely the end of one cycle.

It's a funny philosophical point, actually; to some, the cycle where 'things get better' is the hope, where others take comfort in 'there is an ending'.  So I'd probably go for either over a static boneage, personally.

45 I'm turning 40 this year. If I'm told tomorrow that there will be ZERO SS payments made to me when I retire, because the program is gone. . . . so be it and thank you. However, I want the option to invest income (pre-tax) in my 401K with no limits. I also want portability of funds to another brokerage without penalties. Go ahead. . . axe Social Security altogether. I'd rather lose the "benefit" altogether than have to deal with propping up this pyramid scheme for the next 20 years as we spiral into an ever deepening depression. Run it out for those over 40 and be done with it.

46

It's okay though, economics is on our side.

Collapse is inevitable if nothing is done.

The welfare state simply can't last forever. You can't spend more than you take it. It will not last.

The only thing we should be disappointed in is that we've now chosen what will be the hardest and most painful correction. A total failure.

I really hope other morons out here aren't counting on SS, Medicare, or Medicaid when they retire.

It's simply not going to be there. I hate to use this phrase, but Atlas will shrug. The business class and workers can't stand much longer under the crushing weight of our debt-laden promises.

The next step will be a massive tax raise, and at that point, get ready for permanent double digit unemployment

47

I am well known as a tightwad. If I had all the money the government has taken from me for social security, I would no doubt be a millionaire. But in fact, I will probably live near the poverty line for the remainder of my life, after I retire, if I can retire, and I have the government to thank for that.

 

48 I'm stealing Static Boneage for the name of my new punk band.

49

You can set the "bar" at whatever level you like: set it too high, and it won't solve the problem; set it too low, and a lot of unfairness will ensue (and a lot of pushback from people who paid in).

??? WTF?? Since when is "unfairness" = "pushback"? Establishing levels for government largess suddenly gives one the vapors???

Am I reading AoS or Huffington Post?

50 But it's also a "simplistic question" conundrum (designed to weaken our resistance to government control, IMHO).

Once a congressman talks with his constituents about the reality of it and the fact that no senior is going to be thrown out onto the street, they agree with cutting entitlements. Reagan raised the starting age of SS--we can do it again without a revolution by the seniors.

Don't fall for it! Reform entitlements!

And I'm approaching that age myself.

51 There is an interesting point here, though - namely that SS was "sold" as a savings plan, not tax, per se...

Bernie Madoff, call your office.

52

I've been watching my sister go from two incomes to one since her husband was laid off. She's "forgotten" how not to spend like she has more than enough money. Since I had to start paying private school tuition almost at the exact moment we were no longer "house poor", I never developed the lifestyle attitude that she did. She used public schools and one of her kids got a full athletic scholarship and the other became a dropout pot head thus no tuition.

The idea that she shouldn't drive a mercedes or change her granite countertops or have the newest state of the art low water washer or have a maid is anathema. The solution has been to use a home equity loan to fill the gaps and to keep spending. Couldn't sell some of those "art investments"? Nope.

I'm even for these states selling some of their land. It would be a far less horrible fate than what they will be forced to do if they don't get it together.

53

SS is welfare disguised as a pension plan.

Every dime you paid in is gone.

The Democrats frakked this Country decades ago.

It was just a real slow frak.

End SS now.

I don't mean to sound like a hack, but the Republicans have been involved in the crime as well. They didn't create SS, but they certainly benefited from raiding it for spending purposes.

54 I'd love to see what all the money my dad put into Social Security would look like if it was put into an IRA instead.

55 17 Only to a point.  We (who worked for decades) put in a lot of money to SS and Medicare.  I don't want MORE than that back, but I do want that back.  Getting back what I put in (for those programs) is not "welfare".  I was forced to "save", by government coercion.  I should very well get something back from my "savings".  I'll let an actuary figure that out, but it is not zero, I can tell you that.

Posted by: Randall Hoven at February 02, 2011 10:28 AM (goI7h)

I can certainly sympathize with wanted to get back what was confiscated.  However, because of the Ponzi scheme nature of these programs, you aren't getting back what you put in.  What you put in already went to somebody else.  Anything you get out of those programs at this point is provided on the backs of people like me (i.e. federal income tax payers).   

56

I was quoting Monty, #30

57 I don't receive any SS now though I contribute a big chunk for others that do. I pay huge taxes for a school district though I've got no children. I don't list all of my charitable givings on my tax returns (crazy maybe but a personal reasoning). I do

58

I'm 39 and haven't thought I'd see any SS for at least the last ten years.  When I first told my dad this, he was very surprised and didn't believe me.  I told him I'd much rather write him a check every month than pay into SS.

I'll never see it and have never planned on getting it.  It's theft.

59 The Republicans are afraid to make even the most simple cuts knowing that the Dems will demagogue everything they do. We need to broaden the tax base by creating jobs. Government can encourage job creation by making it easier to do business. Government makes it easier to do business by cutting regulation. Want a $250 billion stimulus that doesn't cost the government one dime? Repeal SarbOx. It didn't do one thing to stop the financial meltdown. Want another huge stimulus? Eliminate the corporate income tax and tax all dividends and capital gains at the income tax rate. Suddenly, the USA is the largest corporate tax haven in the world, bringing jobs to the USA. Grim

60 I hit post before I was finished. Ah screw it.

61 There is an interesting point here, though - namely that SS was "sold" as a savings plan, not tax, per se... Posted by: Jess at February 02, 2011 10:39 AM (6klwE) True enough, but since (as I said above) the government has robbed us it should not come as a surprise that they have also lied to us. Robbers are often liars.

62 They didn't create SS, but they certainly benefited from raiding it for spending purposes.

Posted by: Ben at February 02, 2011 10:43 AM (wuv1c)

Please. Social Security was doomed to failure once Abortion and Birth Control came out. Once that was done the ratio between workers and retirees started to close.

63

@19 I would gladly decline any future claim to SS benefits if they agree to stop forcing me to give them money now

Ditto that.  I'm 49, and I don't care if I never see "what I paid in," but I'd like them to stop taking my money now.

64 I don't mean to sound like a hack, but the Republicans have been involved in the crime as well. They didn't create SS, but they certainly benefited from raiding it for spending purposes. Posted by: Ben at February 02, 2011 10:43 AM (wuv1c) True, but the real focus should be on the party that creates these things and wants more of it. The GOP has blood on it's hands too (violent racist!), but are they really the ones who made this nightmare happen?

65

That is the only way to look at it. Look at it as you supporting your parents and simultaneously decide that you do not want your children to be put in a worse bind to support you.

That's what I told my kids when after sitting in a lifeguard chair for 10 hours in a row in 105 degree heat. The FICA is for grandma. You're young and healthy--it's your donation. Congratulations. "Oh, she just went on a cruise?" Sorry.

66 What about an estate tax for the amount paid out in SS to an individual? At the least it would be a wake up call when the bill shows up after grandpa kicks it.

67 19 I would gladly decline any future claim to SS benefits if they agree to stop forcing me to give them money now

Posted by: beedubya at February 02, 2011 10:28 AM (AnTyA)

Me too!

68

#59 - Grim nails it, and it deserves constant & loud repetition - cut taxes. CUT TAXES.

There, I do feel better...

69 It matters not at all what people think or don't think at this point. To paraphrase a famous quote -- " You might not be interested in economic reality but economic reality is interested in you." When it all comes apart,(and it will) people's selfish expectations will all go into the dumper. Weeping and wailing to follow.

70

"Robbers are often liars."

Or,

Congressmen are often liars.

Robbers are often Congressmen.

See, isn't this fun! (and educational)

71 This is why if any cutting is to be done (before it is forced upon us that is), it must be completely across the board. No exceptions. Anyone forced to give up anything with another does not will holler.

but like Ace, Im pessimistic. Nothing will happen until something or everything collapses.  Human nature

72 I am age 60. If you add up all of my SS contributions at a 4% rate of return my account would hold 500K. I realize that SS is not a savings account, but if you limited the contributions to conservative investments, forced the POS's in Washington to leave the funds alone, and limit payments to people that contributed to the system it would be self sustaining. Mind you, the SS system should not even be in existence. It is not an area that government should be involved in. Rooseveldt used it as one of his many political tools to manage the economy/populace to ensure that he was elected to four terms. Can you say barry soetoro?

73 OT:

It's going to get terminal in Egypt they are bringing in the war camels and horses and pavement people, sounds like a frackin' sci-fy movie, stupid savages.

74

I look at counting on SS about as favorably as I look at the approach of living comfortably in poverty through my military pension for the rest of my life. 

Which is to say: fuck. that. noise.

And I can't wait for all the city, county, and state pensioners who are making bank at 50 for their "time" to try and get back into the workforce after their golden parachutes fail.  At least my comparatively paltry pension for my 20 years of service to Corps and Country ain't gonna be much to lose.

75 Notice how you have no personal power over this? Why can't you just refuse to pay the SS tax? You can't because your income is taxed automatically before you see a dime. Want to protest? Quit your job. Terminate all sources of income. What? Not so easy? That's how the Governments own us. We are all serfs.

76 Please. Social Security was doomed to failure once Abortion and Birth Control came out. Once that was done the ratio between workers and retirees started to close.

Definition of irony--two of the left's sacred cows are mutually exclusive...

