In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Greenspan says S.S an entitlement!
babybear
Member Posts: 1,642 ✭✭✭✭✭
Needs to be cut and scaled back in future like OTHER "entitlement" programs!!! Did'nt realize I was paying into a giveaway!!..www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/02/12national1737EST0768.DTL
Comments
So it is not an entitlement, it was bought and paid for by all of us and mangled by the gov.
Just my two cents.
When you wrestle a 'gator, there ain't no good end!!
"Molon Labe!" Spartan General-King Leonidas
They dont pay into the system, They get a tidy Retirement somewhere from 100,000 and up for the jobs they did, whether it was one Term or a Dozen, Do you think they care, it dont affect them , cause if it did, they would do something to better it , rather than screw it up..
"I dont care how thin you make a pancake, it still has two sides"
"A wise man is a man that realizes just how little he knows.
There are no bad guns, only bad people.
Sure glad you didn't say it. [:D]
What a crock.
The gene pool needs chlorine.
Mad Dog
This is only a mildly interesting story to anyone reading it right now. But when your parents get too old to work and think they are going to be able to not be a burden to you, their children, because both parents will be getting social security, don't be surprised that there is no money for them to live on and they have to live WITH YOU. And you young people now who might be thinking that as a worst case when you get too old to work you can at least survive on your social security due to you, don't be surprised when you do get old and there is no social security money for you to live on and you have to go onto welfare (is there is any). We ALL should force the Washington crooks to give up their comfortable congressional rretire plans (which they voted for themsleves) and force them to depend upon social security, just as we lowly common folk are expected to do.
Quote "When guns were invented everything changed. For the first time in the history of the world a frail woman had a chance to sucessfully defend herself and home. My dream is that one of the anti-gun nuts will need a gun for defense and be unable to have one because of their own actions."
>
>This is worth the read. It's short and to the point.
>
>Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years.
>
>Since most of us have paid into FICA for years and are now, or will be,
>receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we
>are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the federal government to
>"put away," you may be interested in the following:
>
>
>Q: Which party took Social Security from an independent fund and put it in
>the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
>
>A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic-controlled House and Senate.
>
>
>Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
>
>A: The Democratic party.
>
>
>Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
>
>A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.
>
>Q: Which party decided to give SS money to immigrants?
>
>A: That's right, immigrants move into this country and at 65 get SSI Social
>Security. The Democratic Party gave that to them although they never paid a
>dime into it.
>
>
>Then, after doing all this, the Democrats turn around and tell you the
>Republicans want to take your Social Security. And the worst part about it
>is, people believe it!
>
>This must be an issue in "04." Please! Keep it going.
>
>
>SOCIAL SECURITY FOR CONGRESS:
>O ur Senators and Congress men & women do not pay into Social Security and,
>of course, they do not collect from it.
>
>You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their
>rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for
>themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan.
>
>In more recent years, no congress person has felt the need to change it.
>After all, it is a great plan.
>
>For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
>
>When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die, except
>it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments.
>
>For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may
>expect to draw $7,800,000.00 (that's Seven Million, Eight-Hundred Thousand
>Dollars), with their wives drawing $275,000.00 during the last years of
>their lives.
>
>This is calculated on an average life span for each. Their cost for this
>excellent plan is $00.00. Nada. Zilch.
>
>This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You and I pick
>up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan come
>directly from the General Funds-our tax dollars at work! >From our own
>Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into-every payday
>until we retire (which amount is matched by our employer) --we can expect
>to get an average $1,000 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we
>would have to collect our average of $1,000. monthly benefits for 68 years
>and one (1) month to equal Senator Bill Bradley's benefits!
>
>
>Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. That
>change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the
>Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the
>rest of us ... then sit back and watch how fast they would fix it.
________________________________________________________________________
"If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" -Thomas Paine
If the people have become so apathetic that they will not vote out all the liberal scum (republican and democrat alike), the only solution is Constitutional Convention II the sequel. Let's get it right this time.
www.realityzone.com and www.NORFED.com please spend a little time there and if your interested in "Liberty" afterwards just drop me a line. Thanks and good luck to all who battle both sides of the political isle for it is Them against Us.
For years he has said that SS is welfare...
Gratifing to me to watch people wake up and realize that the elite are going to take it all...
No spirit of the founders left in this country....is there ?
I've ranted now if your interested in th real deal please spend a couple of minutes over at www.realityzone.com. Read the book The Creature from Jekyl Island.
Now your ready to take the control out of their hands once you know who it is you have to fight then it becomes much easier to do so.
Ask me how Liberty Dollars can help make "change" on dollar at a time and if you own a small business you can profit from doing so.
Nice to read something from someone that has taken the time to educate themselves.
Long live the New World Order.
I recently heard the simplest description ever of what plagues Social Security -- when it was started, there were 50 workers paying in for every retiree taking out. When the baby boomers retire en masse, there will be 2 workers paying in for every retiree taking out.
This isn't fatal by itself, of course, because after the baby boomer period, the number of retirees should decline again. But the crunch is coming in the next few years.
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
Lord Lowrider the Loquacious.
Member:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets
She was only a fisherman's daughter,
But when she saw my rod she reeled.
Lord Lowrider the Loquacious.
Member:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets
She was only a fisherman's daughter,
But when she saw my rod she reeled.
SS is the very definition of the word "entitlement." If I am "entitled" to something, it should theoretically be guaranteed me, small though it may be.
I recently heard the simplest description ever of what plagues Social Security -- when it was started, there were 50 workers paying in for every retiree taking out. When the baby boomers retire en masse, there will be 2 workers paying in for every retiree taking out.
