Social Security Bomb, Must Read!

page: 1
67
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+45 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I would like everyone to know the truth!

With Obama quoting: "I can not guarantee those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it." It got me thinking, Mr. Obama. I thought Social Security was in a lock box in its own fund? Why would Social Security be in the General "coffers" of the Federal Government and be threatened to not be handed out if we hit our debt limit? If it was in its own fund there would not be a problem right?

So i started to do some digging and found out that we, United States Citizens, have been lied to. There is no Social Security "Lock Box" there is no separate account. Social Security is lumped into the whole US Treasury General Fund! Shocking! We been lied to by our Government! who would have thought!

Under the Supreme Court Case Helvering v. Davis case. On November 12, 1936, "(Social Security payments) are not earmarked for any special purpose." They are (Social Security payments) "true taxes, their purpose being simply to raise revenue . . . available for the general support of Government." This was a Supreme Court decision questioning the constituionality of Social Security

www.lewrockwell.com...

So for all of us paying our Social Security tax, Its just that, a tax that goes into the general fund. NO LOCK BOX! If Social Security does not get paid when we hit the debt limit, you will know why. Obama sliped as was cought telling the truth to the american people that Social Security is part of the General fund. We get 200 billion a month from taxes. Social Security cost 50 billion. If Social Security is not paid out it's because its prioritized that way. plan and simple

Can you believe they teach you in school that Social Security is in its own "Lock Box." What a Joke.

Nice to know huh.

Have a Great Day ALL!
edit on 14-7-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



+34 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Yup, war and 200 bases around the world are so much more important than the American people.

Countries destroyed by multinational corporations, international banksters and stockholders/investors greed.

The system needs to be rebuild from the bottom down, and those responsible executed.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:20 PM
link   
Well, then we the people should get together and sue the government using that case as a precedent, should something like that happen.

Although, I seriously doubt it will happen, they're just flinging poo at each other.

Awesome find man, S&F

Khar



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Im am just so sick and tired of being lied too. you cant trust anything the goverment says anymore. the only thing you can trust is yourself and your own research.


+7 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:24 PM
link   
I sure wish I could march into the HR at my work and tell them to STOP TAKING OUT SOCIAL SECURITY FEES FROM MY CHECK!!!!

Because obviously I wont be receiving any of it!



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Starwise
I sure wish I could march into the HR at my work and tell them to STOP TAKING OUT SOCIAL SECURITY FEES FROM MY CHECK!!!!

Because obviously I wont be receiving any of it!


Its the biggest scam ever. I really feel bad for those that have been " paying into the system" to come and find out they were just paying into the general fund and there is no lock box
edit on 14-7-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
Like Ron Pauls brother said in a documentary(I think it was "End of Liberty"... He said that the FED asked for collateral on the debt the govt owed at the end of the great depression... The collateral was you, me, our children, and our childrens children... we were all pledged against the debt of the govt through Social Security...

Scary for sure...

I was talking with my dad about this issue earlier, and he also thought it was a separate account... but nope its all just a lie(SURPRISE)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Starwise
 


I see no legit reason why we shouldnt be able to opt out of this huge scam...

Why cant you just say NO NO NO I wont pay for social security or the taxes for illegal, unconstitutional, and immoral wars...



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by morder1

I was talking with my dad about this issue earlier, and he also thought it was a separate account... but nope its all just a lie(SURPRISE)


Its the little lies that hurt the most. yeah look up the case. it will shock you. Best part is Obama gave it away. I would not have looked it up if he did not say it


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss
Im am just so sick and tired of being lied too. you cant trust anything the goverment says anymore. the only thing you can trust is yourself and your own research.


I figured this out after mining the internet for information over many months worth of my life.

There are some on ATS that would say that I had wasted that time, that I should have been focused on my future. It is those same people that claim there is nothing sinister going on in the world. There is no boogeyman, the world and the United States is the way it is because we all wanted it this way and our representatives did mostly what we asked them to.

I reject that notion that we wanted it. We have been conditioned since birth to accept the world for what it is. When people like myself started asking questions and stopped supporting the system because we were disgusted with it. It was us that the uppites blamed for creating the problems in the first place.

The USA was not created to be a free country. It was created to be a financial haven for the people already controlling the world. The realization of the plan didn't occur until technology allowed it to.

I say nearly every single thing done (laws, regulations,et cetera) in this country post 1850 was perfectly executed for a much bigger purpose.

I feel lied to everyday when I turn on my TV, listen to the radio, even when speaking with intelligent people that have no idea that were conditioned to think a certain way about what we call Democracy.


Sorry I get so off topic. I'm not suprised that Social Security does not have its own fund. Because doing that, would actually make sense. How else can you lose 2 trillion dollars and say, whoops!


500th post
edit on 14-7-2011 by sticky because: to add 500th post to the end...
edit on 14-7-2011 by sticky because: (no reason given)
edit on 14-7-2011 by sticky because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Dear Michelle:



Thank you for contacting me about the preservation of the Social Security system. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.



Social Security is a statutory entitlement program. Beneficiaries have a legal entitlement to receive Social Security benefits as set forth under the Social Security Act. Since its inception, Social Security has provided a vital safety net for our elderly and disabled by lifting millions out of poverty and ensuring they maintain a respectable quality of life.



Social Security is what is referred to as a pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) program. The vast majority of the taxes the government collects from workers and employers are used to pay the benefits of current retirees. What is leftover after paying retirees is the surplus. By law, the federal government is required to securitize these surplus funds into special, non-traded bonds that pay interest. The funds themselves are then lent to the federal treasury to help meet other government obligations.



This fact has lead many of my constituents to ask me whether this money is paid back. The answer is yes. Social Security bonds are obligations that must be repaid when they are due, with interest.



Many have advocated that all Social Security revenues be deposited in special accounts and not made available to meet other obligations. This is why I supported the Social Security and Medicare Off-Budget Lockbox Act, which would accomplish just that.



It is important, however, to remember that a "lock box" approach alone would not come close to solving the long-term finances of the Social Security system. Social Security's problems are demographic. Over time, there will be fewer and fewer workers paying into the system for the number of retirees receiving benefits. In 1950, there were 16 workers paying into Social Security for every retiree receiving benefits. Today, there are approximately 3.3 workers per retiree, and by the year 2031 that number will decline to only 2 workers for every retiree. In addition, individuals are living longer lives which places still more stress on the system's finances.



Like you, I believe the longer we delay the important debate of our Social Security system, the more difficult the choices become. Addressing this issue will require bipartisan cooperation and the involvement of all stakeholders, including you the taxpayer. In 1983, a bipartisan commission was established to rescue Social Security when it was in immediate danger of crisis. As a result of this commission's work, the Social Security program has been saved for many decades. I believe a similar commission should be established to look at government entitlement programs. The Commission would make recommendations to Congress which would then debate and vote on them.



Fiscal discipline also plays a very important part in preserving the integrity of Social Security. Irresponsible Washington spending is the biggest threat to Social Security, as well as long term economic growth and our efforts to pay down the national debt. I will continue to look to support policies to ensure transparency, soundness and sustainability in programs so important to seniors and the disabled.



Lastly, please know I remain committed to strengthening Social Security. As proposals are submitted to reform this system, it is imperative we keep focused on keeping our seniors' retirement secure and ensuring the long-term stability of this program. I will not support reforms that raise payroll taxes, reduce benefits or raise the retirement age.



Again, thank you for sharing with me your concerns about the preservation of Social Security. Please feel free to contact me at (202) 225-7041 should you have further questions or concerns or visit my website at www.house.gov/graves.










Sincerely,

Sam Graves
Member of Congress
There is no link for this since it was in my personal mailbox. I emailed him about this issue a few days a go and essentially he appears to confess there is no lock box at this point. Read this and tell me what you think.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by sticky

Originally posted by camaro68ss

The USA was not created to be a free country. It was created to be a finincial haven for the people already controlling the world. The realization of the plan didn't occur until technology allowed it to.


500th post
edit on 14-7-2011 by sticky because: to add 500th post to the end...


