First Social Security recipient put in $24.75 - got back $22,888 (Limbaugh sides with the left?)

Rush Limbaugh .com ^ | 2/04/05 | The Maha

[Libloather]

Now, I got one more thing on this Social Security business. Apparently some people misunderstood what I said when recently discussing the program. I never said that the first recipients didn't get any benefits. What I said was the first recipients didn't pay into the system or very much. The first recipients of Social Security were pretty much near retirement age or were at retirement age when FDR introduced the program. They were the real, true beneficiaries of this program. That's when it took 16 workers to pay the taxes for those people that had not put anything in the system. Now, even though some people have misunderstood this, let's tell you about the first recipient. Ida May Fuller. "On January 31st, 1940, the first monthly retirement check was issued to Ida May Fuller in Vermont. The first monthly check she got was $22.54. She was a legal secretary. She retired in November of 1939, so basically she got her benefits within 60 days of her retirement. She started collecting benefits in January 1940 at age 65. She lived to be 100 years old, dying in 1975. Ida May Fuller worked for three years under the Social Security program.

"The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime, she collected a total of $22,888 in Social Security benefits, paying in $24.75." Now, it was a deal for Ida May Fuller and that's just how Ponzi schemes work! The first participants get huge payouts. That's the lure to suck everybody else in. Of course in this case, the people had no choice. Their taxes were, you know, after World War II, this stuff was all withheld because that's when withholding started was during World War II, and it proved so miraculously favorable to the government that they never rescinded the withholding law and that's how it got started. I never said that the first recipients didn't get any benefits. What sense would that make? The recipient is a beneficiary. You know, I work really hard here for you people not to listen carefully. I say what I mean. I mean what I say, and I love hearing myself say it when I say it. Now, I've just had to spend three minutes here cleaning up on the part of people who didn't hear what I actually said. They only heard what they wanted to hear me say because they think I make mistakes, but I don't.

[Ciexyz]

At least Ida was a working woman who drew some well-deserved benefits for her contribution to society. And I'm glad she lived to a good age and enjoyed that money. I don't begrudge her a dime.

It's the people who cheat on SSI and never work, even tho they could, are the ones that I begrudge the money.

[gogipper]

Some one (with a lot more math ability than I) should develop this scenario for a 20 year old entering the workforce today with an average income. How much would 12 percent of his or her salary taken over 45 years add up to? And what would be the expected payout with twenty years of life expectancy. I'll bet there's a big loss.

[Soul Seeker]

If you've nothing else to do tonight, grab a dictionary, and look up "sarcasm" and "humor" and then try to understand the concept of illustrating absurdity with further absurdity. Unless this was the intention of the original post.

[k2blader]

I think Rush is being half-serious.

It's the more-pain-later-but-at-least-it'll-be-dead option: Let SS go bankrupt.

[ProtectOurFreedom]

The Heritage Foundation Social Security Calculator will answer your questions.

[PistolPaknMama]

"I'm thinking of joining the left."

Pure sarcasm. Don't take it out of context.

[zeaal]

Interesting.

[PolishProud]

Rush Limbaugh does not like social security. He thinks there is no reason that people shouldn't get rich like him and save money for retirement. Some of us have paid a lot of money into SS and the government has an obligation to pay. Limbaugh believes its an undeserved entitlement.

Limbaugh is the reason I became a conservative, but the more I listen to him the more I realize that he's not as smart as he think he is. He a lousy debater. Michael Medved is better. Hell, he can't pick a NFL payoff winner.

Rush Limbaugh, a legend in his own mind.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Let's just don't do anything, and let's let the program blow up, implode, and go defunct, and then we're rid of it! Yeah, let's just get rid of Social Security. Let's just not do anything and get rid of the program. (Laughter).

(Humor) Like in the 'cowboy' from the movie "Dr. Strangelove", Limbaugh has learned to love the (socialist) 'bomb'.

[gogipper]

Wow, I used the social security calculator link that was posted and tweaked it to how I would advise my 20 year old son. It is really an eye opener.

---

You can expect to pay $676,864 in Social Security taxes over your working life for retirement and survivors benefits. For those taxes, you can expect to receive $3,361 a month in Social Security retirement benefits. Your rate of return under today's Social Security is -0.69%.

However, if you had been able to invest all of your Social Security taxes in a Personal Retirement Account (PRA), you would have had a total of $3,014,171 when you retired. Your monthly benefits would have been $24,553. You lost $21,192 a month.

---

Polish proud, no one has said that those of us who are upwards in age shouldn't get the benefits that have been promised. The only ones who I hear talk about reduced benefits are the liberals who think its just hokey dokey that benefits should be reduced when the system starts to go broke. To them there's no problem, the government giveth and the government taketh away.

But shouldn't we make it more fair for today's kids? And shouldn't we help develop our economy by building wealth? Read about Chile's social security reform. Its phenomenal.

[skinkinthegrass]

I would settle for gradual PRIVATIZATION. The goal should be, nevertheless, a COMPLETE privatization.

Totally agree.

[Libloather]

You can expect to pay $676,864 in Social Security taxes over your working life for retirement and survivors benefits. For those taxes, you can expect to receive $3,361 a month in Social Security retirement benefits. Your rate of return under today's Social Security is -0.69%.

And if you, heaven forbid, croak one day before the proper retirement age (which can change whenever Washington decides to change it), the gubmint keeps the loot, unless there are survivors. The total scam...

[skinkinthegrass]

Hell, he can't pick a NFL payoff winner.

That remark, will get Rush's attention.

[Shortstop7]

You are obviously clueless.

[Graybeard58]

-You are obviously clueless.

Libloather is having fun - He/she is not dumb.

[It's me]

Are you for real?

[k2blader]

SS *is* an undeserved entitlement. What are you, a Demorat?

[backhoe]

  -- The way we're going to win this debate is by using the democrat's words against themselves. We already have FDR, Reid, and Clinton on board.

 

 Bill Clinton's 1998 State Of Union Address. VIDEO (Opens door to partial privatization of Soc. Sec.?

 

 

 Dingy Harry Reid Searchlight Flashback,1998 & 99 OK to put money in private to solve Soc Sec crisis

 

 Clinton urges voters to save Social Security (1998)

 

 President Clinton's Remarks on Social Security- 2000

 

 

 Reid Supported Private Accounts in 1999 -- Especially FDR's quotes.

 

 Dick Morris: Finessing Social Security -- Anybody who didn't see it tonight, don't miss the rerun of Brit Hume's show.
They have TAPE of FDR advocating private accounts in 1935.
And, as a bonus, Harry Reid in 1999 advocating them, too!  

 

 Social Security Alternative Already Working in Texas

 

 CHILE RETIREMENT ACCOUNTS On Social Security and Pension Reform: Lessons from Other Countries

Clinton said we must "SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY" [Some links]

Clinton said we must "SAVE SOCIAL SECURITY" [Some links]

[LibertarianInExile]

If either side was humane at all, we'd be talking about ending the system entirely. Stealing Americans' money so the government can pay for those who didn't prepare for their own retirements or insure themselves for catastropic illness is wrong, no matter how much we think those people deserve charity. Forcing charity from people who would spend that money on other things isn't charity at all--it's extortion.

[goldstategop]

He's right. Come to think of, its a good idea. No more government handouts to worry about! (laughing) Perhaps we should all sign up at DU. (laughing harder)

Denny Crane: "There are two places to find the truth. First God and then Fox News."