77 >>Not to put too fine a point on it, but what you (and I and everybody else) were paying all those years was not "savings" it was a TAX. >>And the government is not compelled to return taxes. While what you are saying is technically true, generations of Americans have been brought up to believe by the federal government that SS was in fact a savings plan. To this day, many continue to tell people that it is both a savings account and fully funded. I'm not a bit surprised that a large segment of the population believes that SS is government managed savings account since they have been told that is exactly what it is all of their lives.

78 And institute market reform and immigration reform so that real jobs and real health insurance are waiting for us if our retirement funds disappear through bad luck or bad management. I am in complete agreement that there are many sectors begging for "reform" in the federal government (it needs to shrink by half or more, in my own opinion), but to key any SS/Medicare reform to those other reforms is self-defeating. SS/Medicare is a huge structural problem that dwarfs all others; if we don't solve that problem, nothing else really matters. As a practical matter, I don't expect* any structural changes to SS/Medicare for anyone within 5 years of retirement. However, our financial situation will force reforms on us if we're not proactive about them, and the longer we wait, the more intractable the problems become. *Though changes may be forced on us whether we like it or not if the financial markets tank again. The European sovereign debt crisis and Japanese debt crisis, not to mention a slowing Chinese economy and prospects for slow growth across the board, provide the potential for some nasty shocks.

79

Never mind that SS is a tax, and just about every dollar put in immediately goes right back out; the popular perception of the plan as some kind of "savings account" persists.

Exactly.  And that popular perception is aided and abetted by demagoguing politicians who are making Social Security reforms much more difficult while at the same time keeping themselves in office as a defender of granny's - and our - "Social Security Lock Box".  Doesn't exist.

Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid together make up more than 40% of federal spending.  Other program costs - defense aside - are dwarfed in comparison.  If the Big 3 don't get reformed, we're boned.  If they do, we're busted.  May we have the wisdom to choose wisely.

 

 

80

I think we can maintain some of our social safety nets - but the democrats have to let go of their desire to add more more more. and hey - lets just hit up the private sector tax payer again. We can use emotional arguments (D).

The democrats will destroy the engine that feeds their social welfare programs.  That's why it's so important to kill Obamacare.  We have enough trouble funding our current entitlements We cannot afford to layer anything else on the heap.

 

Michael Barone sums it up nicely via insta:

 Â“If you put together ObamaÂ’s resistance to just about any serious changes in entitlement spending with his antique vision of technological progress, what you see is an America where the public sector permanently consumes a larger part of the economy than in the past and squanders the proceeds on white elephants like faux high-speed rail lines and political payoffs to the teacher and other public-sector unions. Private-sector innovation gets squeezed out by regulations like the Obama FCCÂ’s net neutrality rules. ItÂ’s a plan for a static rather than dynamic economy.” 

 

81 Can I haz Egyptian Riot thread yet?

82 The main problem is that people stop thinking of these things as welfare (charity), and begin thinking of them as wages. Taking "wages" away amounts to theft in most peoples' eyes; hence the outrage when a discussion of benefits cuts is raised.

I'm not sure this is all that wrong, Monty.  The reason people think of them as wages is because the money for these programs has been garnished from their wages over the course of their entire lives.  To be fair, they have paid for these benefits.  They are owed what they have already paid for.

That's what makes these programs so difficult to cut:  long, long ago money was shifted from one generation to the previous, when the previous had not paid for anything.  That generation is long gone and we are stuck with an endless cycle of shifting money from the next generation to the current.  Now that the next generation is too small to sustain the current generation's needs, something's got to give.

Somebody is going to get screwed, and that's God's honest truth.  Either the boomers don't get their benefits or the Millennials pay double, but the long and short of it is that one of these generations is getting screwed at the expense of the first generation to receive Social Security almost a century ago.

83 It ain't about gettin' mine--if it is yours, then it had better be in a retirement account or a box under the bed. Once it is in the hands of government, it's gone, plain and simple. Always has been that way. Had Congress EVER cut spending in any meaningful way? No they  haven't. All they can do is spend more, and then more, and then more. Doesn't matter who gets elected--it's made that way.

Could always go Galt, I suppose. Find someplace with running water and lots of game, and a good growing season. Live off your interest and elbow grease. That probably won't work for very many of us.

84

"There is an interesting point here, though - namely that SS was "sold" as a savings plan, not tax, per se..."

Swedish public pension plan (ATP) was sold the same way. People was given the impression that they paid into it and would get the money back. What they really did was pay money to the government so the State could give it out in pensions at that time, with the promise that once the current payers got old, the government would pay for them too. There's never been any individual "account" of any sort, and there was no contract of how much they would get, just a promise that "the government will provide".

85 @ 77 Posted by: JackStraw at February 02, 2011 10:53 AM (TMB3S) Yes, as I said above at 61: Robbers are often liars

86 "Don't even presume to speak for the rest of us."

Just qualified for Early Retirement today, not that I'm applying for it. And I'm waiting for the cuts that I've been told were "inevitable" since, when, the 1980s?  Still waiting..seriously, we'll get by somehow.

87 Everybody's in favor of cutting costs...until the cuts involve them.

It's a feature, not a bug.

Thunderdome!

88 The key in my opinion is that the right has to change the terms of the debate.

Right now the question is "do we fund program X at the expense of more debt?". Well the debt hurts us all, the effect of each dollar given away is minimal in a country with 100M taxpayers.

Now, if we can make the question of the day, "do we use our limited tax dollars to fund X or Y?" we can win. This way we are using people's self interest to make rational decisions.

89

87 Everybody's in favor of cutting costs...until the cuts involve them.

Who am I?  Who do I belong to?

90

Am I reading AoS or Huffington Post?

Posted by: Jess at February 02, 2011 10:42 AM (6klwE)

Kinda what crossed my mind when I read that "stimulus wasn't big enough" crap here yesterday.

91

The key... for me anyway... is that I will sacrifice, but dam it you better reign in other things FIRST.

Case in point... Michelle Bachman floated a plan that would take 40 Billion from Vet Services, but do NOTHING to the Federal retirement plan, when THEY make bank compared to me... and I earned mine being shot at, while they sat at a desk...

The first thing they need to do is outlaw Government Worker Unions... (I know, pipe dream...).

92 Let it burn.

93 Again.  If this nation can rid itself of the "myth of retirement" then many of these problems of SS, Medicare would be a thing of the past eventually.  Retirement is a European socialist idea.

94
It was never my intent to claim SS, and the same applies to many of my geezer friends.  However, with the proliferate spending on nonsensical programs such as Head Start, Fannie Mae, or analyzing the sex practices of monkeys, we white hairs entered the SS scam to puff up our estates because of the assholish behavior of our elected elites.   Fuck 'um!

95 If I only had a time machine. I'd go give Zangara a stable chair.

96 ^{Again.  If this nation can rid itself of the "myth of retirement" then many of these problems of SS, Medicare would be a thing of the past eventually.  Retirement is a European socialist idea.}

^{Posted by: Soona at February 02, 2011 11:01 AM (jHv0E)}

Not so much. Time was that when you got old, your family took care of you. That was because you had 12 kids, and they each had a dozen, and so on. Retirement meant you could take it easy, and that was because you had your own, familial safety net. Now we think the government will do this for us. Since when have you gotten a nice warm hug from the government? THAT part is the socialist bit.

97 O/T College Park, MD are doing their best to keep the little leftiest thugs, losers, creeps and criminals from burning down the town again after their basketball game.

98

Posted by: crisis du jour at February 02, 2011 10:54 AM (H2mzF)

Well, ONE change to the Constitution I'd like to see, is an Amendment that says the Government shall follow its own laws, and be held accountable just as a person would be...

Sovereign Immunity, while legal, is when you think on it really an UnAmerican ideal... it flys in the face of having a Government responsible to the people...

Thus, in the case of Soc Sec... all those who sold the Tax Structure, known as Soc Sec, as a savings plan?  They would be open to charges of Fraud... as they KNEW the truth, yet lied to us.

Same with Freddie and Fannie... there are certain members of the House and Seante who should be held LEGALLY accountable for their Lies about how stable it was.

99 In spite of the annual birthday card I get from the Social Security Administration, I don't have any confidence that I will receive any benefit from the funds I have paid in to the scheme. However, I am good with paying in to the scheme so we can keep our promises to those who have counted on social security for their retirement. I only ask that I be given tax incentives so that I can save more for my own retirement. I am 46 and have been paying into the scheme for 30 years so its not as if I wouldn't be "losing" anything my giving up my benefits. I just expect the government to compensate me with an investment climate that promotes personal responsibility. That won't cost the government a single dime.

100

Ameliorating this, somewhat, is the lack of automatic increases for Social Security retirees over the past few years.

These were a flash point for SS debates during the Reagan years. Cost of living allowances (COLA) were "untouchable" in Democrats' demagoguery. Reagan merely wanted them stepped down a bit.

Lately, the justification for their absence has been a lack of inflation. We'll see how long that holds.

101 If folks got -something- in return, that could mitigate the problem.  Probably doesn't even have to be money, directly--a tax break for forgoing SS?  Some other consideration?--but something.

Incentives take many forms.  Time to get creative.

102 And put me down in the "Don't give me back what I paid in, just fucking stop taking it from me" category too.

103

I don't know the math on whether this would work, but I think something like this would be palatable to a lot of people for SS reform [at the moment without the private investment account type reform we would like to see]:

-  w/in 5 years of being 65 - no change

-  between 5 -6 years - retirement age raised to 67

-  between 6-7 years - retirement age raised to 68

-  between 7-8 years - retirement raised to 70

-  over 8 years - retirement age is 72.  Also, over 8 years have an income and asset threshhold over which one does not receive benefits (but have it be yearly, so if someone loses assets, they become eligible in subsequent years).