I would have to say the USA was created to be a free country and that was our fight for independence back in 1776. But something went wrong after the Civil War and we lost that independence.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by dreamseeker
 


wow, bomb drop. thanks for the post. star for you! Im glad someone is telling the truth! Still the school books would tell you different!
edit on 14-7-2011 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 08:45 PM
link   
You are correct. It's my understanding that for years, the taxes collected for Social Security have been raided like a slushfund. We'd have plenty of money for the baby boomers that are coming up if the goverment hadn't stuck their hand in the cookie jar all these years, but they did, so we don't.
And BTW, both parties are to blame, they've both done it.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Wow I am simply amazed at the reactions to this news. No offense to those of you that are realizing all of this now. I say thank god more people are finally waking up and seeing the truth. I have for many years been telling people there is no such thing as a lock box. I always used the analogy of a shoe box with your name on it sitting in a bank vault somewhere. But hey lock box works.
As stated above the number producing for those who are receiving payments have been steadily declining. The same thing goes for union retiree's. More retiree's are drawing benefits than there are actually producing.
It is not different than SS. When SS was orginally started is was for the purpose of raising the revenue to pay for all of the WPA and CCC jobs. The entire system has been a scam or better explained a pyramid scheme. Its coming home to roost. Obama slipped up by saying that checks would stop if no aggreement is reached. The truth is they won't, not for awhile anyway. But the money is running out and no matter what is passed it is only delaying the inevitable.
One more thing that might get your attention. Look at your next check stub and note your SS withholding then double that number. You see your employer pays one half you pay the other half. The other half is what you actually see. To be more correct you pay all of it just thru your labor but you only see your half in dollar amounts.
Tell your boss you want to become an independent contractor and you will pay your taxes yourself. Then you will really get peeved when you actually have to cut a check to the government knowing how they are handling your money now.
I know this to be true because I've been self employed for nearly 20 years now and that's what I've had to do all of those years. Plus being a business owner you would be shocked how much of your labor goes to expenses having you work there.
Thanks OP for posting this and welcome to the world of the awake.


+1 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
S&F OP!

That was a big slip of the tongue by the President... it should backfire in his face if the retirees in this country still remember Social Security as being "protected"... hopefully most are scratching their heads wondering "WTF did he just say?" or they are thinking that he's just a politician playing the game.

Either way, scaring the elderly into thinking that they may not have money causes a kind of paranoia that I don't think most members here are aware of.

I helped support my Grandparents before they passed away. When something like this comes into the picture and made them fear not having money, they would go into "hoard" mode. They would not buy their medication, they would buy only the cheapest and worst food money could buy, they would turn off non-essential utilities (cable tv) and they would stay that way until they thought things were "all clear".

This is what most elderly folks are doing right now, and it causes them to get sick, stressed out and even more fragile than they usually are. If my Grandparents were alive, and my President was doing this to them, I would flip out. As it stands, it infuriates me that he's allowed to make such threats against the American people, he may as well be committing murder or treason against us because NO leader of this country should EVER be able to hold its citizens hostage in such a way as Obama is hinting. It's appalling.

~Namaste



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:15 PM
link   
will cut off the 50 million on social security and disablity? If so where does it stop. What about section 8,food stamps or medicare/medicaid. If the federal government is bust than how can they pay anything. I am really scared that if something does not happen we will see 60 million+ people suffer beyond belief. This a scary time here in the USA? Would it be just one check cut out or all checks until an agreement is reached? How often will this happen?


+3 more 
posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 





Social Security is lumped into the whole US Treasury General Fund! Shocking! We been lied to by our Government! who would have thought!


The lies go well beyond the encouraged assumption that Social Security is placed in some trust fund and is generating interest, or is being invested. All federal taxes go into the same general fund.

The federal government is not really lying to the public, they are relying upon tautology.

Tautology has two distinctive factors. One is the needless repetition of language. The second and most important thing to understand about tautology is that it is always true.

The importance of this is that the truth has been spoken in a way to be construed to mean something else. If one is not skilled in reading between the lines, not skilled in paying as much attention to what has not been said as to what has been said, then they will easily fall prey to the mystical incantations of the priest class lawyer set.

People who are paying a Social Security tax, are also paying the so called "income tax". The people doing this are doing so because they believe they are liable for the tax. However, who among you here have actually bothered to read the tax code to find out for certain if you are indeed liable for any tax under this revenue law?

The vast majority of people simply just go along with what other ignoramuses have told them in terms of liability for this so called "income tax". Of course, given the nature of a "valid tax return", even if one is not liable for the tax before "filing a valid tax return", the moment that "valid tax return" is signed under penalty of perjury that "all the above is true and correct", that admission of liability now makes the person liable.

The people have been scammed into paying a tax they most likely do not owe, (I say most likely because if you read the code, there are very specific taxed activities that undeniably make those people engaged in those activities liable), not through lies, but through carefully constructed truths.

Take the 16th Amendment for example:




The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.


Of course, Congress had the power to lay and collect taxes on income from the very beginning of the ordained Constitution for the United States of America. So, if Congress all ready had the power to lay and collect taxes on income, then why write this Amendment?

Well, some to many believe it is because the rule of apportionment imposed by the Constitution was to cumbersome for Congress to effectively pass an income tax, so Congress "relieved themselves of the rule of apportionment".

Of course, if they did such a thing then the 16th Amendment would be unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court has upheld that Amendment as being "harmonious" with the Constitution.

How is the 16th Amendment "harmonious" with the Constitution?

Well, it "harmonious" because Congress has not "relieved themselves of the rule of apportionment", instead what they have done is reminded the courts and the people that they have the complete and plenary power of taxation and they can lay and collect a tax "on" income as an indirect tax as well.

When the word "on" is used to mean in direct contact with, such as a tax directly on income as property, then that word would constitute a direct tax on income which would then be subject to the rule of apportionment.

However, when the word "on" is used to mean in regards to, then this takes the tax "on" income out of the realm of direct tax and into the realm of indirect taxes, such as imposts, tariff's, and excise taxes.

Wait, you say? If the "income" tax is not "on" income directly as property, then what is being taxed?

Good question.

Wait, you say? Why even bring up income if it isn't being taxed?

Another good question.

Whatever taxed activity is being taxed, there has to be some way to determine how much is owed. If the activity generates an income, then income would be used as a measurement to determine how much is owed.

So, the purpose of the 16th Amendment was to get the courts to stop striking "income" taxes without apportionment down as being unconstitutional, and forced them to view any "income" tax not apportioned as being an indirect tax "where all income taxes inherently belong".

The so called "income tax" is not a direct tax on income, but is an indirect tax on some taxed activity.

So, what taxed activity are you involved in that would actually and factually and lawfully make you liable for the tax?

The government has not lied to you about this, instead what they have done is allowed the "experts" to lie to you about it. They have insulated themselves from the "tax collectors" who enforce the legislation, by letting the "tax collectors" lie about it. They have allowed those "tax collectors" to grow to a beastly size so that in the event you actually ever bother to take the time to read the tax code and come to the realization that it is you and the Secretary Treasure who are the only two people with authority to assess your own liability, and in the event you determine you are not liable, that you will surrender anyway because of the frightening nature of the criminal thugs who are misconstruing the legislation to mean that all people who earn income are liable.

These "tax collectors" who are doing this, are not legally, factually, or actually, operating as official government agents, because they are operating outside of the scope of their jurisdiction. Because of this, they are acting as private persons upon their own private beliefs.

The government has not lied, they have simply allowed you to believe in lies.



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 


Call me crazy, but I think I could likely do much better safeguarding my OWN future if I was allowed to keep that same share of my OWN money...

Have ponzi schemes EVER worked for the general benefit in the long-term anyway? Hell, even my annual SSN statement doesn't seem to forecast me receiving a living wage in the end...maybe I'm just reading the damned thing wrong, I suppose. (?)



posted on Jul, 14 2011 @ 09:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


you always have great things to say JPZ, thanks for the insite.






top topics



 
67
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join