Everybody tells me how important it is to vote....

[Caster]

We don't need a "total rebuild"...we simply need to return to the principles and documents the country was founded on and operated on from the mid-1700s until about 1930. We CAN do that with voting and people being involved.

Humbly, I disagree. Armed rebellion may be a puke answer but how do you propose we vote the lazy deadbeat entitled ghetto trash out of their welfare checks and the Socialist Security that is swan diving into the pavement when SO many people depend on it.

Wisdom will tell anyone that we can NEVER return to the system our founding fathers built. There's too many dependents and no one has the testicular fortitude to tell them to get up and work for their bread or starve to death.

I think things could be made BETTER, but it'll never be what it was meant to be or once was.

I will eat crow in public with no salt or sauce, RAW if and when we get a president get behind the podium and say something to the effect of : "Hence forth, all social programs are canceled, if you don't work or provide for yourself by some means of your own, you will suffer the consequences. Likewise it is not the burden of the young to care for the old. Social Security is now null and void. If you are not a part of the solution then you are a part of the problem and you will be dealt with."

I'd vote for that guy!^^^^^

Everyone can enjoy freedom and happiness and still pull their own weight. I'll never be happy no matter how free I am when I have to work to support someone else.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Caster

[RobertNashville]

Humbly, I disagree. Armed rebellion may be a puke answer but how do you propose we vote the lazy deadbeat entitled ghetto trash out of their welfare checks and the Socialist Security that is swan diving into the pavement when SO many people depend on it.

Wisdom will tell anyone that we can NEVER return to the system our founding fathers built. There's too many dependents and no one has the testicular fortitude to tell them to get up and work for their bread or starve to death.

I think things could be made BETTER, but it'll never be what it was meant to be or once was.

I will eat crow in public with no salt or sauce, RAW if and when we get a president get behind the podium and say something to the effect of : "Hence forth, all social programs are canceled, if you don't work or provide for yourself by some means of your own, you will suffer the consequences. Likewise it is not the burden of the young to care for the old. Social Security is now null and void. If you are not a part of the solution then you are a part of the problem and you will be dealt with."

I'd vote for that guy!

Everyone can enjoy freedom and happiness and still pull their own weight. I'll never be happy no matter how free I am when I have to work to support someone else.

A President can say that all day long but it's meaningless because the President has no power to make it happen. A president, if he is popular enough and/or if his party holds power (or a lot of the available power) in the legislature then he can set the agenda and push for change but a lot of the power of the president is in his ability to block or not block change by virtue of his veto power.

We aren't going to change anything overnight - you aren't going to end SS by the stroke of t pen and even if you could, I can't imagine a more cruel act than to steel money from people all their working lives on the promise that they'll at least get some of it back only to tell them "sorry...try the dumpsters behind Kroger for your food.". Changes will have to be done in a way that is gradual with everybody losing some but not some losing everything.

So what if we don't change it back to 100% of how it was...that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it nor doe is mean that armed rebellion is an answer - first because it probably wouldn't be successful and even if it were successful there is no guarantee that the government put in place will be one that is actually better than the one just overthrown. It may be different but not necessarily better.

The only real answer is getting people to vote and to vote for the betterment of the country rather than for what the government will give them.

If we can't get people to do that...if the welfare/entitlement generation continue to only vote for their own selfish interests or if people who know what is needed refuse to participate (and would rather just complain about the lack of quality candidates) then our course will not change.

Edited April 11, 2012 by RobertNashville

[mcurrier]

Who said he believed in it? It's difficult to tell what he believes in. He passed a lot of laws in MA because that's

what the people in that state wanted. Neither you nor I know his core beliefs are, only what he says, and that is

dependent on the crowd he is speaking to.

Sounds exactly like someone else we all know (except for the blue part which is exactly how representative govt. should work).

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If you are referring to Obama, I knew way before the 2008 election what kind of ass he would turn out to be.

Commies like him are easy to see through. You just have to see both hands all the time, because when one

slips out of sight, you're screwed. Obama came from nowhere to prominence way too fast to be believable.

You probably knew that, too.

Romney is a politician like all the rest, but he is something to work with, unlike Obama, a true communist.