I also think SSI disability needs major reform.  The definition of "disability" they seem to be using is that the person does not want to work.  I personally know around 10 people who receive disability and lord knows I have never noticed them unable to do anything.  I think disability should be where someone literally cannot work at any job, not the casual disability definition that seems to be currently used.  I don't know what the annual costs of SSI disability is, but I think this is a very, very abused system - more so even than medicare or medicaid I would wager.

104 Wait until the Fed seizes your 401K to protect it from the vagaries of the stock market.

105 I'm about 8 years from "retirement age", and I've always known Social Security was a Ponzi scheme. Time to write it off., like you would with any bad investment.

BTW: Anybody priced dog food lately? It ain't cheap. Neighbors, OTOH, are free, and when properly smoked will keep for days, and make delightfully tasty sandwiches.

106

Lately, the justification for their absence has been a lack of inflation. We'll see how long that holds.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at February 02, 2011 11:07 AM (ZRm0r)

It'll last as long as they DO NOT use the index which includes food and fuel... as housing drops are counteracting anything else in that index.

Real inflation is alreay going up... just go to the grocery store...

107 BTW: Anybody priced dog food lately? It ain't cheap. Neighbors, OTOH, are free, and when properly smoked will keep for days, and make delightfully tasty sandwiches.

Posted by: jwpaine at February 02, 2011 11:09 AM (FUozQ)

Help us out. Start with the lawyers and politicians.

108 ...we bolster our society's ability to create things, thus jobs and wealth, alongside the cuts -- that way we can afford the gradual cut back, heck, maybe even continue to be able to keep a small safety net in place;

Posted by: unknown jane at February 02, 2011 10:30 AM (5/yRG)

Well, part of the problem is that we already make a lot of "things" and we do so with fewer and fewer people every year.  We're also committed to a trade system that undermines full domestic employment by obtaining the labor resource extremely cheaply elsewhere (even much cheaper than Mexicans).  Those two factors mean high unemployment.  It will only go higher as governments start cutting.  Also, we can't let Granny freeze to death or die of starvation, so we're stuck.  Try pushing the oldsters back into the work force, and the unemployment problem worsens even more. 

Theway things are done now, with no expansion of domestic energy production, no measures to offset foreign trade restrictions against US businesses, and no new labor-intesive industries popping up in the US, wealth stratification will go to a level never seen before (we're actually already seeing that), and then the whole system will all fall in. 

So, what do we do?  SS and Medicare are not going to die a quick death.  First comes inflation to drive down all wages and the value of the payments to retirees.  That probably will not be enough, so they'll cut the military, and drastically.  Some cuts are no brainers - like abandoning Europe - but it will go farther than that.  Other government services, like the highway system, will fall into neglect.  In the end it will all start to crumble.  But the Leftists will never let go of power, and will continue to infest the government and the educational establishment.  They wont' give up a dime of their fat salaries, nor give any entrepreneur the freedom to succeed and create wealth.  Those of us on the Right in the US are too law-abiding to do anything effective about it.  Once we go down, we'll stay down.

So, while I'm not talking about government payouts, I will say that I agree with the idea to take all you can.  You're gonna need it.  And if you can, create a plan to get it out of here and take it to a place where willingness to work and some investment capital are still appreciated.

 

109 Wait until the Fed seizes your 401K to protect it from the vagaries of the stock market.

Posted by: The Robot Devil at February 02, 2011 11:09 AM (zqzYV)

If that happens, and it doesn't spark open revolt, put that down as our expiration date.

110 If you recognized your household finances were essentially bankrupt, what would you do? Wait till it all comes crashing down, or start liquidating assets, shedding debts, and downsizing your lifestyle?

Every day we wait to deal with this is a day digging the hole deeper. The first rule is to stop digging.

111 Neighbors, OTOH, are free, and when properly smoked will keep for days, and make delightfully tasty sandwiches.

Posted by: jwpaine at February 02, 2011 11:09 AM (FUozQ)

There is one pretty cute little lady down the street I wouldn't mind eating.... oh wait..

Now... be careful, you will need to ration your neighbors, it takes a LONG time to grow a neighbor to adulthood after all...

112 If you draw a check or benefits directly from the government, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

113
  Never did figure on SS for our retirement ( yes, I said this before).  We structured our retirement NOT taking it into account.  So if you wish to call it a tax, how about refunding ONLY my contribution, until the dollar amount is reached.  Then you may quit the whole fucking thing AFAIC. 

  I'm still curious, though with what you do with the individuals who simply don't have ANY retirement funds. Not the welfare pros,etc, just the ones who never made enough past simply existing from week to week.

114 Punxsutawney Phil ->  no shadow, no more winter!

115 Egypt thread up, BTW.

116

My ex-husband obscounded off with everything. My pensions were cashed in as start up money for a business I thought would benefit our kids. It ended up benefiting the bookkeeper and him. I see government waste daily. The underclass sucks up more dollars than you realize. They call 911 for a hang-nail and then hospitalized and drugged on our dime. The amount of foreigners living in government housing is obscene. If they actually held people accountable for the relatives that came here then we would be swimming in dough. The medical establishment and the social worker do-gooders, have created a clueless, blood sucking underclass who bear no responsiblity for themselves. I will really need my SS check. I have nothing to leave my kids and their father is absent working ala John Galt. I am currently researching life insurance policies, so that when I am older the kids can choose to pay for it with a payday when I croak. As my profession does not really allow working without being on the books, I am trapped. If I could I would go underground.

117 We've never expected SS to be available to us anyways. For us it won't be so much "losing money" as it is "stopping old people from stealing all our money"

Posted by: supercore at February 02, 2011 10:22 AM (bwV72)

Perhaps the best way we can repay the baby boomers for blessing us with Clinton and the Summer of Love would be to cut them off, but since we don't vote fat chance.

THEIR generation decided it would be a great idea to look forward to slopping away at the SS ponzi scheme without having the functioning nervous system to realize that would mean they needed to have MORE kids, not less kids, to keep funding it. Their personal "me me me" attitude may FINALLY kick them in the balls and it will be great to see folks my parents age fighting to hold onto the workforce- something they all saw coming but refused to acknowledge and deal with. They pushed Carter over the top in 1976? Dog food for all of you.

Frankly if you are looking forward to and are dependent upon social security...thats not my fucking problem. You shoulve have considered savings and planning to work into your 70s and 80s and 90s like my generation will be expected to do. I shred my ss statements because they're a fucking joke.

118 It's going to get terminal in Egypt they are bringing in the war camels and horses and pavement people, sounds like a frackin' sci-fy movie, stupid savages.

Posted by: 'Nam Grunt at February 02, 2011 10:51 AM (ivCSJ)

Really Grunt, I'm getting real tired of hearing how the Egyptians protester are middleclass, civilized, educated, informed bunch of patriots. 

 

119

Posted by: monkeytoe at February 02, 2011 11:08 AM (sOx93)

then you'd better stop ALL immigration, legal and illegal, and start creating jobs...

Because you just significantly increased the work force... especially those who will now hang onto top level positions for years longer than they otherwise would.

120

The Donkeycrats have had serious behind the scenes discussions about "nationalizing" (STEALING!!!) private pensions to pay government obligations (UNION PENSIONS!!)..

...if you don't think it could happen here...look at Argentina and Eastern Europe

If the GOP doesn't get this shit under control now...we're fucked

121

I see where the folks in Government want to drop by C-130 Free Food to the starving egyptians in Cairo.

How much does that cost? to give away food to people who hate us.

122 If you draw a check or benefits directly from the government, you shouldn't be allowed to vote. I don't think that's a fair thing to say. Rather, I'd say that if you pay no net taxes, or are a net positive consumer of governmental services, you'd have to make up the difference in order to vote. I'm not sure how this would work in our representative system of government, though.

123
Many liberal pundits suggest that SS was never intended as a retirement plan.  What planet do these cretins live on?

In the thirties, most folks didn't make enough money to sustain their lives and create a retirement plan.  The only opportunity they had to retire with dignity was SS.  Also, well into the 50's and even with SS, families sustained the elderly in their homes, and the meager SS supplanted the overall family income. 

It only became fashionable to plant grandpa or grandma in a nursing home when government created these unsustainable care programs we have today.  I guess it's true, the elderly are expendable and useless. 
*(Checks weapon stash)* 

124

Who are you going to believe about SS??...me or your lying eyes??

...and ears

125

Not so much. Time was that when you got old, your family took care of you. That was because you had 12 kids, and they each had a dozen, and so on. Retirement meant you could take it easy, and that was because you had your own, familial safety net. Now we think the government will do this for us. Since when have you gotten a nice warm hug from the government? THAT part is the socialist bit.

 

I didn't say that it would be immediate.  Much of this is so ingrained in the American psychy that a sudden cutoff would cause riots that would make Egypt look like a bunch of two-year-olds.  Incremental raising of the retirement age is a good start.  For the other bennies from Uncle Sugar.  Cut taxes. Cut taxes.  Cut taxes.  Go to a flat tax where EVERYONE pays, not just 50% of the population.  People will go to work if they see their neighbors doing so much better with a job than with gov. handouts.  For those who don't want to work?  Well, there'll always be some.  Let them live with the consequences of their decisions.  Remember.  Prior to Dear Leader's regime, unemployment was at its highest, 5%.