This isn't fatal by itself, of course, because after the baby boomer period, the number of retirees should decline again. But the crunch is coming in the next few years.
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
If congress had let it alone it would be solvent. In fact it was on strong ground in the 50s then congress stepped in.
When I pay into it it is not an entitlement. Read my comment above.
When you wrestle a 'gator, there ain't no good end!!
"Molon Labe!" Spartan General-King Leonidas
Huh?? You'll have to decode that.
I get a statement showing the balance I've put into SS. It's not enough to get me through many years of retirement, even if they give it all back at once. Saying your SS money is yours is like saying your tax money is yours, as far as I can tell. Yeah, you paid it all to the "community pot," but they dole it out to those ahead of you and you will be paid by those behind you, if it holds up. The program is not a savings account and was never designed to give anyone his own money back. If they give you more than you put in, it's a lucky thing; if you wind up getting less because they run out, it's a bad thing. Is it possible to receive more from SS than you personally contributed? I don't know, but with inflation over 40+ years...
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
quote:...Oh yeah, so I keep the Nazi's appeased, GUN, AMMO, YEAH!!...
Huh?? You'll have to decode that.
I get a statement showing the balance I've put into SS. It's not enough to get me through many years of retirement, even if they give it all back at once. Saying your SS money is yours is like saying your tax money is yours, as far as I can tell. Yeah, you paid it all to the "community pot," but they dole it out to those ahead of you and you will be paid by those behind you, if it holds up. The program is not a savings account and was never designed to give anyone his own money back. If they give you more than you put in, it's a lucky thing; if you wind up getting less because they run out, it's a bad thing. Is it possible to receive more from SS than you personally contributed? I don't know, but with inflation over 40+ years...
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."
I believe the point is that the system would have been solvent (read that as paid for itself), or in much better shape, if the congress had left it alone. Since they didn't I would have been much better off, and so would everyone else, if I put the money in an IRA account. Try and find Paul Harveys first comment on SS and then his second after congress began raiding it.
When you wrestle a 'gator, there ain't no good end!!
"Molon Labe!" Spartan General-King Leonidas
I have a job and am forced to pay Social Security taxes. Whatever I pay is matched by my employer. These combined funds are earmarked by my government to be put away in a special fund to cover the needs of the program.
But... My government needs a quick buck and "borrows" the funds earmarked for Social Security. After all, who better to borrow those funds because they're backed by by the full power and authority of the United States? (In the end that's you and me.)
Now comes the difficult part, so I really need an able assist... I've been taxed by the United States Government to support a program that I'm forced to participate in? Then my government "borrows" the money that I've paid into the system? And it's OK because my representatives have promised that I'll pay back the money they've borrowed at interest by increasing my taxes?
So, am I correct when I state that... I've been taxed for a program I can't opt out of. My government has raided the funds they've confiscated. And best of all... It's no problem because they'll force me to pay all over again with interest.
Wow! Is this a great system, or what?
And Greenspan is absolutely correct... An unfunded mandate is purely an entitlement! Define Social Security any other way.
We get exactly what we deserve in those we elect. Career politicians are probably the single worst menace we face as a nation. But we elect them year after year and support a system that all but assures an incumbent re-election.
Ever hear about TERM LIMITS? One term, no special benefits, no private retirement plans, never an ability to vote a raise for yourself... Nothing but an opportunity to serve those who elected you.
I'LL VOTE FOR THAT!
Nord
There was (is) a surplus, because as previously stated, there were many people (babyboomers) paying in on the workforce for a few retirees. This surplus was not going to last, Government spending certainly did not help, but is not the only cause. More retirees, fewer workers will be the root of the problem.
The bigget killer to this entitlement was its expansion. The original program had no widows benefits, dependent children benefits and disability benefits, or as previously posted benefits to aliens who had not paid into the plan. However, this is why the take from your pay is so high, not a balance using problem.
The solution is simple, have more kids, get them a job.
KC
Social Security is a "Ponzi scheme" plain and simple.
Enter the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 (the FED is neither federal or a reserve) This allows the Gov to borrow from the Fed they print money send it too the banks and loan it out to the GOV. Dump millions into an economy and pretty soon you have the hidden tax known as INFLATION no need to tax the people directly and upset them. This is why the Federal Reserve Note in your pocket has lost 96% of it's purchasing power since 1913. Social Securities is a slush fund for unchecked spending sure it helps but ever talk to someone who recieves benefits? They could be doing better.
If you understand banking a little heres the big one. The Economy is backed by DEBT!!!!!!!!
You open a savings account with $100.
They now write $900 worth of loans against your $100
It's called fractional banking.
Now those $900 worth of loans are entered into the asset column and loaned out AGAIN at a 9 to 1 ratio. Imagine an IOU being an asset. If you owe me $10 I call it a liability cause you might not pay me.
This massive expansion of the money supply creates inflation and the fact that we left the gold standard years ago just means our money is truely worthless. Greenscum was a proponent and backer of the gold standard in the 60s now he's owned buy the FED RES (private employment not GOV) and has nothing to say about it. He wakes up from a coma and realises the national debt is skyrocketing , never mind trade deficets, and says he's concerned??
Sorry but WTH ???????????
Return America to glory and power ask for REAL money and look into how to use it, buy and trade LIBERTY DOLLARS. The real silver backed money.
T. Jefferson: "[When doing Constitutional interpretation], let us [go] back to the time when [it] was adopted. [Rather than] invent a meaning [let us] conform to the probable one in which it was passed."