I have to 'get over it' ???
Yes, you have to get over it. Until the system is changed, which I'll be happy to join you to support, this is how things work. It's how it has worked for every worker and retiree over the last 70 years.
The parents of the retirees of today could have said the same thing.
and indeed they shouldve, back to the point of buying the initial lie...it shouldve never been implenmented, but the fact that we are screaming about it today, and being rebuffed, is an indicator of how far entrenched the poisin pill has become...'granny *needs* her check, so denying it is somehow more immoral than thieving from myself and my kids ???
There are certain things you're going to have to come to grips with. I don't know of another time since 1933, when the Republicans were the majority of the House and Senate, and were ensconsed in the White House as welll, until January 2001, until January 2007. We have had one six year window that I know of. Not I or any other Conservative can get our elected officials to jump to our tune. Please explain why you think it's rational to blame Social Security on retirees.
I can see why you would take Bush to task, for not addressing it when he had the chance, but Bush didn't dance to my tune. I have wanted to cut off freebies to illegal immigrants since the mid-1980s. Have I gotten my way on that issue? I would like to see almost all government social programs either gutted, or turned into privately held funds controlled by the people who paid them in.
As for defending the Social Security system we have, I'm not defending it. I am defending people who paid into it, and have every right to think the retirement they were promised, will be there.
Do you think the idea that Social Security won't be there when you retire, is something new? It's not. People have been saying that since before I got my first job. You and your children are not being any more unfairly treated than anyone else who held a job post 1933.
I want to see Social Security privatized. What you and your kids pay in, should be placed in a fund you control. Until we get that up and working, we're stuck with what we have.
<>What other rational thing do you suggest?
its theft, its the truth, why NOT say it to protect my kids ???
I know this is going to be a big blow to you, but the whole world for everyone esle but you, does not revolve around you and your children. Theft is taking funds and not returning them as promised. It would be theft if Social Security payments were to cease today. It is not theft, taking the money with the proviseo that you and your children will have Social Security too when you retire.
Those caught in it, are not evil. Those on the bottom rung today are being no more absued than today's retirees were when they were on the bottom rung.
didnt say the recipients today are evil, just selfish in that they got pwned, and want to pass the literal buck to my kids...
Glad you didn't say they were evil. Whew! The glowing descriptions you provide, pretty much infer they are evil. I disagree.
As for them getting owned, that's just silly. As Conservatives we rail on many things. Is it easy to get things changed? No. The Social Security system was set up long before I was born. There are reasons why it wasn't over-turned. They are political, and the rank and file had no chance whatsoever to change that system. The Democrats will never allow that system to be changed for the better, if they have any say whatsoever. You should know that.
who, because of increasing demographics and insolvency are indeed MUCH more abused if they hafta shoullder the burden...
We all had to shoulder the burden. I got paid a lot less money when I was younger. I was still paying into the system. Your kids get higher pay than we did, they're also paying out higher rates than we did. You didn't know this? Really?
I think it's more productive to consider alternatives to what S.S. is today, and get some form of privitization implemented.
how will that work in a FRee country ??? we agree that the scheme shouldve never began in the first place, so how will entrustin grafternment with future dollars make it better ???
If the plan is devised right, and the funds are placed under the control of the individuals paying in, I envision a way for folks to save a ton of money across the board.
This would wrap a housing fund, your retirement, your healthcare, your vehicle insurance, your life insurance, your mortage insurance, your unemployment insurance, and probably other similar outlays I've overlooked in a fund to be administered by you. You would be self insuring for most everything by the time you were thirty, some of it much earlier. You would be able to take out funds to place a down payment on a home. You wouldn't be paying out monthly payments for the above things (other than you home mortgage of course), or you would be paying out very little for a comprehensive catastropic plan, that would only kick in, if you had a major loss. The rates would be very reasonable, as compared to thousands of dollars at present.
how about this, let me OUT of the conn game ???
Until the current system is converted to something along the lines I have outlined above, that's not going to be possible. I wish it were. It's out of my control. We have responsibilites to people who paid into the system for 45 to 50 years, and that's a fact adults have to come to terms with.
I, and my kids, can look after ourselves and know how to better prepare for our future, and if we fail, then tough shit to us, FReedom aint a guaranteed check...
You can wax rhapsodic until your lips are raw, cracked, and bleeding, you're in the tail end of a line of people who have been belching about Social Security probably since it's inception. IMO, the system should have been set up along the lines of what I outlined above from the get go. It wasn't. We have to deal with the idiocy that was devised. That's a sad fact of life.
Here you do what I constantly find myself doing, referencing a 'slush fund' or 'S.S. pool of funds'
not at all...there never was or will be any contract for ss dollars, or a 'lockbox' regardless of where the money is placed...it always was and always will be a 'slush fund' of monopoly money for which pols buy favors and votes...its all general revenue/tax receipts, just a matter of when the physical take ends and the IOUs begin...the more strongarmed robbery dollars, the less 'borrowing' has to be done...ie more graft...
You were right the first and third times. There never was or will be a lockbox. There is no social security slush fund, just a general revenue/tax receipt fund.
And becoming involved with an effort to fix this situation is to be admired. It is not to be admired to trash people whose careers are at an end, for playing by the same rules they were required to their entire working lives.
there aint no 'fix' to the mob...sorry, but its not trashing granny to tell her shes been robbed and *her* money is gone...
Okay, then you want to go on the record as stating that probably in excess of 50 million U.S. Citizens who paid into Social Security for 45 to 50 years, should have their entire income cut off immediately, so you and your children won't have to pay out $50 to $100 dollars per pay check.
coming to my house and telling my children that they must reimburse her gullibility is an insult to my kids...i have some pity for granny, but not enuff to starve my kids...
You're kids are starving because you pay out $50 to $100 dollars per pay check? Really?
granny shouldve stood up when she had the energy, instead of allowing the scam to continue...
So what you're saying, is that everything you ever wanted government to do, happened just the way you wanted right?
You don't like Social Security, yet you're not to blame, Granny is. Have you stood up and forced change in the Social Security system?
After all, you're implying that with just a little effort, Granny could have changed the system for the better. What alternate universe are you living in?
And the people who are retired now, didn't steal any cash either. A lot of money was taken from them over the years also.
and again, they chose to play the game, when the demographics were trending to insolvency...
You are one dense individual. Workers are forced to pay Social Security withholding. What choice did any older person today have when they were working, when the Democrats held at least the House, the Senate, or the White House since Social Security began? Before you go shooting off your mouth again, explain the process you think people should have taken to fix this.
roughly half of em supported more guv largess and debt that stole the money...my kids didnt have that option and wont with the numbers we know to be true today...
I'm honestly not quite sure what you're saying here, but I believe you are infering the retirees today supported more freebies for themselves, even though they knew the system was upside down.
Well, I'm not retired yet, but I was furious with Bush pushing through the Medicare Part-D provision. How far did that get me? I can't even control our own side.
We can't even keep a guy like Obama out of the White House, and you're pissed that today's seniors didn't force a change in Social Security?
I'm sorry you don't like the current system. I don't like it either. I just don't think you cut off 50 million people cold turkey, even if the current system does suck. That would be tantamount to murdering them. I'm not on board for that. And spewing incessantly against Seniors, is not helping anyone.