Posted on 01/31/2005 4:04:36 PM PST by qam1
Flora Asa of Dowell and her late husband worked all their lives--she in the nursing profession, he at the Majestic Mine east of Du Quoin. As President Bush pushes to hand part of America's retirement system over to Wall Street, here's Mrs. Asa's response: "Stop flirting with our money and keep your hands off."
If given a choice, three in five Americans would strengthen Social Security with as few changes as possible, according to a poll conducted by AARP (American Association of Retired Persons). The poll also found that the more Americans learn about diverting Social Security taxes into private investment accounts, the less they like the idea.
Two-thirds (66%) of Americans age 30 and above support keeping Social Security as is, including 6 in 10 (62%) Gen Xers ages 30-39. A similar number of leading edge boomers ages 50-59 (65%) and a clear majority (57%) of boomers ages 40-49 agreed.
"A majority of Americans, even younger adults, would like to see Social Security continued substantially as it is today," said AARP CEO Bill Novelli.
Mrs. Asa goes onto say, "I don't see anything--any reason--to change it because once they change it, they'll want to change it again and there won't be anything left. That's my version."
"If they don't raise it (benefits), they just need to leave it alone," she said.
She continues, "I don't believe in having the people from places like Mexico come here and get a (social security) card and do their thing when they haven't paid into anything," she said. "The government just keeps borrowing and borrowing and putting it in different places. We won't have anything one of these days," she said.
Thelma Pettiford of Du Quoin is 84 years old and remembers when you could collect full social security at 62 or at 55 if you were handicapped. "I don't think we need to change either. Keep it the way it is," she said. "I receive it, so do my sister and two brothers and we need to leave it alone," she said, partially dependent upon the retirement income. Another retiree, Hilda Higgerson, also agreed.
"Social Security does need to be strengthened and people accept that fact. On one hand, the public has been told to have doubts about their Social Security benefits. On the other hand, they expect the government to deliver on its obligation to honor those benefits." Novelli added.
According to the AARP, more than two-thirds of people under age 50 are not confident that Social Security will be there for them, the poll indicates. But a strong majority of all those polled (83%), agreed that Social Security should be strengthened rather than replaced, and that private accounts would hurt Social Security (60%).
"Most people who are not retired or close to retirement know little about Social Security," said Novelli. "A political undercurrent of uncertainty contributes to support for investing a portion of their Social Security taxes in the stock market. But support falls away the more people learn about private accounts and how they might work," he concluded.
After initial supporters had been exposed to all of the consequences of diverting payroll taxes to fund private accounts, only 10% still favored them. This means, in the context of the entire survey sample, that only 5% favored this approach once the consequences were evident.
The survey found that 43% initially supported the concept of diverting payroll contributions to fund private accounts. But barely a quarter continued to support private accounts if it meant a lower Social Security benefit in retirement. The $1 trillion in additional debt in order to pay Social Security benefits to current beneficiaries reduced support to less than a fifth (18%) of respondents. Leaving responsibility for this debt and for Social Security's current shortfall to our children reduced support even more, to 17%.
"A lack of knowledge about private accounts is a dangerous thing," explained Novelli. When people are exposed to the full details of private accounts, support falls to only 5 percent."
The telephone poll of 1,500 adults aged 30 and over was conducted for AARP by Roper Public Affairs the end of December. The margin of error is 3 percentage points.
I don't care what else happens to SS, as long as I get my share.
of course... the biased question I would love to ask:
Do you support the failed stagnating socialistic Social Security system, wherby the government forcibly and criminaly steals money from it's own citizens and then returns only a tiny fraction of it upon their retirement?
If you answer no to the previous question, would you support a nationwide refusal to pay ANY payroll tax, on the grounds that it is unconstitutional, anti-thetical to liberty, and unamerican?
My answers would be no and yes, respectively. :)
We were foolish enough to put some of our money in an AARP fund. It turned out to be our worst performing investment by far.
ARRP is nothing but a big insurance company. It is sure not a charity.
Here's reality Mrs. Asa: SS is a TAX and the govt owes you nothing.
NOTHING! The SSA can CHOOSE or DECIDE to give you money based on the laws written by Congress which instruct them to do this or that.
Most Gen Xers who I know are vehemently in favor of Social Security privatization. We're the ones who see our Social Security taxes drained into a system from which we'll never see a dime. I contribute to my 401(k) and have a pension, but I'd still like to be able to keep my money and invest it how I see fit.
I'm someone who just turned 50... and will NEVER, I repeat, NEVER join AARP. 'Eff the AARP.
Good for you,kid! LOL
But even from this report, the alert reader can tell that this is a "push poll." Through false information at the people being polled, and see how their viewpoints can be shoved around.
Isn't it time for a Freep of AARP?
Congressman Billybob [TWO different columns this week]
Click for latest, "Homer, Shakespeare, Pope, and George Bush"
AARP should stay out of this, as all of their members are over 50 and will not be affected.
"AARP should stay out of this, as all of their members are over 50 and will not be affected."
EXACTLY!