[Caster]

We aren't going to change anything overnight - you aren't going to end SS by the stroke of t pen and even if you could, I can't imagine a more cruel act than to steel money from people all their working lives on the promise that they'll at least get some of it back only to tell them "sorry...try the dumpsters behind Kroger for your food.". Changes will have to be done in a way that is gradual with everybody losing some but not some losing everything.

But people are taking out more than they EVER paid in and the system is dishing out more than it takes in. It's cruel to throw some old person to the wolves even if they SHOULD have prepared for their futures themselves instead of relying on someone else to do it for them [that's lazy]. I will admit that's cruel. It's equally cruel to steal from me to support the system. AND it is STEALING because I don't want to participate. The only way to take from one and give to another [against the first persons will] is by theft and I hate it.

Edited April 11, 2012 by Caster

[Guest Lester Weevils]

But people are taking out more than they EVER paid in and the system is dishing out more than it takes in. It's cruel to throw some old person to the wolves even if they SHOULD have prepared for their futures themselves instead of relying on someone else to do it for them [that's lazy]. I will admit that's cruel. It's equally cruel to steal from me to support the system. AND it is STEALING because I don't want to participate. The only way to take from one and give to another [against the first persons will] is by theft and I hate it.

I would have been happy not to pay self-employment tax double rate (currently 15.3 percent with no deductions, except the temporary Obama SS tax cut) for 44 years. Might have made a little money off it, at least what part would be left after the Bernie Madeoff's of the world are done with it.

But if I hadn't paid, they would have done to me what they will do to you if you don't pay it.

I think you are neglecting the little factor of compound interest. I tallied up all my SS payments, inflation adjusted. Any crap investment ought to at least track inflation. The inflation adjusted sum, divided by what SS promises to pay, means that I have to live to 83 to get all my money back. It is very unlikely that I'll live to 83.

So sure, cancel the SS checks. All those stupid old folks should have gone to jail rather than pay the tax.

Admittedly it is a messed up situation. Not ragging on ya. Just giving another perspective.

[Caster]

It's still a socialist idea. A man should be responsible for himself. Instead I am forced into a system, against my will, because I live in a country where personal responsibility is a not a requirement to survive.

[RobertNashville]

But people are taking out more than they EVER paid in and the system is dishing out more than it takes in. It's cruel to throw some old person to the wolves even if they SHOULD have prepared for their futures themselves instead of relying on someone else to do it for them [that's lazy]. I will admit that's cruel. It's equally cruel to steal from me to support the system. AND it is STEALING because I don't want to participate. The only way to take from one and give to another [against the first persons will] is by theft and I hate it.

I hate it too but tell me, most people do well just to get their bills paid; especially after the government takes 15% of their income for a promise of SSI later, how exactly are most people supposed to prepare for their future under those conditions?

How much are you putting away right now? If you haven't been saving at least 15% of your income since you started working you aren't going to be prepared either. You already know you need to be saving but are you (you don't really need to answer me and I"m not trying to beat you up here...just trying to make a point)?

Someone WILL have to bite the bullet but it cannot be those who no longer have time to prepare - try and just discard those people and you'll have your armed rebellion. It's probably too late for me but I'd still give up ever taking SSI if they would just stop taking from me now but most people my age and certainly no one who is very much older can possibly make up for not having social security income when they can no longer work.

Edited April 12, 2012 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

I would have been happy not to pay self-employment tax double rate (currently 15.3 percent with no deductions, except the temporary Obama SS tax cut) for 44 years. Might have made a little money off it, at least what part would be left after the Bernie Madeoff's of the world are done with it.

But if I hadn't paid, they would have done to me what they will do to you if you don't pay it.

I think you are neglecting the little factor of compound interest. I tallied up all my SS payments, inflation adjusted. Any crap investment ought to at least track inflation. The inflation adjusted sum, divided by what SS promises to pay, means that I have to live to 83 to get all my money back. It is very unlikely that I'll live to 83.

So sure, cancel the SS checks. All those stupid old folks should have gone to jail rather than pay the tax.

Admittedly it is a messed up situation. Not ragging on ya. Just giving another perspective.

