Posted on 04/13/2023 7:59:48 AM PDT by SteveH
the federal social security system is a lie. you can find out about how it is bankrupt by 2030 any day of the week by just picking up a newspaper and reading the headlines.
paying a vendor who has lied about his or her or its product is called STEALING. It is prohibited by social convention (such as the 8th commandment, the koran, verse 5:38, and furtum in Roman common law) and so broadly understood to be morally wrong.
so why should people be required to stand by and allow their social security to be stolen from them in the forseeable future??
how about if everyone can get an estimate of the (stochastic, to borrow a term) value of their social security now, apply for it, and obtain it in a reasonably short amount of time (eg 4 weeks)??
if we know that a train will become a wreck in a time certain, then it is criminal and morally wrong to force us to stay on the train until it is wrecked and all hope of retrieving the value of the amounts held in trust is dissipated.
can the US government be held accountable in courts of law for this THEFT???
could this become the basis of a class action lawsuit???
The other 50% content themselves with pickleball.
> Replose -> reply, or maybe response. I was distracted by a squirrel while editing it.
Thanks (I think I might have seen the same squirrel btw)
> The chief justice of that court died almost exactly six month before Abraham Lincoln and did not see the end of the civil war said events triggered.
bring it. probably more humane to die of a minie ball in the @$$ than to have to live g*d knows how many years under an overpass without any health coverage.
> Looking like you might have to settle out of court...
part of me is liking the way that sounds...
Your insult to “boomers” is not appreciated. I’ve worked for my SS for 35 years. I PAID for my benefits and am entitled to them.
> ... the Boomers get screwed first.
so long as i can bring as many soccer moms and aspiring rappers along as i can to get f*cked too
No, because Ponzi schemes eventually run out of money. But SS is only broke on paper; the government will fund it from the general revenue when the time comes.
We'll just print trillions to save SS and Medicare, the same way we've been/will be printing trillions for Covid relief, unemployment, reparations, foreign aid, bank bailouts, Wall Street bailouts, housing bailouts, government employee pensions, etc.
Don't blame us Boomers. Even by the 1970s, before Boomers had any power, SS was a third rail.
I remember back in the 1970s, Florida Representative Claude Pepper (1900-1989) was famous for repeatedly saying, "Don't tamper with Social Security."
Jack Kemp talked of ending SS in the 1970s. But after he lost his presidential bid to Reagan in 1980, and went on to serve as Reagan's Secretary of HUD, Kemp finally conceded that SS was here to stay, because the American people wanted it.
I've also read that Barry Goldwater suggested ending SS during the 1964 campaign (when New Deal programs were still relatively new). That was yet another reason he lost to Johnson.
“Your insult to “boomers” is not appreciated.”
What insult? I said only the truth about them. If you take that as an insult, then the Boomers apparently insulted themselves by their own behavior.
Thing is: we're talking about old people - like yours truly. We croak. The system counts on that. That's why it stops when breathing does, and can't be passed on to heirs.
If the Dems screw up SS, you'll get whiplash from the amount of Dem voters over 62 voting GOP.
“Don’t blame us Boomers. Even by the 1970s, before Boomers had any power, SS was a third rail.”
Ah, and Boomers never held the majority of political power after that, eh? Never had any opportunity over the last 40 years to change it?
No, I think I will blame the Boomers, because, yes, they bear responsibility for blocking any legislation to fix it over the last few decades, when they were the demographic with all the political power. The fact that other generations acted in a similar irresponsible way doesn’t excuse the Boomers for continuing on that path. Especially when the Boomers were the one generation who had an opportunity to fix the system without anyone losing any benefits at all, during the 90s-early 00s boom years. But they squandered it.
First of all, Social Security is not going to run out of money in 2030, 2033, 2037, or any other the other years being bandied about.
Worse case scenario - if nothing is done between now and then - is that the Social Security cash reserves will be depleted. There will still be enough coming in from FICA taxes to meet 74% of the projected obligations.
So people who are in the system will not get no check at all. They will get a reduced check. So if your current benefit is $1,000 a month (to use a round number), your check would be reduced to around $740 come 2030, 2033, or whenever that cash reserve runs out.
Obviously that is not a great thing. But it's hardly what the alarmists are saying (that people will get no benefits at all).
Most likely there will be a "last-minute" solution to the problem. Raising the retirement ages for younger people is possible but that would not solve the problem in the short term as it would take years for that to start having an effect.
What I see happening is the cap being raised on FICA taxes. Currently, the "max FICA" income limit is set at $160,200 for 2023. So once you reach that income threshold, the FICA stops coming out of your paycheck.
Each year, that gets bumped a little, but you might see a proposal to have that raised a lot - maybe as high as $500,000. So that would capture more FICA taxes from those currently making between $160,000 and $500,000 (a LOT of money by the way) which would save the system for the forseeable future.
I'm not advocating any of the above. I'm simply stating what the likely solution to this will be. Yes, more TAXES!
And that should make everybody angry, especially when we are shoveling billions of taxpayer dollars overseas every year to other countries like Ukraine.
Everything the government promises is a con job in the long run.
Pyramid schemes are great for the early adopters.
Nice rant.
Whatever happened to the city of Galveston, TX...Didn’t they opt out of SS...
> Nice rant.
Thanks, I try lol :)
Bear in mind the CoVID program intends to enact genocide on the world, including the workers who contributed to Soc Sec. A lot of them took the ‘clot shot’ and won’t be with us much longer. Hard to estimate how many we will lose, and how many remain.
> I remember back in the 1970s, Florida Representative Claude Pepper (1900-1989) was famous for repeatedly saying, “Don’t tamper with Social Security.”
A Dhimmiecrat... when they start the f*cking, err, tampering, I’m going to quote this guy on every page of my manifesto
> Jack Kemp talked of ending SS in the 1970s. But after he lost his presidential bid to Reagan in 1980, and went on to serve as Reagan’s Secretary of HUD, Kemp finally conceded that SS was here to stay, because the American people wanted it.
> I’ve also read that Barry Goldwater suggested ending SS during the 1964 campaign (when New Deal programs were still relatively new). That was yet another reason he lost to Johnson.
As I recall, Democrats were the party of slavery. See below for a dictionary definition of slavery (imho kind of like social security). Who passed social security? Oh yah, FDR... Democrat...
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/slavery
slavery
noun
slav·ery ˈslā-v(ə-)rē
Synonyms of slavery
1
a
: the practice of slaveholding
b
: the state of a person who is held in forced servitude
c
: a situation or practice in which people are entrapped (as by debt) and exploited
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.