After I take my money from 50 years of deductions, calculated at what interest I Would have earned if the government let me save and invest it, then I will be taking someone else’s’ money - realistically that’s about 10’years from now if I live that long
Yeah, I am entitled to that because the government made a contract with me, just like an insurance company - which also pays benefits with OPM ( (you don’t have or intend to ever collect on insurance, right? Because you’ll be taking other peoples’ money)
You might not like social security but too bad.
You have the same contract now , which is why you have to pay into the system
but if you hit 66 and don’t want to take the entitlement - don’t
Same with your parents and grandparents if you have any alive
If you are young enough you can go start again in a country that doesn’t collect taxes for old age pensions by whatever name they call it
I read the Caymans is not too tough to move to
“government made a contract with me”
No they didn’t.
” I am entitled to that...”
Which is to say you are entitled to take someone else’s money.
“You might not like social security but too bad.”
It’s not about “like” or “dislike” it’s about being honest about what it is, and where the money comes from
“After I take my money from 50 years of deductions...”
It was a tax, as such you had no (legal) choice but to pay - since you didn’t change the system then, you had to pay. Don’t be surprised if the system changes though, while you are still collecting.
“but if you hit 66 and don’t want to take the entitlement - don’t”
I’m sure that decision will be made for everyone without any action on their part.
While policymakers obsess about the income tax, they often lose sight of an important detail: For two-thirds of households, the levy that matters most is the payroll tax.
According to a new report by the Joint Committee on Taxation, the 80 million tax filers making $40,000 or less will collectively pay no federal income tax and many will even receive cash payments from the IRS in 2015. But they will pay $121 billion in Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes (including the employer share, which most economists believe falls on workers).
Even middle-income households—those making between $40,000 and $75,000—will pay three times as much in payroll tax than federal income tax—nearly $190 billion of the former and just $64 billion of the latter. Over all, three-quarters of these middle-income households will pay more in payroll tax than income tax, according to JCT (see Table A-7 of the report).
In fact, income tax payments don’t begin to exceed payroll taxes until household incomes reach six figures, and only really dominate for those making $200,000 or more.
Still, the design of the income tax very much matters to those low- and middle-income households. Thanks to personal exemptions and the standard deduction, many households making less than $40,000 can zero out their federal income tax liability. Refundable credits, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit, make it possible for many middle-income families with children to receive income support through the revenue code. If Congress revises the rules, the income tax liability of those households could change significantly.
Wrong. SCOTUS decided otherwise in Flemming vs. Nestor
The Court ruled that no such contract exists, and that there is no contractual right to receive Social Security payments. Payments due under Social Security are not “property” rights and are not protected by the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The interest of a beneficiary of Social Security is protected only by the Due Process Clause.
Under Due Process Clause analysis, government action is valid unless it is patently arbitrary and utterly lacking in rational justification.
When I first paid into SS, the retirement age for full benefits was 65. In 1983 Congress changed it to 67 and it was signed by Ronald Reagan. Your SS contributions don't belong to you. The government can change the rules any time it wants.