Anyone who had paid the same 15% into any decent investment through their working life would be a millionaire by the time they reached 65 even if they did absolutely noting else. Moreover, it would be THEIR money; money they could pass onto their children if they didn't need to use it all before they passed.

The real return on the money we pay into the system isn't even enough to qualify as a bad investment - a bad investment would still give a better return than SSI does.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Anyone who had paid the same 15% into any decent investment through their working life would be a millionaire by the time they reached 65 even if they did absolutely noting else. Moreover, it would be THEIR money; money they could pass onto their children if they didn't need to use it all before they passed.

The real return on the money we pay into the system isn't even enough to qualify as a bad investment - a bad investment would still give a better return than SSI does.

Hi Robert

Yup, that sums it up quite well.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Don't blame the people that are drawing SS now and who have paid into the system all their working life. Blame all the crooked politicians that robbed the SS trust fund and put IOU's in it. The problems of our country is repeatedly re- electing these crooked politicians. Before 1994, the Dems were in control of Congress for over 40 years. I believe that was the time frame they started stealing from SS, and when they ruined the education system, and when they created the welfare system so that the dead beats wouldn't have to work. Everyone during this time frame contributed to America's decline by continually voting over and over for the same crooked politicians. And in 2008, the American people again went to sleep, and voted into office a commie that is trying to bankrupt our country, and stomp on the Constitution. It's time for people of this country to wise up or witness the total ruination of America.

[gregintenn]

Don't blame the people that are drawing SS now and who have paid into the system all their working life. Blame all the crooked politicians that robbed the SS trust fund and put IOU's in it. The problems of our country is repeatedly re- electing these crooked politicians. Before 1994, the Dems were in control of Congress for over 40 years. I believe that was the time frame they started stealing from SS, and when they ruined the education system, and when they created the welfare system so that the dead beats wouldn't have to work. Everyone during this time frame contributed to America's decline by continually voting over and over for the same crooked politicians. And in 2008, the American people again went to sleep, and voted into office a commie that is trying to bankrupt our country, and stomp on the Constitution. It's time for people of this country to wise up or witness the total ruination of America.

I can place part of the blame on the people drawing social security now. They certain;y didn't put up much of a fight when it was enacted.

[Caster]

I can place part of the blame on the people drawing social security now. They certain;y didn't put up much of a fight when it was enacted.

Me too. I place a LOT of blame on the last two or three generations for letting things go. Retirement age people in this country have a lot to answer for. There's many a thing that they should have put up a MASSIVE fight over, but in their apathy and ignorance they did not. Taking us off the gold standard, The NFA, Socialism Security, Big Government micro managing our lives, these things were NOT a problem early in the 20th century. Things are as bad as they are for one reason...the people have let it become this way. The only reason local, state and federal government have any power over you is because for the last 60-75 years people have sat with their thumbs up their butt and let them.

Paid in all their working life my hairy white butt. There's an old man that hangs out here at the shop, he's 85. He's been drawing over two decades. He'll tell you in a heartbeat that he'd drawn out what he paid in in the first few years. As far as investing the money he paid in so that it made a profit?? That's a joke if I ever heard one.

[Oh Shoot]

I can place part of the blame on the people drawing social security now. They certain;y didn't put up much of a fight when it was enacted.

Nobody who started collecting social security when it was enacted is alive today.

Makes as much sense to criticize all the people who aren't yet collecting it for not putting up a fight about it, too.

- OS

[gregintenn]

Nobody who started collecting social security when it was enacted is alive today.

Makes as much sense to criticize all the people who aren't yet collecting it for not putting up a fight about it, too.

- OS

It was signed into law August 14, 1935. My wife's grandmother, who was born in 1913, is still sucking it dry.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Me too. I place a LOT of blame on the last two or three generations for letting things go. Retirement age people in this country have a lot to answer for. There's many a thing that they should have put up a MASSIVE fight over, but in their apathy and ignorance they did not. Taking us off the gold standard, The NFA, Socialism Security, Big Government micro managing our lives, these things were NOT a problem early in the 20th century. Things are as bad as they are for one reason...the people have let it become this way. The only reason local, state and federal government have any power over you is because for the last 60-75 years people have sat with their thumbs up their butt and let them.