126 If you draw a check or benefits directly from the government, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

A bad trap.  But as long as you're all in on universal suffrage, your tools are limited.  Even so, a better argument--if you go that route--is to say that if the majority of your income is from government benefits (transfer payments, credits, etc.) then the franchise is restricted.

That, however, is well outside the window of the currently accepted.  But things may change; time alone will tell...

127 Okay, Monty, now you're pissing me off a wee bit....

First of all, what's this "we" shit? I'm in deep dung financially right now, and have been for the better part of a year. I'm not getting any government handouts, not am I expecting any.

When you talk about "us" making sacrifices, it begins at the top, Bunky. The government -- those who are living in the kind of luxury past monarchs couldn't even dream of -- have spent years making sure their uber-wealthy supporters and buddyroos never have to worry about where their next millions are coming from. They also send our money to people who don't want to work, and those whose "work," being government-supported, does not have to pass the same tests (like: does anyone want to buy it?) our work does.

They also piss away enormous sums around the world, keeping third world despots in luxury, propping up goons in global shit-holes.

Whatever you think of SS, it was -- and still, to some extent, is -- presented as a kind of involuntary "investment," NOT as a tax.

Where I come from, if you take money from someone under false pretenses, that's theft. Even if the Don of the mob that controls this crime is dead, his successors, buttonmen and soldati who keep it going are still liable.

Make Osama Obama sit in the fucking White House because he can't afford to travel, tell the worthless piece-of-shit members of Congress to stop throwing money around like penny candy, and get back the money stolen from us to pay for some bazillionaires' continues lives of excess, cut off aid to totalitarian regimes and other enemies of the USA, and THEN talk to me about making friggin' sacrifices.

Until then, I don't want to hear it. I have enough shit to deal with.

128 I'm here. Gleaming amid stacks of paper and demijohns of ink, you know I can solve your dilemma. Every government does it, so why pretend you won't? I don't judge. Yet you know you won't stop spending, and I can make all the turmoil evaporate in the turn of my platen. My friend, it's when, not if.

129 I'm not sure how this would work in our representative system of government, though.

Wasn't there a poll out there where people actually would trade the right to vote for a guaranteed income?  Forget who did it, but it was an interesting result to argue...

130 stop social security now......

131

Social security and medicare charity?

What an idiot.

My spouse and I have contributed hundreds of thousands, matched by our employers.  At modest rates of return, we would have close to a million.  Frankly, I have zero sympathy that criminal politicians siezed the money and redistributed it to buy votes.

Getting something back doesn't smell like charity to me.  If I don't get back what was promised, rage boy is gonna look like a choir boy.

Whatever Monty's smoking, it aint' brain juice.

132 and reform the tax code so i don't need deductions....

133

I guess you don't like the military vote then, eh?

Posted by: CDR M at February 02, 2011 11:21 AM (5I8G0)

or the RET Military vote...

134 and cut all social programs...if you want or need a social program start a private one and collect donations yourself

135 @103:  I like your plan. I think the changes do need to start earlier.  If I can hang on to my stupid job I would like to wait until 70 to apply.

But as we speak, people my age who are still working are applying for Early Retirement, because goddammit fuck 'em and who knows if it'll be there in 4 years, etc.

136 134 112 If you draw a check or benefits directly from the government, you shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Posted by: X at February 02, 2011 11:12 AM (V6CZ

I guess you don't like the military vote then, eh?

Posted by: CDR M at February 02, 2011 11:21 AM (5I8G0)

LOL.... thats pretty much the Polar Opposite of Heinlein's Starship Trooper thing... where ONLY Vets got to vote....

137

Government programs insure enough to guarentee poverty.  Means testing equals screw the rich some more.  The incredible injustice of it  to the wealthy who have paid the most is what offends me about means testing.  A program that first sold as never being more than a 1% deduction grew to over 14% counting employer matching funds.  It was only supposed to be deducted from the first, what, $2000 of earnings?  Now I believe it is deducted from the first $100k and they want to remove any cap at all.  Yeah, that's fair.  Means test those rich assholes, they don't need the money back they were promised.  Sure they paid more than anybody but they won life's lottery.  For the record,  I have assets but by no means would be considered wealthy.

 I predicted this problem in the 1960's in a paper I wrote in school.  Pretty incisive for a high school kid but didn't get any particular recognition.  There needs to be a soft landing on this. Start reducing benefits and raising the age a little year but also quit screwing the younger generation a little bit untill the program is phased out. 

Our welfare / Social Security system has tempered the fear of poverty and reduced our inclination to make prudent financial decisions.  It has seduced us. It has destroyed the nuclear family and created a society that values things now over future security. 

The government has even been eyeing taking over 401K's and IRA's with a "guarenteed" return from the government.  Don't trust the rat bastards.  When the government seduces you, you get screwed.

138 NO MORE SCHOOL LUNCHES!!!!!!! PACK A DAMN LUNCH

139

When SS was implemented, most people DIED before they hit 70.

Now it is likely 90.

Raise the SS retirement age to 85, NOW.

The baby boomers will scream bloody murder but fuck em- they've had the power to avoid what was coming for over a decade now and did NOTHING except expect my generation (and generation X and the generation not even born yet) to pay for their retirement? I would much rather pay for a Logan's Run scenario or buy stock in Soylent Green. Both would be more effective at solving the entitlement crisis than what every generation in power before mine has chosen to do.

140 Where I come from, if you take money from someone under false pretenses, that's theft. Well, fine -- so do I. But the thief not only made off with your money, he died a long time ago. Do you go after the thief's children now? Or his grandchildren? How is that a just or fair solution?

141 If anyone thinks my SS is going to be taken from me until after all the miriad payouts to the illegals have been stopped, they better think again.  I will take it out of somebody's ass.  And it will cost a lot more than what I paid in.

142 I'm in my late thirties. I've never really had any confidence that there will be anything for me anyway by the time I get to the front of the line...that's it's been a Ponzi scheme for my generation and those after. And I've never viewed the SS tax as anything but confiscation of my earnings to fuel said Ponzi scheme. I'd opt out of the whole rotten thing if I could. I don't care if I lose the alleged "benefits" doled-out by Father Government. I'd just like the parasites to take their damn hands off my wallet.

143 Looks like Algore got to Phil Manbearhog. 

144 I am ready to take a cut. Let's be real, Gen X has always known we were gonna get screwed in some way or another. Being sandwiched b/w Baby Boomers and Gen Y, both cohorts being huge, and we Gen X being tiny in comparison, the pols dont care if they offend us...

So, hows about the govt gives me 1/3 of what I have already put into SS and let's me have it tax free to roll into my ROTH IRA and invest myself?

they can keep taking my payroll taxes for future payments, but say 2/3 of future deductions get split b/w my own ROTH IRA and the SS 'fund' that isnt...

so Gov gets 1/3 of my FICA to keep outright for 'budgeting' cough cough, and then they get 1/2 of the other 2/3, to SPLIT b/w Medicare and SS or wherever they need it to go...

But do NOT raise my payroll taxes any more.
do NOT add a VAT, no way no how no VAT
do NOT BS me on Medicare being solvent, BS BS BS
do NOT pretend wealthy ie income over 1m a year IN retirement needs the same bennies as granny in the low income community, by which I mean add MORE PREMIUM pymnts for those still EARNING over 1m when they are >65 for medicare?!

doesnt take a soopergennnius like Obummer to figure out some meaningful reforms

but it does take someone like Paul Ryan, someone with GUTS to pout the cuts on the table...

145 Well, fine -- so do I. But the thief not only made off with your money, he died a long time ago. Do you go after the thief's children now? Or his grandchildren? How is that a just or fair solution?

Posted by: Monty at February 02, 2011 11:25 AM (4Pleu)

Problem is that there are politicians in office TODAY who have in the past told us this was going to be OK... so there are those who are still running the Ponzi scheme, knowingly, and should be held accountable just like a common criminal would be.

I just can't get past the fact that our Government continuously puts people in Jail for actions it does itself.

146 time for Soylent Green   and that movie filmed in a Dallas mall with Jenny Agutter and Richard Jordan and Michael York about killing people at 30

147

The silver-lining to this overwhelming miasma of gloom is the Ogabe-Bernanke duo-avatar of Lucifer has expanded the money supply 168%, and with $4 gas next summer,  State and Local government layoffs, commodity futures up 10%,  Asian 2011 inflation at 10%, yada, yada,  the four horsemen at full gallop, the whirlwind arrives before IA caucuses begin.

A year ago forecasts of Greece on the Potomac seemed hysteric, histrionic but the 'weak horse' was whipped to the front on a record run.

 

148  If they offered me an opt out clause on SS, I'd take it. 

Posted by: CDR M at February 02, 2011 11:19 AM (5I8G0)

Anyone under 40 with a brain stem would.

149 I have a question on raising the age limit.

wont this just leave FEWER JOBS for the young folks? ie we wont leave working til we are 70...

wouldnt it be MORE cost effective ti LOWER early retirment payout age, commensurate with benny cuts instead?

If it were me, I would ENCOURAGE earlier retirement , with the accompanying CUT in payments, so at age 55 you can retire and you get 1/2 of your scheduled payment.

then there will be room for the new workers to get into the workforce AND we will have cut IN HALF the pymtns we have to make to the folks who took the early payout,,,

just a thought.

