I Earned These Entitlements

Redding Record Searchlight ^ | August 29, 2011 | John Cleckner

[Poundstone]

I earned these 'entitlements'

I believe that most citizens do not understand what a federal entitlement program is. There are earned entitlements versus a special government entitlement that is given to an individual who needs assistance that is mandated by law.

What is a government entitlement? Note below that some are free and some are not! Why the government is lumping these programs together is beyond me: Only Congress would think this was a proper thing to do. How can a program like military retirement be linked with food stamps? The programs I am associated with should never be diminished by the federal government because they are either paid for by me and my wife or I have earned them. Most citizens believe all the federal entitlements are giveaway social programs and that is not true.

[sten]

That $350K you paid in has been long gone. It was gone as soon as you sent it in. It was used to pay people who were on SS while you were working. And the beat goes on. Not your fault, for sure. But the idea that the money was in an account or something like that and was "raided" or "spent" by politicians is nonsense. SS doesn't work because it's a pyramid scheme. Always has been. Again, that's not your fault. But eventually they're going to have to come clean. And we the tax payers will be the ones getting screwed.

actually, it wasn't until LBJ put the social security fund into general spending that it became insolvent.

15% of your income held aside for 45 yrs is enough to receive a happy monthly check... if they didn't steal it. which they did.

why no one ever demand these people be placed in jail is beyond me

[sten]

if you paid into social security, you are due money out. that’s how it’s supposed to work and not a government pension.

government pensions are for government employees .. in addition to their social security payouts

there is no reason, besides for police, fire, and military, for people to receive a pension. were they not paid along the way? if not.. we can talk. but the vast majority, if not all, were paid along the way. many being pair 6-figure salaries into retirement.

[Steel Wolf]

A well-reasoned reminder that some "entitlements" are OWED to recipients due to what the recipient has put in. Such things as federal pensions (civilian and military), SS, etc. It's not welfare or Medicaid.

The bottom line is that 'entitlements' are grouped together due to their financial similarity, not their moral ones.

That said, wither or not owed or earned, our entitlement culture is destroying America, and that includes things like military pensions. We simply can't afford for people to retire when they're 38, and live off with a full set of government provided benefits while they go off and have second careers with government provided skills, retraining, housing assistance, etc.

The military pension system was designed when the military didn't pay well, the skills taught didn't really apply on the outside, and people didn't live as long. These days, the military pays in the top quarter percentile for a high school graduate or college graduate. Those personnel costs are devouring the military budget.

And that's just one example of the most moral and valid entitlements. A huge amount of money the government doesn't have, paid out to people that don't genuinely need it.

If you look at other entitlements and cash handouts, it's not even trading valiant military service abroad for a comfortable retirement. BUT, the net effect is the same. A lot of small, noble sounding programs have grown and grown and grown. People come to expect them as groups, which layers heavy monetary demands on the state coffers forever.

Being former military, I understand the argument for military retirement, but none of these other programs are without much larger groups of supporters who all make their own cases for why they deserve their particular pet funding source, or what moral imperative a just society has to pay it. So, the idea that you can somehow get the government to start discerning between items on a budget due to a moral need and not a fiscal / political one is pretty much inoperative.

[icanhasbailout]

I see. So you think that a Ponzi scheme entitlement that was known to be such a full generation ago and nothing at all was done about it is equivalent to inalienable property rights? leftwingwhiners.com is thataway --->

[CSM]

I’ll go even further. If the gov’t let me opt out of paying the system today, therefore opting out of any future payments recieved, in return they can keep all of my payments that I have made n the past! I am a little more than halfway through my working life span and I can still make more in the long run!

[MizSterious]

For your information, social security was an investment of my own money (and taken by force I might add). Retirement is not the same as welfare. How obtuse of you to even suggest it.

[icanhasbailout]

Yes ditto that. I am fully willing to write off everything already stolen from me (I have already, actually). Get me out of this Ponzi scheme, I - unlike others in this conversation - do not think it justified to steal from someone else to make up for what was stolen from me.

[FreedomNotSafety]

You are not “owed” anything. It is immoral (not to mention legally dubious) for one generation to bind the next for its debts. What politics give...politics can take. SS is a simple and straightforward politically calculated Ponzi scheme. Your ignorance of Ponzi schemes and reliance on the promise of politicians does not encumber the rights of my children and grand children to decide NOT to pay your entitlements.

If you are dependent on SS then you are dependent on good ole’ Uncle Sugar and you are not Free. You will have to vote the vested interest ticket and keep politicians in office who promise to pay your benefits regardless the cost to everyone else. Social Security is pure looting. Take from today’s workers and give to today’s recipient. That’s all that it ever was and all that it ever will be.

What you receive today is not based on any thing other than politics. If your generation has the political clout than you can extract whatever you want from some other generation.

There is no basis in law for calling SS a trust fund or giving any legally enforceable claim to future benefits. It is also not some sacred inter-generational promise since future generations were not even alive when the promise was made. It also is not due and payable because you were promised by some politician that it would be there for you. If you have a problem with that then look up the person who made the promise and make him pay.