The system is set to go bankrupt around 2024 as I understand it...which is nearly to the year when my Parents would "retire". If we let these bozo detractors keep it down, they're essentially going to screw anyone who is under 50 right now.
"...they expect the government to deliver on its obligation to honor those benefits."
Government has no obligation to open its coffers to all comers.
This was a push poll designed to scare everyone away from private accounts. You can tell by the 10% figure quoted regarding those who continued to be for them after being told all the 'negatives.' I don't buy their numbers and I don't buy their propaganda. I think Gen X leans toward WANTING Social Security as is, but knows it is going to be scrapped just as we're old enough to get in on stealing from our kids. And I'm not among that group that wants its crack at the till--I want government out of the extortion racket.
In fact, I am disappointed that Dubya didn't offer to buy out Social Security outright and end the leftist redistributionism. But I guess young people are not going to win regardless of what the government promises this time, as usual. At least we'll get a bone tossed our way as the ship continues sinking. "Private accounts" are going to mean SOMETHING isn't taxed for a while and there is at least nominally a real 'lockbox,' which is better than the funds just being government money to blow.
AARPS POLL DID NOT INCLUDE YOUNG PEOPLE......I AM 62YRS. WORKED HARD FOR MANY YEARS, GET MY HUSBANDS SS.....TOTAL $800.00/M0. IF MY HUSBAND HAD BEEN ALLOWED TO INVEST HIS SS MONEY I WOULD PROBABLY GET $2,000.00/MO.....TEXAS STATE EMPLOYEES WERE ALLOWED TO INVEST THEIR SS MONEY AND THEY RECEIVE BIG CHECKS......THE AARP IS JUS ANOTHER LIBERAL BIASED NUT CASE AND DONOT REPRESENT ALL 50+ AMERICANS...I SAY GIVE THE YOUNG PEOPLE A CHANCE TO INVEST THEIR MONEY. I WANT MY CHILDREN AND GRAND CHILDREN TO HAVE MORE THAN $800.00 AT RETIREMENT......................
I have been ranting about nonprofits here for years. There are now over 1 million nonprofits in America. Too many of them are in business to either enrich their handlers an/or push their political agenda.
AARP should have to operate as a regular for-profit corporation and not be subsidized by the taxpayer. So should ADL, PETA, Consumers Union, etc, etc, etc. Oh, and that includes Judicial Watch. Yea, Judicial Watch, who over the past 7 or so years has taken in 75+ million dollars. Have they ever won a court case?
Let these outfits pay taxes and for their own dang postage just like any other business!
Why am I not surprised.
This is like a Greenpeace poll on Global Warming, Or an American Cancer Society poll on smoking bans, Moveon.org poll on Iraq, etc
http://www.usanext.org/full_story.cfm?article_id=97&category_id=3
The following are examples of the misleading methodology:
The survey includes no respondents under age 30 even though voters age 18 to 29 made up 17% of the 2004 electorate.
Those age 60+ constitute 34% of the sample, yet they were 24% of the 2004 electorate.
20.7% of adults receive Social Security benefits. Yet 33% of AARP’s respondents report receiving benefits. This biases results against plans to strengthen Social Security since all surveys show resistance to change among Social Security recipients.
AARP’s sample gives Democrats a six-point advantage over Republicans (37% to 31%). However, the parties made up equal percentages of the 2004 electorate (37% to 37%).
AARP finds a right direction/wrong track margin of 32% to 60%, far below those of other recent major surveys: 46% to 53% in January 3-5 Gallup survey; 44% to 51% in January 3-5 AP/Ipsos survey; and 40% to 54% in January 5-9 Pew survey. This indicates a sample far more Democrat than are American adults.
A 47% to 48% margin trust the President, similar to the Democratic party’s 48% to 43%.
AARP finds all those age 30+ holding a favorable view of Social Security. Yet other national surveys have shown those under 55 hold a decidedly unfavorable view, again raising questions about the partisan composition of AARP’s survey.
AARP asks respondents whether they favor or oppose allowing workers to invest some of their Social Security payroll taxes in the stock market -- never mentioning other options, such as bonds, that are seen as safe and win higher support. Even with the slanted wording, a majority of those under 50 favor the idea, and even with the skewed sample composition, the idea only loses by a slim 43% to 48%.
AARP asks respondents whether they agree “Social Security should be protected as a guaranteed benefit, and should not be privatized.” Yet no one has proposed privatizing the Social Security system and Social Security benefits are not now “guaranteed.”
AARP also asks whether respondents agree “We have a responsibility to meet our obligation to people currently on Social Security to protect their benefits.” This clearly implies to respondents that personal account proposals threaten retirees’ benefits even though the President and others have emphasized that no proposal would affect retirees or those near retirement.
A A R P
American A**holes Resisting Progress
I'd love to see the questions.
AARP should have to operate as a regular for-profit corporation and not be subsidized by the taxpayer. So should ADL, PETA, Consumers Union, etc, etc, etc. Oh, and that includes Judicial Watch. Yea, Judicial Watch, who over the past 7 or so years has taken in 75+ million dollars.
---
Eh? AARP is taxpayer subsidized? Can you elaborate?
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.