150 Ponzi--and Bernie Madoff--didn't have 160 million taxpayers to grease them out of their Dilemma

or legions of Demo and some Repub politicians to facilitate them

151

'Make Osama Obama sit in the fucking White House because he can't afford to travel, tell the worthless piece-of-shit members of Congress to stop throwing money around like penny candy, and get back the money stolen from us to pay for some bazillionaires' continues lives of excess, cut off aid to totalitarian regimes and other enemies of the USA, and THEN talk to me about making friggin' sacrifices.'

That's all well and good, and I would love to see it happen (it won't), but it wouldn't make a bit of difference.  We are being killed by the exponential math of entitlement spending.  We are in the rapids and being swept toward the falls, with visions of Greece in the near future.

We either reform or rescind (probably will have to be the latter) the entitlements or within a decade the nation will be broke and in economic chaos.

Nobody wants to heart, so nothing will be done and our fate is locked in.

I'm not a survivalist kook, but I would recommend taking steps now for what may be coming soon.

152 'hear it'  LOL

153 152, Logan's Run!! sanctuary baby. I got my ankh all ready!

154 To be fair, they have paid for these benefits.  They are owed what they have already paid for Wrong, wrong, WRONG. We have not paid for benefits. We have paid TAXES. Read the Saocial Security website. Hell, read that bullshit flyer the SSA sends yearly. They are not obligated to pay benefits and can cut them at any time. These taxes didn't go into a fund or an investment account, where it earned interest. It was spent. It's fucking gone. Who makes SS part of their retirement plan? The payments aren't shit. I watched one set of grandparents live like paupers because it was their only source of income. Fuck. THAT. And the argument that pisses me off the most is "Well, I paid into it, so I should get my money back." Grow the hell up. YOU GOT FUCKED. There is NO MONEY. Here's another daily affirmation for you: YOU WILL CONTINUE TO GET FUCKED. You will continue to "pay into" a non-existent "plan" and get NOTHING. And there is not a fucking thing you can do about it. If Social Security is part of your plan, you have a shitty plan. Make a new plan. It's not fair, because "fair" doesn't exist. The universe doesn't understand the concept of "fair." The universe is concerned with survival. Nobody cares and nobody is coming to help you. So you'd better get busy.

155 We GenXers are used to being latchkey/joint custody types; we spawned all the devil-children movies.  We're inured to disappointment, so we don't mind if you tell us we're not getting SS.  BTW, I'm quite open to euthanizing old people. 

156 One other note, my mother, who died 2009, was collecting more from my father's government pension (she never worked a day after 1947), was collecting more than I would receive from SS after working since 14, all of my life. There-in lies the problem.

157 I recognized decades ago that payroll taxes I paid into Social Security and Medicare were simply robbing me to pay someone else and that neither me nor my wife would ever have what we paid into the system returned to us (we're in our mid-fifties).

I'm perfectly willing to forfeit what little we might get back in order to reform the system because we set aside other available funds, mostly from our earnings, to cover our retirement. Yes, we have been fortunate to have been able to this, but at the same time, we consciously made sacrifices by getting educated and trained properly, by keeping our noses to the savings grindstone through good times and the bad, and by planning for the years when we would no longer be fully employed.

I am perfectly willing to assume full responsibility for covering our health care costs once we are no longer fully employed, but guess what? The ham-handed "help" of government intervention has distorted the medical services sector for senior services beyond all hope of salvaging through its Medicare program. Show me an insurance company that is willing to provide coverage for anyone in that age group, beyond supplemental coverage for Medicare. There are none, simply because the federal government destroyed any incentive for insurance companies to compete there.

Preznint Splutnik and his cohorts yakitty-yak us to death about how health care spending will drive deficit spending in the federal budget. Rather than conjure up pure bullshit schemes to "bend the cost curve downwards", why don't they revert to addressing the root cause: why is spending on health care the responsibility of the federal government at all? Ditto for social security.

158 Do you go after the thief's children now? Or his grandchildren? How is that a just or fair solution?

Posted by: Monty at February 02, 2011 11:25 AM (4Pleu)

YOU OWE US FOR ...ER...UM...EH...I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO JUSTIFY MY GREED BUT FUCK YOU YOUNG PEOPLE ANYWAY!

159

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 02, 2011 11:32 AM (xmuv/)

Actualy, a lot of that money is sitting in interst bearing financial instruments held by the Treasury.

Soc Sec is the third largest holder of public debt...

So... in a paper way... it still exists, but if they were to cash it in, it would crash the banking system.

160 Well, punch me in the face and call me Anderson Cooper!

Karma.

161 I guess you don't like the military vote then, eh? Just the Navy vote. Oh, but not you, CDR M. You're one of the "good ones."

162 The book was better.  (Also looking damned familiar these days...)

163 We're inured to disappointment, so we don't mind if you tell us we're not getting SS. Oh, I mind. I mind one hell of a lot. I just accept that SS has been one big screw-job from first to last. I reconciled myself long ago to the fact that my SS taxes were support payments for my grandparents, not retirement funds for myself. It made the bitter pill a bit easier to swallow. I think, ultimately, that it's the under-50 generation whose going to take it in the kiester on this one. We always expected to get screwed, so politicians will be less alarmed at the prospect of actually doing it. We might get some pittance from SS, but I'm personally betting that it's half or less (inflation-adjusted) of what Uncle Sugar is telling us it will be. And there's a small but significant chance that it just won't be there at all in 30 or 40 years. (On the other hand, a global plague, nuclear war, alien invasion, or huge solar flare could wipe us out long before then. You have to keep a certain amount of perspective on these things, I guess. In the long run, we're all dead.)

164 PS everyone knows that SS sends 'retirement' payments to illegals living in Mexico who worked here under a fake SS number right?

yes they do.

the deal is you MUST live OUTSIDE the US and then you get your check.

how about we cut that off YESTERDAY?
 ' an illegal worker using an illegal SSN has the same rights to SS benefits as a legal worker with a legal SSN. The only difference is that the person who worked illegally must receive those SS benefits outside of the USA.

In 2006 the Ensign Amendment was drafted to eliminate this interesting treatment. The bill was defeated in the Senate by a 49-50 vote. Senator Leahy (D.Vt.)'

165 How is that a just or fair solution?
Posted by: Monty at February 02, 2011 11:25 AM

You didn't read the rest, Monty.

The theft continues, therefore, those who keep the crime syndicate going are liable.

Or do you think that organized crime died when Capone went to Alcatraz?

Is it "just" or "fair" to squeeze the last dimes out of ordinary citizens to support our D.C. royalty? To give Egyptians, Iraqis and Pakistanis weapons to use on each other? To pay Bill Moyers' salary?

If that's what we're going to do, it's "fair" to put the squeeze on the heirs to the fortunes of Zombie FDR, Zombie Joe Kennedy and soon-to-be Zombie Bernie Madoff -- and their multi-billionaire pals -- first.

166 Women live seven years longer than men, on average

So, make the retirement age for women seven years higher than for men

sounds like a plan...............

167 cant get linky to fit here

the post on the SS bennies paid to illegals is at ZeroHedge dates 9/7/120 SS to pay billions to illegal workers..

more:

To emphasize, it is perfectly legal for a person to receive SS benefits on wages earned while in the country illegally as long as the person receives those benefits outside the US. It has always been legal as far as I know. I was hired as a bilingual speaker of Spanish to process these claims and did so personally or in a supervisory capacity.

They (SS) hired me to take claims from people who were insured for benefits, illegal or not. Then, of course, people can go home and get checks. This is LEGAL. Believe it or not, perfectly legal. If Congress had intended to, it could have passed a law making all those quarters of coverage disappear. But, they didn't and they haven't and I'd be surprised if they ever do.
Again, the real kick in the pants is that the money MUST be paid out of the country. Who says America does not have great legislators and great laws? No wonder we are becoming second rate.

168 so gfolks who claim giving AMNESTY would 'FIX' SS are full of shxt. the illegals ALREADY get SS..

tell granny that when we ask her to have less bennies..

let the Baby Boomers fight it out with the illegal retirees and see what happens.....

169

"wont this just leave FEWER JOBS for the young folks? ie we wont leave working til we are 70..."

 

Few employers are going to pick the 75 year old over the 25 year old for most jobs.

So the unmployed population shifts to geriatric.

I like that scenario. There is no justification in passing the costs off to the young, and since older Americans CAUSED THIS PROBLEM they should be the ones to face the brunt of it, sorry. All this talk about "being responsible for yourself" that your parents and their parents always loved to dote downwards? Give em all a fucking mirror.

170 >>getting busy.

171

Perhaps this is a stretch, but if somebody with skills and a blackboard like Glenn Beck will explain the national consequences of overspending, some people will eventually understand.

For example, the employees at my husband's medical office would like to have high wages, and plush surroundings. They would like it if his patients were seen for free or for a very low fees. When they express sentiments to that effect, and they do, we have a short conversation about economic realities. After we explain it, they understand that  a high wage means nothing if in the long run it results in the end of your job. The same is true for money spent on the physical plant or discounts given to patients. Once we explain it, they get the picture and have more realistic expectations.

This won't work for everybody, but it's amazing how many people have no clue about the economic realities of running a business. Probably the same thing is true for Americans with regard to running a government. Some people just require a reminder that, no matter how worthy the cause, if it results in bankruptcy it's not a good idea in the long run.

172

I took a buyout from the AF to leave Active Duty a few years back at roughly the midpoint of my career, when I had made rank and could have expected to last at least 20 ('twas a generous buyout, and I was able to find full-time work with the Reserves, but will not receive retirement). 

My mindset is that at some point in the future, the concept of paying military retirees a fairly high multiple of their pay (40-50% of their final pay, depending on when they joined) for the remainder of their lives (35-40 years), as well as the other attendant benefits, will no longer be feasible.  I hope they do continue to pay retirees as promised, but future inflows are impossible to predict.  

173

There are additional difficulties.  Let's say SS ends.  What that really means is that lots and lots of old folks simply go on welfare.  You can't realistically work when you're very old - you often can't drive, see, or hear properly.  You have low energy, etc.  Nobody wants to employ you for anything more complex than being a greeter, because people in the US generally assume that oldsters are useless.  Once you hit 50 you better have an exit strategy, because your employer IS working on one for you, and you might not like it.  My entire retirement plan is based on having adequate cash to let it work for me by the time I'm 50 - because I'll be lucky to stay working any longer than that.  I save just shy of half my income for that purpose.  Most folks can't do that.  Part of why I can is because I have no kids holding me back - so if this doesn't work out, I'm screwed.

We'll still be paying for their support.  May as well try to figure this out, because nobody is willing to let old folks freeze/starve.  And if you are - you damn well better starve the ghetto rats first.  They're the ones breeding a bunch of hungry bastards who have no plans to work or do anything requiring effort other than crime.  If there is any justice at all - starve them first.

 

174

Here's the deal fro everyone saying "I want mine": You already got it. Not for retirement, but your elected representatives chose to use the money elsewhere. Wars, welfare, ethanol subsidies, whatever was bought with the money taken from the SS fund or by debt that necessitated it's taking. Current retirees SS money was also spent this way, and it was decided to pay them anyway--by taking money from current revenue. You, or at least enough of the electorate, chose to support this. That's the hazards of living in a democratic system.

 

So everyone has already gotten "theirs", not in the form of SS handouts, but in the form of someone elses' SS, or money spent elsewhere, etc. In fact, not only has yours been given back, but so has mine, already, and likely my kids as well, thanks to the debt we will take on to continue to prop up the system until we decide to right things.

175 "so at age 55 you can retire and you get 1/2 of your scheduled payment."

...then look for another job to supplement your meager pension.

176

off damn sock...

177

No real mystery.

Tactically, everyone is looking out for their best interests; keep the patronage coming.

No one thinks strategically: that patronage is a noose about the neck, slowly tightening.

178 So with all the belly aching and rational thought going on here does anyone think politicians or the American populace has the guts or inclination to do anything about it?

179

91 That's what I was alluding to.  That's bullshit -- cut fraud, graft, and corruption?  Great!  No more boob jobs for colonels' wives?  Fine by me.  Cut actual medical services to disabled veterans?  Of **ck no you don't!  I'll even grant tightening the definition of "disabled" (as there are some that look pretty damn able to me) but across the board cuts?  Go to the hot place Ms. Bachmann...unless you want to propose Congress critters get the same kind of (cut) services as our vets.

And that's what it comes down to:  I think there are people who would be willing to give up stuff...but not if the more equal pigs keep voting themselves and their cronies more and more, while asking them to make that sacrifice.

180 Once you start paying the Dane-geld, you never get rid of the Dane.

181 Avogadra: is this your number? NA = 2.73159757(14)×1026 lb-mol−1 = 1.707248479(85)×1025 oz-mol−1 Perhaps this is a stretch, but if somebody with skills and a blackboard like Glenn Beck will explain the national consequences of overspending, some people will eventually understand. I doubt it. Most people have a very hard time understanding numerical extrapolation, ratios, and percentages. Vegas has been counting on our profound innumeracy for decades. (As have the various state lotteries.)

182

Accordingto the Social Security actuaries SS levels out in 2037 at being able to pay 78% of the projected benefits in 2037. Those projected benefits include COLA's which means SS will be able to pay roughly what it pays now. It doesn't go broke and go away like many on here have stated.

The question that should be asked on these goofy polls is do you want to take a 22% cut in benefits or do you want to pay X to get full benefits. It's never asked that way nor is any other question about benefits, defense, education etc. So the polls are useless.

Medicare is the real problem as it will only be able to pay around 50% of benefits. Again there needs to be a real question asked of voters, do you want to pay more or get less. When those questions are asked you will be able to have a real discussion.

183

I believe most of their debt is NOT commercially traded paper.

Posted by: CDR M at February 02, 2011 11:37 AM (5I8G0)

No, not commercial paper... its a special class of Low interest bearing "financial vehicles"... which are only availble from Treasury for the Soc Sec Admin...

Special buddy buddy (F'er) deal, so Treasury has the use of and can spend the Soc Sec "Trust Fund".

184 One of the things I’d like to see is the full tax showing up on our paychecks. People look at the tax now and think it sucks that they’re never going to see a return on that tax—but if they saw double that (or nearly 250% of it with the fake employee-side tax reduction) on their paycheck, there would, I hope, be more support for reform.

185 Actualy, a lot of that money is sitting in interst bearing financial instruments held by the Treasury. Soc Sec is the third largest holder of public debt... So... in a paper way... it still exists, but if they were to cash it in, it would crash the banking system. Incorrect. T-bills do not earn interest. They are promises to pay you a certain amount of money at a future date. And where does that money come from? Taxes. You only think it's interest. The ONLY SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT IS TAXES. Essentially, Wimpy could have designed the Treasury bill. "I will gladly fuck the taxpayers next Tuesday if you loan me the money for a hamburger today." Printing money is not creating money. It's diluting the money you have, making it weaker. Pouring piss into a glass of wine doesn't improve the piss. It ruins the wine. The government doesn't "invest" a fucking thing. They borrow against the idea that a growing economy will increase tax receipts enough to pay back the principal and "interest" on the (ibill. Plan B is raise taxes. THE ONLY SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT IS TAXES.

186

113  what you do with the individuals who simply don't have ANY retirement funds. Not the welfare pros,etc, just the ones who never made enough past simply existing from week to week.

Local charities.  Not a federal responsibility.

187 187. you are proving my point,  thats when you Go Galt.

you think you cant get a job at 55 but you can keep one til 70? that makes no sense

if no one will hire you at 55, they sure as shxt will can you BEFORE you hit 70

and good luck proving age discrimination

188

200 And just look what government has done to those as of late -- there seems to have been a concerted push to get more people on the dole, just when the cracks in the system were starting to show, hasn't there?

 

189 91 and I earned mine being shot at, while they sat at a desk...

The first thing they need to do is outlaw Government Worker Unions... (I know, pipe dream...).
_________

or invent desks that fight back.

190 I got mine very well could be our national motto at this point.

191 This syndrome needs an acronym.

ALIGEM?

192 It ain't that I'm worried or care about the  money that I paid in and getting my share back. I'll let it all go today if I could. What pisses me off is not the reality that there will not be anything there when I retire, so I've already lost that, it's that I'm chained to a failure and forced, by the barrel of a gun, to pay into that system for millions and millions of relatively wealthy who've been ingrained with the notion that Social Security is "theirs" and that "they earned it."

193

I'll be eligable for SS in 7 or 8 years.

All I want is all the money I paid in, back, period.

Just give what I paid in , back, in one lump sum, and I won't bother the federal government again.

 

194 Say... does anyone know what the government's only source of revenue is?

195

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 02, 2011 12:07 PM (xmuv/)

OASI Trust fund bonds DO gain interest... but at a very modest rate.

196 What is good for the goose, baby, is definitely good for the gander. I will gladly sacrifice to keep America and life as we know it, free. But you have hit the nail on the head.

My friends on the left, the ones with no God, swear that we conservatives will not do what we preach, when, in my own experience, the opposite it true.

They must be forced to sacrifice, they don't do it willingly, ever. The big difference between them and me is that I DO lead by example.

@#183
We just closed a deal for a dental practice to be taken on by a new doc. Old doc paid very high for the skill set and new doc sees this is not feasible. Employees must take a pay cut or lose their jobs. I fear they are not going to be smart and take the cut because they feel they were worth it to old doc. Reality will not treat them kindly.

197 There is no conundrum here. If you took my money through an involuntary tax and gave it to someone else, that is theft and Marxist wealth redistribution. The reason I have been supposedly paying into this Ponzi scheme was for my own benefit. So, give me back my money with interest, and we're good.

198 I could be mistaken, but wasn't my hash the Prime Minister of Qatar back in the 70s?

199 For 40 years, SS has been taken from my wages. It has been taxed before being withheld, too. You remember that, right? Here's my proposal - give me the money back along with the equal SS withholdings from my employer, who has been me for 35 of those years. You waive taking the second round of tax bite on this; I'll waive the increased value from collecting - starting in another 5 years - for 15 years plus my wife collecting as a widow for another 5 years after (based on actuary tables).  I think its a good deal for the Feds - hell, I'll even take it in five equal annual payments. To be eligible for this program, people have to show some minimum net worth that makes it very likely they'll never need elderly welfare. This isn't a panacea, but you might get 5-10% who could qualify; whether they would take the deal or not is another matter. I would, in a New York minute.
So much for dreaming. Our Brave, Brave Sir Robin politicians won't come close to thinking outside the box in enough numbers to enact this or any other proposal. And I'll just continue with my plan to gift out my SS payments to my kids to make up for the screwing they are taking.

