Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

I don't altogether agree with Kudlow on this but he makes some good points. We forty somethings(and under) are going to have to pay for the boomers and those before who will have put in less than they took out. What Kudlow doesn't acknowledge is that despite FDR's rhetoric, he fully expected that SS would end up the way is has, with everyone completely beholding to the federal government as that one demographic everyone intends to be a member of...old age. That's why dims hate any talk of caps, either on income or benefits or about private accounts. It changes SS from a societywide income stream that obligates the people to depend on it, to a "poor old people's" tax which is what it should be. If you want big government that pervades every aspect of society you have to maintain that EVERYONE needs social security. Tax everyone but only return benefits to an arbitrary income bracket and you break the socialist chain. It becomes just another tax to help those weakest in society which we are used to. I am far from a tax the rich voter but hell Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are entitled to BIG SS checks and retiring Boomers are going to be the richest demographic in US history. Why should they want, need, or deserve SS? And as cons how can we support the current system as it now stands when we know it drives people from the cradle to the grave into the hands of big government largess.
1 posted on 11/26/2007 3:00:13 PM PST by Delacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Delacon
Why should they want, need, or deserve SS?

Because, damn it, we paid for it!

2 posted on 11/26/2007 3:05:31 PM PST by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

We forty somethings(and under) are going to have to pay for the boomers and those before who will have put in less than they took out.

As a boomer who has maxed out payments into SS for 30 plus years I won’t recover what I put in if you also figure the interest I would have earned on those dollars at just 5%. You also have to consider my employers has matched my contribution over the same period.
No I won’t be seeing everything I put in.
The generation before us did take more than they ever contributed.


5 posted on 11/26/2007 3:15:41 PM PST by Recon Dad (Marine Spec Ops Dad)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

The longtime Social Security Administration commissioner Robert M. Ball wrote on this page recently that “it’s the essence of responsibility, in my view, to insist on no benefit cuts...”

Hmmmmm.... That’s what we’ve been doing for 74 years. So far, it’s not worked, and in fact, that’s what got us into the mess to begin with.


6 posted on 11/26/2007 3:18:13 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

The FDR way was to set the age of retirement a couple of years past the estimated life expectancy.

Raise the retirement afe to 80 and SS is fixed!


7 posted on 11/26/2007 3:19:42 PM PST by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon
Franklin Roosevelt explicitly limited Social Security's commitment, saying in August 1935 that the goal of the new program was not a total pension but "some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family."

In other words, it will buy your food, but it won't pay your rent. Were that goal kept in mind, the fix would be easy.

Rent can be dealt with by your subprime mortgage bailout check, delivered under separate cover. ;)

8 posted on 11/26/2007 3:20:12 PM PST by Mr. Jeeves ("Wise men don't need to debate; men who need to debate are not wise." -- Tao Te Ching)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

“The Social Security program might have been able to afford this if American families had continued to produce three, four or five children. But they did not. Families shrank.”

So the New Dealers assumed in their calculations that we would have exponential population growth from then to infinity? Not the brightest bunch afterall.


9 posted on 11/26/2007 3:24:42 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

“Americans have an exaggerated sense of respect for the New Dealers who created the original Social Security model. Questioning them or the Great Society heroes seems impolite.”

Only if you are a rabid liberal.


10 posted on 11/26/2007 3:25:45 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon
Left unsaid is that monthly SS payroll deductions have exceeded payments to seniors for decades. Rats and pubbies alike rolled the excess into the general fund. Poof! Gone.

The very same congressional blowhards that held Enron up for ridicule and prosecution have misappropriated many thousands of times more. Commingling of funds is illegal, unless one is congressman. D@amn them all.

17 posted on 11/26/2007 3:37:53 PM PST by Jacquerie (Terry Schiavo - Murdered by Judge George Greer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon
Monthly benefits didn’t start until 1940

We had a built in population of approx 9 million that were 65 or older. by the time 1940 rolled around.

If you were born in 1900, your life expectancy was approx 48 years.

If you were born in 1950, your life expectancy is approx 66 years.

Seems to me the dead was suppose to pay for those who continued to live.

Probably would have worked too, except they turned SS into a bazillion other things unrelated to pure retirement.

Now, with that said, my life expectancy, after having attained my current age, is,. approx 73 years...
so...all you youngsters...get back to work !!

27 posted on 11/26/2007 4:19:46 PM PST by stylin19a
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

Lord aren’t we sounding like a bunch of govt addicted liberals. “I paid in, I want whats mine!”. Believe me I do speak with the sanctimony of someone who was born on the cusp of the boomer generation and who knows that all the boomers who have sucked SS dry will have mostly died off and all the resentfull Xers and younger generations will hold a political block that will make sure that whatever changes that havent already happen will screw me to the wall when I reach retirement. That said, the first thing a con should be thinking is how we can break ourselves from the SS system entirely, NOT how we can get out what we paid in. Our best objective as cons is to aspire to leave a legasy of good government. Thats what cons do.


29 posted on 11/26/2007 4:26:55 PM PST by Delacon (“The attempt to make heaven on earth invariably produces hell ” Karl Popper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

I’m more in favor of confiscating all money, property and goods of the crooked politicians and bureaucrats that stole the SS money and then bringing back slavery and making these crooks work for the victims until they dropped dead. And after they dropped dead I’d hang them.

But that’s just me.

I’m also in favor of digging up FDR and hanging him, too.


34 posted on 11/26/2007 4:54:58 PM PST by sergeantdave (The majority of Michigan voters are that stupid and the condition is incipient and growing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To read........


39 posted on 11/26/2007 5:03:54 PM PST by Rick_Michael (The Anti-Federalists failed....so will the Anti-Frederalists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

Fix it the Republican, conservative way. Cut Social Security taxes. Cutting taxes raises revenue, right? I don’t understand why no GOP Presidential candidate is proposing this. It’s the only way to fix Social Security.


45 posted on 11/26/2007 5:30:24 PM PST by brightonbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon
I scrolled quickly through all the comments and didn't see Fred Thompson's name mentioned once.

Ms. Shlaes was referring to Thompson's proposal to peg S.S. increases to the CPI instead of to the wage index without naming him.

I fear that no one's paying attention to the issues.

Not a good omen for Mr. Thompson -- abortion and speculation on his belly-fire is so much more popular, I guess.

51 posted on 11/26/2007 6:38:03 PM PST by BfloGuy (It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we can expect . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

wanna fix it? Take all the immigrants that are on it and tell them NO, you haven’t paid anything into the program to deserve anything out. Many of these guys take their work record from their home country and come here getting FREE benes with no input, and out govt cries there is NO money.


53 posted on 11/26/2007 7:17:43 PM PST by television is just wrong (deport all illegal aliens NOW. Put all AMERICANS TO WORK FIRST. END Welfare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Delacon

You can’t “fix” Social Security. It’s a worthless ponzi scheme that was destined to failure from day one simply because it can’t work and politicians control it with their meddling.

Any talk of “fixing” or “changing” is ridiculous. It should be eliminated. Period.


60 posted on 11/26/2007 9:25:18 PM PST by Fledermaus (The Dark Knight is coming !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson