Social Security

[Bondo]

Re: Social Security

Plywoody,<br /><br />If you knew Anything about the History of what you talk,<br />Possibly an Intellegent Dussisscion could be held with You,+ Your Kind, Bleeding Heart Liberals.........<br />

The original Act provided only retirement benefits, and only to the worker. The 1939 Amendments made a fundamental change in the Social Security program. The Amendments added two new categories of benefits: payments to the spouse and minor children of a retired worker (so-called dependents benefits) and survivors benefits paid to the family in the event of the premature death of the worker. This change transformed Social Security from a retirement program for individuals into a family-based economic security program.

On August 1, 1956, the Social Security Act was amended to provide benefits to disabled workers aged 50-65 and disabled adult children. Over the next 2 years, Congress broadened the scope of the program, permitting disabled workers under age 50 and their dependents to qualify for benefits, and eventually disabled workers at any age could qualify.<br />

The most significant change involved the passage of Medicare. Under Medicare, health coverage was extended to Social Security beneficiaries aged 65 or older (and eventually to those receiving disability benefits as well).

In the Social Security Amendments of 1972, Congress federalized the adult categories by creating the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program and assigned responsibility for it to the SSA.

The Social Security Amendments of 1980 made many changes in the disability program. Most of these changes focused on various work incentive provisions for both Social Security and SSI disability benefits. The 1980 Amendments also required SSA to conduct periodic reviews of current disability beneficiaries to certify their continuing eligibility.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT<br />"We can never insure one-hundred percent of the population against one-hundred percent of the hazards and vicissitudes of life. But we have tried to frame a law which will give some measure of protection to the average citizen and to his family against the loss of a job and against poverty-ridden old age. This law, too, represents a cornerstone in a structure which is being built, but is by no means complete.... It is...a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide for the United States an economic structure of vastly greater soundness." -- August 14, 1935<br /><br />HARRY S. TRUMAN<br />"Social Security...is not a dole or a device for giving everybody something for nothing. True Social Security must consist of rights which are earned rights -- guaranteed by the law of the land." -- August 13, 1945<br /><br />JOHN F. KENNEDY<br />"The Social Security program plays an important part in providing for families, children, and older persons in times of stress. But it cannot remain static. Changes in our population, in our working habits, and in our standard of living require constant revision." -- June 30, 1961<br /><br />LYNDON B. JOHNSON<br />"One of the most urgent orders of business at this time is the enactment of hospital insurance for the aged through Social Security to help older people meet the high costs of illness without jeopardizing their economic independence." -- February 9, 1964<br /><br />JIMMY E. CARTER<br />"The Social Security program...represents our commitment as a society to the belief that workers should not live in dread that a disability, death, or old age could leave them or their families destitute." -- December 20, 1977<br /><br />WILLIAM J. CLINTON<br />"Social Security...reflects some of our deepest values -- the duties we owe to our parents, the duties we owe to each other when we're differently situated in life, the duties we owe to our children and our grandchildren. Indeed, it reflects our determination to move forward across generations and across the income divides in our country, as one America." -- February 9, 1998

THE FUTURE OF SOCIAL SECURITY<br /><br />During the 1990s, Social Security faced long-term challenges. The 2000 Trustees Report stated Social Security could pay full benefits until 2037, but the standard 75-year test of actuarial balance was not met.<br /><br />A major impetus to the public debate on Social Security reform came in January 1998 when President Clinton announced in his State of the Union Address that we should "save Social Security first." The President also announced a series of forums around the country during the course of the year to engage the citizenry in an informed public debate, culminating in the first-ever White House Conference on Social Security in December 1998. Numerous proposals were introduced, suggesting strong interest in dealing with the long-term challenges facing the program.<br /><br /><br />THE IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL SECURITY TODAY<br />Social Security has grown to become an essential facet of modern life. One in six Americans receives a Social Security benefit, and about 98 percent of all workers are in jobs covered by Social Security. Social Security benefits comprise about 5% of the nation's total economic output. From 1940, when slightly more than 222,000 people received monthly Social Security benefits, until today, when almost 45 million people receive such benefits, Social Security has grown steadily. And Social Security benefits provide income security not just to the elderly. Nearly 1 in 3 beneficiaries are not retirees.<br /><br />The SSI program, meanwhile, provides needed income support to over 6 million recipients, 31% of whom are aged individuals; 56% disabled adults; and 13% disabled children.

All for this information,+ More is found Here..... The History Of SS...... <br /><br />So, You see,

I don't understand why the administration, as well as others, keep referring to this as a retirement system. It is an insurance system.<br />For example, I have a disabled daughter (blind) who would qualify, if she chose to, to recieve SSDI benefits for the rest of her life because of her disability. She has contributed next to nothing to this system.<br />

This System was NOT designed to pay people like your Daughter...........<br />It was Designed to be a Retirement System.......NOT an Insurance system.....<br />Adding all the Disabled is what's Breaking the system.....<br /><br />As Usual with the Liberals.............<br /><br />If They have No Clue as to What They are saying, <br />Just Make It Up As You Go....................

 

[fixin]

Re: Social Security

Edit....I was in a bad mood

 

[Fly Rod]

Re: Social Security

The government raped the system by taking SS funds and using them elsewhere!!!<br /><br />Quick fix: Have a referendum put on the next election ballot worded in such a way to take away the retirement benifits of our elected officials (retroactive back about 15 years) in congress and put them on the "Social Security System and we would have it all "Nicey!! Nicey once again"!!!! <br /><br />There is no mention of the drain on our wallets for the cost and up keep of their retirement benifit package!!!

 

[gaugeguy]

Re: Social Security

Personally, I want out. Let me take care of me. The way I figure it, my 95 year old grandmother has collected everything she and my grandfather, all of her children and grandchildren have put into the system. There is no way I'll see a dime of what I put into it when I am eligible to collect in 27 years.

 

[NYMINUTE]

Re: Social Security

Increase the FICA cap to unlimited. It is simple. You pay out of each and every check. The Million dollar a year people will collect SSI at their eligeble age too. Let them pay in per their income.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Social Security

BONDO, A very interesting read! And as far as my knowledge goes historically, it's accurate.<br /><br />What bothers me about the subject is the timing.<br />Given the larger issues which are more readilly imporatant, (ex; the taxation system in it's entirety, border protection, assualts to the constitution and re-definition of it), retirement just doesn't seem to me to be the premier issue. Not that it aint a total mess, just that our priorities seem to be skewed here!<br />But at least, the current admin has brought it to the front burner, and cranked-up the heat.

 

[CalicoKid]

Re: Social Security

No gaugeguy you will never see a dime you've put in it again. You would hopefully be getting your childrens and grandchildrens contributions.

 

[DJ]

Re: Social Security

I can't believe all the cynicism....all corporations are evil, blah, blah, blah.<br /><br />SS IS broken. The Dem's cheered when Bill Clinton said it was broken. Nothing was EVER done to fix it (typical Bill) and now the Dem's claim it's fine. I think I know who the snakes are.<br /><br />Even FDR (the plans creator) was in favor of SOME of the SS account to be private. It was shot down in the congress, of that time. He (FDR) knew that the private sector would provide a much higher rate of return than any government investment. He also knew that a decent rate of return was needed to sustain the numbers, throughout the years.<br /><br />The REAL issue is that there are more $$$ going out than coming in. The work force is shrinking (birth rate down, we've aborted 40+ million) and a huge "bubble" of baby boomers is about to start collecting. <br /><br />It's simple economics and math here. No tricks, just facts.<br /><br />As far as other "pressing" issues. I agree, there are some huge ones (borders, Iraq, taxation) out there. I think all will get addressed in this term. I don't necessarily agree with the order. If we are not safe, within our borders, the rest of the issues become moot.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Social Security

Right on Bondo..

 

[jtexas]

Re: Social Security

Originally posted by ob:<br /> Some blue collar and un-degreed retirees use it as a suppliment to a modest pension as well.

Most if not all defined-benefit pension plans are "integrated" with social security. <br /><br />Meaning that your retirement benefit is "defined" as a percent (depending on length of service) of your working salary (or average salary over some period) net of social security benefits.<br /><br />In other words they calculate what your total retirement income will be, and just pay the amount over & above your SS benefit.<br /><br />Meaning that employees of most major corporations are also depending on social security to get the full amount to which their life of loyal service entitles them.<br /><br />Meaning also that if SS benefits are significantly decreased, pension plans will have to make up the difference, and most major corporations will find their pension plans dangerously underfunded. I mean a serious crisis. Affecting a rather large portion of productive taxpaying loyal American citizens.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Social Security

Originally posted by Fly Rod:<br /> The government raped the system by taking SS funds and using them elsewhere!!!<br />

That's all just accounting mumbo-jumbo. Accounting for a non-profit entity is called "Fund Accounting," and "Funds" are just numbers on a page that represent future (or past) expenditures you expect to make with money you expect to collect (or have collected) in the future (or past). The term "Social Security Funds" does not refer to actual dollars set aside in an account.<br /><br />Sort of like when you plan to pay next month's bills with next month's paycheck. But you have too many bills so you write a check against a line of credit. And one of the bills is interest on the line of credit. But it doesn't really matter, because you are the U.S. Federal Gummit, and you have infinity credit.