Hi Caster Not picking a fight, just joking around--

As far back as I remember, every year for about 2 weeks around april 15, the papers, TV and radio would be full of talk about the gov wasting money and stealing us blind with taxes. And then everybody gets over it until next april 15. Maybe your generation will do something different, but it is the pattern I'm still seeing. Aren't you about 30? What have you done about it in the last 12 years? Two weeks of outrage and 50 weeks of silence. Ain't seen anybody out on the streets with pitchforks and torches. Not even one time.

Paid in all their working life my hairy white butt. There's an old man that hangs out here at the shop, he's 85. He's been drawing over two decades. He'll tell you in a heartbeat that he'd drawn out what he paid in in the first few years.

Like any pyramid scheme, the earlier you get in, the more you profit. Then the profits gradually tail off and when the pyramid finally collapses, the last ones in are left holding the bag. I just want to make sure that the bag-holders are your generation and not mine! [just joking, or maybe not! ]

====

A friend's grandpa lived about 100 years. He was a WWI veteran. Told tales of snorting cocaine in the trenches to stay awake and drinking cognac to stay warm. He retired not many years after SS passed into law. That man got in on the ground floor of the pyramid and made out like a bandit. All his buddies died decades earlier and did not make out like bandits.

====

Consider that 85 year old coot who bugs you-- http://www.ssa.gov/h...lifeexpect.html

If that old guy is 85 then he probably retired about 1992. It shows that 27.7 percent of his generation who paid SS tax, didn't live long enough to collect a penny. That leaves more money for the ones who made it over the finish line. The fellers who made it to age 65 would (on average) collect for 15.3 years. Therefore at least half of that guy's buddies already croaked 5 years ago. So today you are paying SS to support less than 35 percent of that guy's generation. That particular 85 year old guy is making a profit but 27.7 percent didn't get anything at all, and at least 36 percent didn't get back every penny they paid. Most of em are worm food.

====

When I calculated my payments, inflation adjusted-- I divided the estimated SS check into the total payments for scenarios of retiring at 62 (with a small check), or retiring at 65 (with a slightly larger check) or 70 (with an almost livable check). The gov bean-counters figured it real good. No matter when I retire, and regardless the payment, I have to live to about 83 to get my money back. Look at this document, the chart on page 8-- http://aging.senate.gov/crs/aging1.pdf

The gov expects the average feller my age, who makes it to age 65, to live almost 17 years after retirement. If I survive the average amount then I will ALMOST BUT NOT QUITE get all my money back. The gov saves money on more than half the people who croak early, which it spends on the remainder who are too mean to die.

As far as investing the money he paid in so that it made a profit?? That's a joke if I ever heard one.

I agree the gov is BS but the SS financing is no more BS than any other part. When George Soros buys a gov bond then the gov pays interest to Soros with your tax money. The SSA "invests" the SS tax in gov bonds. The SS Bonds earn interest exactly the same as George Soros' bonds. The old folks aren't ripping you any worse than Soros and they are on average much nicer people.

In fact, if people were allowed to pay SS Tax on private IRA's then lots of the IRA's would be invested in gov bonds. Even if I had my SS Tax in my own bonds, rather than the SSA bonds-- Even if I didn't get a SS check and instead I lived off my own bonds-- Your tax money would STILL be paying to support my sorry butt! Interest money going direct from your pocket to my pocket. If they had abolished SS in 1968 you would still be paying my retirement anyway!

Look at it another way-- If you buy a $1000 gov bond for your retirement today, when burgers cost $5 apiece. Then you retire in 2047 when burgers cost $500-- If the gov pays back your $1000 with no interest-- The money that would have bought 200 burgers will now only buy 2 burgers. Are ya gonna get mad? OF COURSE you are gonna expect interest payments!

And in 2047 when your kids start moaning about paying tax, after you paid tax for 45+ years, you will whip out a tiny violin and play them a pity tune!

Edited April 13, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Oh Shoot]

It was signed into law August 14, 1935. My wife's grandmother, who was born in 1913, is still sucking it dry.

