Posted on 04/18/2005 5:55:37 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Brenda Ellis's day begins at 6:30 a.m., when she rousts her 11-year-old son, Imani, from bed, hustles him into the kitchen for breakfast and to the school bus by 7. Tianna, 13, and Dikia, 17, quickly follow. Then she's off, some days to a substitute-teaching job in Prince George's County, others to tax clinics for the working poor, where she is earning credit for a hoped-for career in accounting.
If it's a school night for her, Ellis, 41, rushes home to her Landover apartment to quickly fix dinner before bolting out at 5:45 p.m. for the half-hour drive to Strayer University and an accounting class that ends at 9. If it's tax time, she may not leave the clinic until 10. She kisses the kids goodnight, checks their homework, does a little of her own, has dinner, then climbs into bed by midnight, to start over 6 1/2 hours later.
--snip--
"I don't know what's going on with it," she said one night at a tax clinic in Southeast D.C. "I just know I have these three accounts, so I just say, 'Let's hope and pray. Let's hope and pray it's not going into Enron. Let's hope and pray it's not going into Tyco.' It's just hard to absorb all I'm supposed to absorb."
In his push to add individual investment accounts to Social Security, President Bush maintains that people like Ellis have the most to gain -- the working poor, living from paycheck to paycheck. With such accounts, they would have a nest egg they could invest in stocks and bonds and watch grow with the benefit of compounding interest. For the first time, they would have a sense of ownership and a stake in their nation's economy and financial markets.
(Excerpt) Read more at story.news.yahoo.com ...
http://mensnewsdaily.com/blog/minton/2005/04/totalization-with-mexico-could-total.html
Sorry, but there's is no such thing as "working poor".
THere's alot of people that make anywhere from 30,000-100,000 that live paycheck to paycheck. Cry me a river. Either your stupid or not. If your smart, you want to try something new and maybe have a social security when your older. It doesn't hurt to try something new.
It's only a tough sell to the ignorant, and to people who don't even want there to be a private sector. Namely the democratic party.
Obviously, investing in a private retirement account would solve her problems.
My dying mother still would not admit that socialism is GOD AWFUL even as she waited for SS disability to approve her "claim". Well, six months later, it didn't happen.
Amazing how I differ from my family.
It is a tough sell to the stupid and lazy who would rather have next to nothing than to ever have to think about it and take responsibility for themselves.
Sorry I missed it in the article ... where's Dad ?
It wouldn't do much today, but in 25 years it would be the difference between living below the poverty level (and if you relied on SS for your entire retirement, you screwed up royally) and living comfortably. P.S. Thank you for your service to our country 16 years before I was even born.
It would help her family in the long term. Obviously anything is better than letting the fat cats in congress spend 12.4 percent of her income on earmarks.
The government confiscates 12.4% of Brendas income and sends it to my mother. In return she receives a revokeable promise from that same government that when she is old enough they will confiscate money from someone else's salary and give it to her. Private accounts would allow Brenda to keep a tiny portion of that 12.4% for herself and even pass it on to her heirs if she happened to expire before the government's approved age. How can that be a bad thing?
THe population is becoming a top heavy pyramid and the scheme can't perform to historic standards, that's the bottom line.
The children's names are: Imani, Tianna, and Dikia. You have to ask where Dad is? Or maybe we should be asking "Where are Dads?"
These "working poor" are beyond selfish. As long as they get their who cares about their kids!!! Yes, we should all remain poor and destitute because these fools make such poor choices.
I believe the number talked about was a mere 3% of the 12%. What you never hear spoken about is the fact that the 3% eventually gets pumped back into the economy. A portion of that is regained by the government in taxes. All of it is out of the hands of the government where the value of that money is decaying due to inflation and lack of investing.
The more one looks at how bad an idea Social Security is the more one winces at the thought of it.
Like another poster said. If you are relying on Social Security as you only means of retirement you are already doomed. Personally I will feel no pity for you when you are dumpster diving for your meals.
Even as I type my wife is inviting a house full of liberals over for a party.
Once again the choice is stifle, hide, or conflict.
"I don't want to have to think, I just want a tiny govt. check each month."
I see. Millions of intelligent people are going to be denied the opportunity to manage a portion of their Socialist Security withholdings because of a few twits like Brenda Ellis.
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.