 

[jtexas]

Re: Social Security

It is my opinion as an American and a Republican that Social Security exists in this country because we believe that in a civilized society caring for the old & infirm is the right thing to do. Period. And maybe even the stupid (but not the ignorant). Not the lazy, but that's not always an easy distinction to make.<br /><br />pw2, you said your daughter was eligible "if she chose to." I congratulate her on her choice to be self-sufficient, and I hope that should the need ever arise she will not hesitate to accept the benefits to which she is entitled.

 

[DJ]

Re: Social Security

It is my opinion as an American and a Republican that Social Security exists in this country because we believe that in a civilized society caring for the old & infirm is the right thing to do. Period. And maybe even the stupid (but not the ignorant). Not the lazy, but that's not always an easy distinction to make.<br />

I agree, wholeheartedly. However, at what rate. 50% of my income, 70%, 80%? At some point, the working will throw up their hands and the whole system/economy collapses.<br /><br />It is amazing to me how few understand the basics of having money work for you instead of you working for it.

 

[oddjob]

Re: Social Security

Democrats Gave Clinton Standing Ovation<br />for Suggesting Private Social Security Accounts, Yesterday, the same people booed and hissed when Bush did the very same thing.<br /><br />Hi PW

 

[wajajaja]

Re: Social Security

Those who don't plan ahead should be put in canoes and pushed toward the middle of the lake, hmm, would spoil a lot of good boating. <br /><br /> SS is the bottom layer of survival for retirement for those who may not have been fortunate enough to 1 be educated, 2 have steady employment,3 general good health and insurance and just plain lucky in life. <br /><br /> EXCEPT FOR THE GRACE OF GOD GOETH I

 

[fixin]

Re: Social Security

Just for the record..eight years ago Clinton proposed a 4% increase in personal income tax to relieve the burden of social security. The Republican Congress not only turned it down but denounced it as liberal unaccountability.<br /><br />If the increase would have taken affect eight years ago...let's add a little interest. Guess what? It would be about three trillion dollars by now.

 

[JB]

Re: Social Security

I agree that SS is on a steep slope to oblivion because it has become a dole run amok. It currently takes in more than it pays out and the surplus is gobbled up by the general revenue and disappears. Oh, okay, it turns into uncollectible IOUs.<br /><br />1. There is nothing that "privatization" can do for it that IRAs and 401Ks can't do. The only difference is that the "privatized" people will get reduced benefits if they have income from their private accounts.<br /><br />Solution: First, modify the IRA and 401K laws to match the limits and restrictions of the proposed "privatized" accounts, except they would not be deductible from FICA tax. Then limit SS benefits for anyone with independent income above a certain level.<br /><br />2. The FICA taxation is unfair. All income should be taxed, no limit. Not just salaries and wages. This would allow major reduction of the FICA tax initially. It could then be adjusted annually to meet the actual needs of the time. No more "surplus" for Congress to "borrow" and never repay.

 

[DJ]

Re: Social Security

JB,<br /><br />You have to "splain" that one better to me. The way I read it, charge more but reduce the benefits.<br /><br />That is wholly unfair to those that are paying the most. And, those that "planned" use their private accounts and those that didn't plan still get the same benefits. Huh?

 

[JB]

Re: Social Security

Not charge more, DJ. Charge a lot less, but charge all income, and don't funnel an artificial surplus into the general revenue to disappear. SS is currently taxing more than it needs and it is taxing low/middle income people a larger portion of their income.<br /><br />I see SS as a lifeboat; not a retirement plan, not a luxo cruise. Whatever they want to call it, it should respond only to need and it should be supported by all citizens.<br /><br />There is sufficient tax shelter and matching contributions incentive to save via IRAs and 401Ks, but there is no protection from catastrophic events or loans and withdrawals. <br /><br />Catastrophic health problems while not covered by health insurance wiped out most of my savings. Enron, WorldCom and the dot-com crash depleted the rest so that I have to depend on SS or live on my remaining capital until it is gone. Then what?<br /><br />The notion that those who need it only need it because of poor planning is comparable to the idea that the unemployed are just too lazy to look for a job.

 

[pjc]

Re: Social Security

I have briefed though his thread. Yep.....SS is in need of..what?????..don't know.<br /><br />I will comment though that we the people, should have the same option as the Government employees to choose. I understand that Fed government employees have an option other than traditional SS that is modeled similar to what Prez. Bush and the Repubes have been proposing.<br /><br />Anyone here know of this other option that the Fed. employees seem to favor?