200 So, give me back my money with interest, and we're good. There is no money. The money that was taken from you is gone, long since. The only way to get your money back is to take it from other people. Do you think that's a fair or just solution?

201 206  That right there.  Just let me and mine opt out of it -- we'll call it even.  It's bohica, and that sucks, but I'm a patient person and willing to put up with a certain amount of shit -- just don't make me keep doing it especially when I can see for myself that this does not really help anyone (except vote pandering politicos, who I really don't feel like helping).

202 We all were all forced to bet money on Social Security. We lost. Walk away.

203 For all that are advocating "means testing" for social security, that's just another "tax the rich" argument. Robbing the rich is not the answer, enriching the poor through better job opportunities is. WELFARE IS NOT ENRICHING THE POOR. Grim

204 The reason I have been supposedly paying into this Ponzi scheme was for my own benefit. So, give me back my money with interest, and we're good. Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 02, 2011 12:30 PM (mHQ7T) HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAAAA! Wooh... heh! Oh, that was precious. Now, I'm gonna need you to bend over. You're going to feel some slight discomfort here.

205

The real name of the fund, by the way... Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund

Old... Age... Insurance... fund... the very name if misleading, as insurnace is somthing you pay into, which contractualy guarentees certain benefits.

206

We'll still be paying for their support.  May as well try to figure this out, because nobody is willing to let old folks freeze/starve

Tell you what--I'll take care of mine, you take care of yours. SS went insolvent after 100 years. "Honor thy father and mother" still works.

207 @#210 Yeah. Not everybody gets it. A recent example found herself on the unemployment line after we pointed out that we could pay two people with the salary she was getting and thought was a pittance. The two new employees are doing fine.

208 58 I'm 39 and haven't thought I'd see any SS for at least the last ten years. When I first told my dad this, he was very surprised and didn't believe me. I told him I'd much rather write him a check every month than pay into SS. I'll never see it and have never planned on getting it. It's theft. Posted by: Annabelle at February 02, 2011 10:44 AM (4kxCX) It must be a generational thing. I'm 46 and when I told my dad that my wife and I were planning as if we would never see Medicare or SS he insisted that they would be there, no problem at all. I just shook my head. His generation trusted the promises and couldn't believe that the government would go back on its word (which is why he believes that Obamacare is A-OK). I'm just glad he won't live to see the whole fucking thing come crashing down.

209 Ok, Romeo. You have to stop that. Seriously. The gubmint never "invested" excess SS funds. They "bought" Treasuries with them, allowing Congress to take MORE money from you and give it to bums and foreigners. Because if they had asked you for more money, you would have said no. Then they put a piece of paper in a filing cabinet that says "Treasury Bill" and told you, "This is even better than having money, because this T-bill is going to pay INTEREST! DOUBLEPLUSGOOD!" Here's how Treasuries earn interest: 1. They don't. That money they took in exchange for that T-bill was given to bums and foreigners, remember? It's not invested in a business, or a stock, or even magic beans. It's fucking GONE. The only source of revenue for the government is taxes. The only way to pay back those T-bills AT ALL, never mind with interest, is with taxes. The sales pitch is that: 1. We give your money to bums and foreigners. 2. ??? 3. Profit! No government-issued security is "invested" or "earns" anything. It is simply a claim on future taxes.

210 211 There is no conundrum here. If you took my money through an involuntary tax and gave it to someone else, that is theft and Marxist wealth redistribution. The reason I have been supposedly paying into this Ponzi scheme was for my own benefit. So, give me back my money with interest, and we're good.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at February 02, 2011 12:30 PM (mHQ7T)

The money has already been spent in other ways. The very money you paid in is gone.

You were not able to vote in people who would refrain from doing so. Now there is no "your money" there. Sorry. What's the saying go? "You fucked up. You trusted me."

(me being the cowardly pols, that is.)

211 Everyone's logic here seems to be: "Since I knew the government was lying to me for all these years (SS is a tax, not forced savings), then it is now OK to accept that lie."

Bull.  Fucking.  Shit.  That means those of us who put in the most get fucked the most.  If you plan to eliminate future SS payments, do you plan to continue the SS "tax" for those who are still working, knowing they'll never get any benefits?

This is not that hard.  SS is not that much underfunded.  It can be fixed fairly easily, without fucking anyone over 55 at all, and without decimating those under 55 either.  http://tinyurl.com/2eguzqb

212 97 O/T College Park, MD are doing their best to keep the little leftiest thugs, losers, creeps and criminals from burning down the town again after their basketball game. Posted by: dagny at February 02, 2011 11:05 AM (ZuJDg) So what are they doing about the non-students?

213

Posted by: Empire of Jeff at February 02, 2011 12:58 PM (MdmMg)

Stop what... telling folks WHY the Politicians SAY the Trust fund is more solvent than it is???

Because OASI Treasurys DO have an on PAPER interst payment... which the politicians then use to make it look as if its more solvent, than it is.... as it adds non redeemable funds to the "bottom" line.

But please continue in your outrage... just may want to redirect it a bit.

214

This is not that hard.  SS is not that much underfunded.  It can be fixed fairly easily, without fucking anyone over 55 at all, and without decimating those under 55 either. 

But you can't keep the system sustaining so long as it pays our greater amounts every generation, due to incerasing lifespans. It was set up to pay for around 0-5 years, based on retirement age and life expectancy. So we need to keep the pay offs tied to life expectany -5 years, increase taxes greatly. And that's not even getting into demographic changes (declining birthrate).

215 Here's a simple solution - you get what you paid in, and no more; if you're already beyond, you're cut off.  Uncle Sammy sends us all statements showing what we've put in; cut me my check now, and be done with it.

That will also solve the issue of the old parasites stumbling into Congress whining about their 'trust fund.'  Have the Congress-tard punch their SS # into the local gummint bozo-puter, and find out how much they put in and how much they've accepted in checks.

If the stumbler has drawn out more, send 'em a freakin bill.

216 I second Jason Coleman's comments. The 30s and 40s crowd will gladly agree to receive none of what we paid in to Social Security. Just let us out from future obligations and we'll let Treasury keep what we've paid. Deal?

217 There is no money. The money that was taken from you is gone, long since. The only way to get your money back is to take it from other people. Do you think that's a fair or just solution? Posted by: Monty at February 02, 2011 12:35 PM (4Pleu) Precisely. SO: cut off the tax now. Just cut. I don't want anything back because it's not there. I'm 46, and expect to keep working for another 30 years. In that period I can provide for my own retirement (and health care, if you stop taxing me for that too). If everybody under 55 is treated the same way, and knows FOR SURE that this is the only alternative you have, we can allow these programs to die in 25-30 years.

218 SS is not that much underfunded. Yeah-huh. The SSA estimated that it would go into the red in 2015; it went into the red in 2011. Every time the "estimate" how solvent SS is, they use bullshit numbers to make the situation look better than it really is, and then frown in feigned outrage when reality asserts itself and shows their assumptions to be bullshit. (The same problem is bedeviling the defined-benefit pension schemes, both public and private.) The problem is going to get a lot worse, a lot faster than anyone thought it would. It's like taking a cut in pay: first you have to borrow $10 a month to make the rent, then $20, then $50, then half of it, then you have to borrow the whole thing -- every month, in perpetuity. Well, it doesn't take a genius to know that the disaster began with the first month you had to borrow money to stay in the house. It's your fault for not selling the house right then and finding someplace cheaper to live -- all the money past that initial point was just money pissed away to no good purpose.

219 all the money past that initial point was just money pissed away to no good purpose. Actually, it's worse than that because in addition to having no house, you have an enormous debt-load from borrowing so much money for so long. So you're not only out of a house, you're going to be slaving away on paying a debt that was incurred mainly to stave off the inevitable.

220 should be held LEGALLY accountable for their Lies about how stable it was. Posted by: Romeo13

I'd love to see an amendment that made politicians liable for all the effects of their stupidity.

Although,
"Jammed up their ass sideways on fire"
might not be fitting for one of our finest documents.

221 Posted by: Randall Hoven at February 02, 2011 10:28 AM (goI7h)

Won't happen.

222 How many people refusing to pay taxes will overwhelm the system?
That is, at what point will the courts and jails collapse under the weight of trying to enforce taxes?
How many of you bitching about this are willing to go to jail over it? After they've seized your house, car and any other assets you've been renting from them for years?

223 I am willing to let my SS go if they stopped scamming me with the SS tax now.  I know I probably won't receive a dime as the system may  have collapsed by then.  This is what happens in ponzi schemes.

224 Bernie Made-off did the same thing as the Congress and Social Security, so what's the big deal, other than time frame?

225

100% dead on.

You are absolutely correct with this observation "The whole situation will have to come to complete collapse and ruination before the scales fall from our eyes and we see the seductive lie of governmental welfare for what it was all along."

Perfectly said and well done.

226 Here is one solution: 

People who have living parents should be allowed to contribute to their support and claim them as dependents INSTEAD of contributing to Social Security.   Parents who receive such support would give up Social Security payments.

It would reduce the SS rolls,  and help out the younger generation.

Not a perfect solution, but one which would at least put a dent in this without causing pain for some families.

Oh,  and the result of all this talk about Social Security is that people like me (and most of my friends) took our SS at 62.  I started receiving my payments in October.