At some point the amount of taxation (not contributions) needed will exceed what the workers are willing to pay or the economy can absorb and then changes will start.

So, start with means testing so that we can define SS for what it is...WELFARE. Then cut off benefits after a date say 20 years from now. In reality its what most people under 50 expect anyway.

Until then be grateful for every dollar you collect.

[esquirette]

If they had let me keep my own money, I would be rich and out of debt. This deduction from my wages, if not repaid to me with interest, is a theft under any statute, state or federal.

[CSM]

“Oh, wait, you retirement thieves don’t want to do that either.”

I find it rather sad that you consider SSIP to be your “retirement.” Was it lack of planning on your part or an unwillingness to make sacrifices throughout your life that prevented you from creating your OWN actual retirement account?

Social security is nothing more than a tax on workers and employers that are then made to recipients as welfare payments. That is it. There is no investment, no returns on money, nothing but a transfer of wealth from one generation to another. The fact that it happened to you throughout your life is a different discussion, however you considering it your retirement is just another sign of our society continually creating more and more people that are dependent on the federal government.

How free is any individual that depends on the federal government for their monthly stipend?

[rogue yam]

You are talking nonsense.

All Social Security taxes previously paid by you and your employers were not invested in anything.

They were spent. They are already gone.

How obtuse of you to not realize this.

[MizSterious]

No, that is not left wing thinking. It is honorable thinking. Once upon a time, and mind you, I AM older than dirt, a person’s word was golden. You might think that is terribly naive, but in those days, people actually did honor contracts and promises for the most part. Honor was something of value, too, and most of us would have rather starved than ever take welfare, which was considered a disgrace and proof of failure to support oneself.

Now along come the boomers or whatever they call them, and the next thing you know they’re like a bunch of vultures hovering over the elderly, waiting to pick our bones dry, and worse, carping at us because we use up too many resources by living.

I find it difficult if not impossible to be civil to such scum.

[Steel Wolf]

Ah, yet another “conservative” who wants to ignore contracts. Free Republic is becoming increasingly un-conservative.

This problem has two sides.

What your generation was promised is expected to be paid. It's just assumed that you'll get your money.

What my generation was promised ... is gone. We're expected to pay for your entitlements and receive nothing for ourselves.

What my kids were promised, well they're just screwed. They're going to be handed a country that's cannibalizing itself to support suicidal social contracts.

That's not your fault, but that's the situation, and it's fundamentally wrong.

[Mr. Bird]

I hate the social security scheme. But I am finding it a bit hard to believe posters who are claiming they put in "$250-350K" over their lifetimes. The current cap is an outlay of less than $7k. In 1970, it was less than $400. In 1990, it was just shy of $4k. In fact, someone who has been gainfully employed for the past 45 years and paid the maximum would have paid in around $130k. Of course, the self employed would have paid in double that.

$130k is a lot of dough. Add in the lost interest and/or the opportunity for capital gain, and it's huge. But there's no reason to state that we've paid in more than we actually have. Such sloppiness unnecessarily undercuts the legitimate arguments against SS.

[rogue yam]

This deduction from my wages, if not repaid to me with interest, is a theft under any statute, state or federal.

Some people read this and think "Wow! This is an utterly irrational, ignorant, and unintelligent thing for someone to say!"

And they're right.

[freedomlover]

if some greedy ass, get reelected at all costs politican spent it, that is not my problem

---

Whose problem is it then? Mine? My kids? I don’t think so.

If somebody (in this case, the greedy ass politician) owes you money and doesn’t have it, it most certainly IS your problem.

---

What an “insensitive”, but TRUE, statement. The ones that let the Ponzi scheme thrive are the problem. The seniors that insisted on SS and Medicare having “Third Rail” status are the problem.

The S-— has hit the fan, folks. Watch how the EU deal with things, and then California. If we dont learn from that history then WE are the problem.

[Domalais]

The politicians you voted for spent your money. Take it up with them.

[Captain Peter Blood]

What people do not understand about SS and Medicare is that you are not paying into the system into your own account.
What you are paying is to support those getting those benefits.
You have been supporting grandparents and parents on this system. They have and will have gotten the best of the services.
The rest of us on the other hand will probably get none or next to none. The mathematics of situation are what it is.
There are not enough workers paying into the system to support the massive number of people that are hitting and will hit SS & Medicare.
The Default and/or a collapse is coming. Don't think you or anyone else is going to get any of the monies back that were paid in, it's gone and spent.

[icanhasbailout]

I was not a party to those contracts and promises. A contract is a voluntary engagement. Nobody asked for my signature and I have never given my consent. Thus I am not a party to the contract that the politicians you voted for broke, and trying to recoup your losses at my expense makes you a thief.

That's practically the definition of left wing. That is the essence of Marxism - forced, coercive redistribution.

The only way you get a dime out of me is if you stick a gun in my face and steal it from me. And then I will decide whether I am willing to give my life to protect my inalienable right to my own property.

Are you willing to kill me to get what you think you deserve? You may just have to.

[rogue yam]

Federal employee pensions and Social Security are two entirely separate things.

Legally, rationally, and morally.