However, she was not collecting in 1935. Nobody that had any immediate or even shortly to be realized vested interest in supporting passage of the legislation is still alive. Even a 100 year old today did not start collecting until 1973-77.

It's really not valid to criticize folks who have had no choice about paying into the system for taking out of it.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It was signed into law August 14, 1935. My wife's grandmother, who was born in 1913, is still sucking it dry.

She's one of the rare few who see the benefit. What's wrong with that? Would you rather she died ten years ago?

My mother lived to ninety. She was on it a long time, also. My father worked hard all his life and died at 67. Little

benefit, but mom got more out of it. I don't have a problem with that. SSI is a risk pool, some live longer and get

more benefit, if you really call it much.

It would be good if there was a way to opt out for future generations, using some kind of sliding scale of payments,

but that is for another day. We have other big problems on the horizon. One is this election. If it goes the wrong

way, it won't matter about SSI. A lot of things won't matter.

[Oh Shoot]

.... SSI is a risk pool, some live longer and get more benefit, if you really call it much....

Yep, that's point why no one should feel "guilty" about receiving it. It's a crap shoot that you had no choice about anteing into.

With an actual investment, you get to bequeath the money. With SSI, it's gone when you/spouse are.

All that said, everything I read about it suggests that it would have been revenue neutral all along if it had actually been in investment pool where the gummit simply acted as your investment broker instead of spending every dime as it came in and leaving constantly due IOUs in the pot.

- OS

[Guest 6.8 AR]

It was set up wrong to begin with. That's where a private business/investment firm would have done a much better job.

Captive audiences are what the government considers us when they do these things. Even though there may have

been good intentions at the outset, it was set up to fail. Governments don't usually do many things right, but they do

them anyway. It would have been much better if the individual had something like that to bequeath. Wrong people in

charge for that.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I know I won't statistically see how my wife lives, but she will be in decent shape and not depending on SSI.

Her mom is 88(?) and still kicking like a mule. Go to Clinton and see her garden for a yard, right behind the pawn

shop in South Clinton. I was with her when she told her doctor, that she would rather die in her garden and be

used for mulch. She is a hoot. Her garden keeps her alive and I hope she drains every penny she can from

SSI if not just to keep on watering it.

[Guest ThePunisher]

Governments don't usually do many things right, but they do

them anyway.

Yep, because the people's representatives don't listen to their constituents any more, and they know that the sheeple will keep on re-electing them into office. Does Obamacare come to mind?

Edited April 13, 2012 by ThePunisher

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Always!

[Guest lostpass]

Governments don't usually do many things right, but they do

them anyway.

Governments do a lot of things right, I mean they are really, really good at some things. This notion that when the government does, something/anything they do a poor job of it is specious.

What does government get right? The first thing the government gets right is perpetuating the government. Companies go out of business all the time, the government just keeps on rolling. War? Don't care. Dust Bowl? Doesn't matter. Great Depression? We're the government dammit!

In a climate where a business would just quit the gov just keeps on going.

The government is also really good at collecting taxes. Ever try dealing with the IRS? It is often easier to pay than to fight even if you might be right.

The government is also really good at passing laws and regulations. You're probably in violation of 50 things right now.

The gov also fields a pretty damn nice military.

The weirdness is when you stop and realize that almost everything the government does is things the populace wants them to. The government is, after all, the people, when it comes right down to it.

So the government does a lot of things really well, I'm just not sure I'm on board with all the things that group think is good for me. Cause one thing the government seems really bad at is protecting individuals.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Well, I'll give you that the government keeps on trucking and that the military is an outstanding one and that the IRS

is the premier collection agency in the world, but don't forget the monopoly involved when you compare the government

to private business. And don't forget that it's the private business that provides the jobs that pays the taxes that funds

the government that has all of it's powers because of the individual that works to pays those taxes.

Let's not forget the Post Office. It's about to go under, without more of your considerate support. And let's not consider

the style of health care when run like the Post Office. And, "When governments grow, freedoms die".

Shrink it a lot and I'll be quiet.

They're not supposed to protect individuals, just individual rights. Something they have been doing poorly for a long time.