Meanwhile,  my husband is working in Africa because there is no work here,  and I am selling stuff on eBay,  lest you folks think I am living the life of Riley.

227

"...true of social-welfare programs like Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, and so on."

You forgot Unemployment services.  I've never understood why the government should pay people just because they lost their job or were laid off.  I can sort of understand SSA and Medicare because the recipients were taxed to pay for them...but unemployment?  And we won't even get into Medicaid and TANF and SSI.

228 Yeah.  Wages. 

Listened to Weiner being queried on ObamaCare repeal by Heather on Fox, and he starts tooting the horn that the meanies want to take away the donut hole fix seniors got in the bill.

Like its now considered wages and you can't take away a fucking thing, any kind of entitlement whatsoever, once it is given, because it will kill people or something.

I'm saddling up my camel for the street rioting that will ensue here, 'cause that's what will happen.  We'll be taking our beefs to the street, to protest even the thought of any take-aways.

Where is the leader that can get this right?  The one who can achieve the cutting, the slashing, the shutting down of all the useless fluff in both state and federal governments, the takedown of the public employee unions, and more?  I don't see him or her.

All I see is TheOne with his finger to the wind.  And the poll responses all are based on the "As Long As I Get Mine" thing.

229 Until any of you have to actually face the choice of eking out an existence or living on the street, you really shouldn't toss out off the cuff and glib answers or condemnations of those that have faced the choice and decided not to live under a bush somewhere.

I've done both and believe me living in "vassalage" has it all over living under a bush.

The government and it's minions aided and abetted by a complicit and greedy corporate sharks have created a situation where 20% of our working population is either unemployed or underemployed.

I'm 64 and had to go on SS early at 62 because I couldn't find anyone to hire me. (possible age discrimination and over/under qualifications).
I believe in a normal economy (say what we had 5 years ago) I would be working now. Not at a job paying what I used to get but enough so that I didn't have to go begging to the Gov't for money just to exist. I hate being in this situation but I am too old and my health is not the best to be living the life of a vagabond (which I have done so I know what it's REALLY like).

So far (because of the Constitution) I haven't had to compromise any other of my principals to continue to collect what little is offered. From some of the comments here, I suspect that I would find myself worse off at the hands of supposed fellow conservatives whose life experiences and observational abilities are limited and lacking in depth and variety.

Easy to condemn ME as some little piglet sucking on the government teat without knowing or having experienced the circumstances that put me here.

P.S. It's most likely to get worse as the UE benefits haven't run out for everyone yet AND the fallout from the foreclosure mess AND the result of the Fed in a bidding war for dollars against China hasn't landed YET.

Watch what's going on in Egypt. It's about FOOD more than it is about repression. The cost of food is up due to a lot of factors and the U.S. has so far been insulated from the cost increase but it's coming and THEN what you see on TV will be YOU out there because you can't afford to buy a loaf of bread and neither can your neighbor.

230

jakee308,

I'm sorry to hear of your situation. It sounds awful.

Yeah, I have noticed some pretty harsh invective to and from fellow morons who probably under normal circumstances might be having a couple of beers together.

I can well understand how someone younger might very well feel like he or she had nothing to do with this situation, and that it isn't his or her problem that someone was dumb enough to have depended solely on SS to live/retire on.

I can also understand how someone who has paid (by force, not by choice) hundreds of thousands of dollars (or even millions) over most of a lifetime into the SS system might not appreciate being lectured on objectivism and personal responsibility and told to go eat dog food by someone who doesn't have something approaching the same kind of skin in the game.

 

231 Nope. No interest. Just give me back what I've paid in so far. I'll take it from there.

232

No interest. Just give me back what I've paid in so far. I'll take it from there.

I have well over $100,000 that has been taken "at the point of a gun" for S.S. with the expection of it being there when I retired and now I'm being told "tough sh*t"

Pardon me if I have a little problem with that.

Far as I'm concerned medicare/medicaid can get a flush with unemployment being locked at 6 months, no exceptions.

 

 

233 169
ya2daup, would you be willing to write an article on that so that I could post it on Clarion Advisory.  That would be out-fucking-standing!
Posted by: CDR M at February 02, 2011 11:36 AM (5I8G0)

Thanks for the compliment, but write an article on what, exactly?

234 I don't blame anybody for wanting "their" money back. I don't think they're dumb or that they weren't cheated or that they're piglets or sponges or whatever people are claiming they're being called.

But IT'S NOT THERE. THERE IS NO FUCKING MONEY. THERE IS NO FUCKING TRUST FUND.

Fine, throw all the fucking politicians and bureaucrats in jail and confiscate their money, you'll get back a few percent of what they stole. Might save us more money to have them locked up in the long run.

But stop telling me what you're "owed," dude, we both got ripped off. And ain't nobody got a money tree big enough to fix it.

Yeah, we have to deal with the fallout. But the way we deal with it is not gonna be cutting you a check because THERE IS NO FUCKING MONEY. Fucking government is $14 trillion in the fucking red, where the fuck do you think this money is gonna come from, Santa Claus?

This is either gonna be a long, hard slog or a short, bloody one. Long and hard is better than short and bloody, I think we can all agree on that.

So, you got stolen from, you're boned, you're going to suffer. But don't start a fucking blood feud over SS benefits, because if it does turn short and bloody, ain't gonna be no SS benefits at all after that.

Now, if the assholes we elected just keep kicking the can down the road, just remember you need to make sure EVERYBODY knows what they've done to you, about every five minutes, and maybe we can elect some non-assholes. 'Cause electing non-assholes is the ONLY path to getting even a significant chunk of what was taken from you.

Breaking the system doesn't get you Shangri-La, it gets you Detroit.

235

But IT'S NOT THERE. THERE IS NO FUCKING MONEY. THERE IS NO FUCKING TRUST FUND.

So no problem if I stop paying in is there chuckles right?

236 249

But IT'S NOT THERE. THERE IS NO FUCKING MONEY. THERE IS NO FUCKING TRUST FUND.

So no problem if I stop paying in is there chuckles right?

Posted by: gdonovan at February 02, 2011 05:54 PM (HS/md)

Ever get the impression that somebody isn't listening?

Here's a hint, explain what A has to do with B here.

237 A modest proposal: the size of your SS check is now based on the earnings of your <I>direct descendants</I>, whether natural born or adopted, minus any welfare payments taken while raising said rugrats.  No children, no check.

238

Here's a hint, explain what A has to do with B here.

It is a simple concept- I have been paying faithfully into a fund for decades with the expectation of retiring one day and drawing on the fund that I paid into. I had no choice in this matter, it was pay in or jail.

Simple enough no? Aside from defense it is the one use of Feds I approved of.

Now I'm being told, sorry pal we blew your money on hookers and blow.

I say burn it down and start over, its unfixable. I'd be more than willing to throw away any "retirement" for a clean start.

 

239 @193 Sorry, Monty, I missed your comment. I prefer to be known by 6.022×10^23/mole, but you can call me 42.

240

If you try to opt out of SS you'll get a trial for tax evasion. Go ahead. Visit your local SS office and tell them you no longer want to contribute. Better yet tell them you want your money back, right now.Post back when you get out of jail.

 

And therein lie the trouble. You have no recourse. You have no tort under law. The police powers of the state are taking your money at the point of a gun and pissing it away.

 

241 OK, I vented earlier.

It's hard to unwind SS. Just stop it? What do you do with all the retired AARP members? There is no money, no trust fund, no savings, no nothing. No money in today means no SS check tomorrow for grandma. Throw her under the bus. The Zero would approve - dovetails with  his HCR death panels.

I think we need several changes -

1) cuts in SS checks for people > 5 years from retirement - like me
2) plus increases in retirement age for people > 10 years from retirement
3) means testing - retirees already pay tax on 85% of  their SS so there already is some testing right there
4) multi-decade conversion to private defined contribution plan - hell, they can still run an alternative - the Feds do pretty well with their thrift plan and would be among the lowest cost fund administrators if they were private

As someone who has put in (been extorted to the tune of) $100K or so I don't like any of these ideas but they are necessary. We're not gonna throw granny under a bus, just not going to happen, and we're not gonna leave people nearing retirement after a career of low paying jobs without the SS they need and have been counting on for even a modest lifestyle in retirement - it would be too big a double cross for even the government.

242 According to my last statement from the SSA, between myself and my employer, $100 large has been paid into SS on my behalf. I'm 36, and my SS statutory full retirement age is 67. So, come 2041, I can cash out and draw bennies. Clearly SS is not going to be around in its present form by then. SS is a pay-go program, but folks can be forgiven for thinking it's an IRA, since 1) that's how the program was sold from the get-go, and 2) the SSA sends out IRA-looking statements every so often to tell people what they can expect. Sure, there's an asterisk at the bottom reminding you that they owe you precisely squat, but you can be forgiven for missing that part. We're going to have to reform this mo-fo, and I think it's going to involve a couple steps. First, folks above a certain age are going to be grandfathered in. Folks 60+ (or whatever) are going to get most of the promised bennies because they don't have enough time to retool. Second, SS is going to be converted to a straight-up means-tested welfare plan for the old. Folks with savings or pensions or whatever who don't need it are going to get a token amount at best. Finally, we can cut the tax rate once we go to welfare, since fewer people will be drawing a benefit. Hike the amount people can put in retirement accounts on a tax-advantaged basis, and it's a deal.

243 altın çilek - fx15 - leke kremi - yudali - maurers - ozon yağı