Why It Matters: SOCIAL SECURITY

Originally posted by Hefficide

Another note, not to derail the thread, but to help inform the subject in general. Many people get sick or hurt during their working lives and can no longer work - but for short periods of time... say a few months to a few years. Some of these people, especially those who were living hand to mouth, are forced to seek medical help from the state.

I don't know about other states, but Georgia requires anyone in this situation, who seeks help, to apply for SSI benefits and for Medicaid through SSI.

In my participation at the local mental health clinic I have watched several people go through this process. And eventually get the medical help they needed and return to work. The downside? It takes literally years for this to happen. The whole time social services have to be expended to keep these folks alive long enough for SSI to come through. Once that happens they tend to get the right medical attention and return to health quickly - but with a few lost years behind them.

If the medical system were built to deal with these types of temporary disabilities - then the draw on Social Security would be heavily reduced. As Social Security - after taking years to come through, has to back pay these folks, varyingly, but usually from the time they first applied.

People who would much rather have just been able to get medication or surgery done ASAP and gone back to work directly.

The system is broken - and in more than one way.

~Heff

You have that all pretty much spot on. That has been my life for the past 4 yrs. It took 3-1/2 yrs of applying and playing games with the courts before I received a dime from social security. In that time I had to sell just about anything I owned of value, even family heirlooms just to keep the lights on, mortgage paid and food on the table. Prior to getting hurt, in 22 yrs of working I took only 2 vacations, had no problem providing for my family, and made a comfortable living. Didn't have alot of wiggle room for saving thousands but we got by without major sacrifices. And to this day I am still going in circles with all the agencies, just trying to get medication and pay on time and the correct amounts. Yes the system is F'd, no doubt about it. Had I of been able to invest that money in a private fund I never would have had to jump through all those hoops and gone yrs without. Makes my blood boil.

Originally posted by jimmiec
I know a kid on SS, He works everyday. He pulls transmissions/whatever. He looks to be about 23 or so. Scamming the system. No limp. No sign of anything wrong with him physically or mentally. I'm no doctor though.

If he's working for a paycheck under the table, then you're right he is committing SS fraud. People on disability are able to work up to 40 hours per month without having their benefits reduced (supplemental income to that meager check).

If it's volunteer then he's probably just doing it for something to keep him occupied with his time doing something he enjoys. Not all disabilities are apparent just with looking at someone.

reply to post by jimmiec


Some do scam the system. If you know he works while receiving benefits it puts you on the spot.... If you don't report him then you're morally complicit. I don't know your stance on the SS issue off hand, nor your politics. And I am not trying to judge.

If it were me I would straight up ask about it. And if he's living in a nice house with a lot of pocket money and shiny things? I would report him. If he was living a paupers life - and just needed extra money for food and basic necessities? I think I'd look the other way and ignore it.

Maybe that's just me. Again no judgment.

~Heff

Originally posted by bintim
reply to post by popcornmafia

 

What has turned it into a ponzi scheme is that all that money was taken out of the account to pay for other things. It now makes it look like the older generation (mine 60) is robbing the younger. If they left it alone, or repaid the I.O.U.'s everything would have been all right.

We can afford to fight ten year wars, give money to other countries, etc. etc., but can't take care of our elderly?

Your right. I agree.
The money given to countries that hate us is billions upon billions, lets put
that in our old person fund. Those greedy bastards messing with SS are going to start
the second civil war.

reply to post by Hefficide


I strongly disagree with your assessment of disability/survivor benefits as being different. I would much rather see a cut in senior's benefits to aid the disabled over giving more and more to the elderly.

reply to post by ShadeWolf


My reference to those benefits was in the context of them being different in the sense that the people receiving those benefits would not have paid into them the same way as a retiree would have. This is why I made sure to separate the categories - to avoid anyone saying "A disabled person didn't pay in all of their life...."

My intent was not to weigh or compare worthiness for any of the differing benefits, pro or con.

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide


I guess the word KNOW is a bit too strong. I know his first name, never been to his house. No idea where he lives. He asks me technical questions on cars/computers etc.I do know his employer. They don't like it but he works cheap. He probably has been turned in. I have heard a couple people complain about him scamming the system. It gets blamed on Obama every time to be honest. Things like that are accepted unfortunately. Funny thing is i have a back injury, a knee injury and a shoulder injury that could probably get me SS at my age but will never ever apply for SS or disability. I started paying into SS in 1974. I grew up knowing i would never see a dime of it and i guess that shaped my opinion of it. My mother and grandmother received it so i look at it as taking care of them.

reply to post by CB328

I don't have to steal it. It is already gone. You are living off of the sweat of your children and grandchildren now. You are living off of money they haven't even earned yet. Do you feel good about enslaving your grandchildren?

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by CB328

 

I don't have to steal it. It is already gone. You are living off of the sweat of your children and grandchildren now. You are living off of money they haven't even earned yet. Do you feel good about enslaving your grandchildren?

No, not at all. As I said before, our government did this to us. We worked and paid into it all our lives, they stole it. Do I want my children and grand children to have to pay for this? NO .......... I want the damn government to fix it. Quit fighting foreign wars for big business, and quit sending money in foreign aid, and fix the # they broke.

Put me on their retirement plan..................yes, that is what I want, the retirement plan congress has.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


If you wrecked your car and your insurance company told you "Sorry dude. But we're a bit tight right now. We can't have you profiting off of the premiums of others. Therefore we are not paying you, even though you had every right to collect...."

Would you accept that?

That is what we're discussing here. Insurance upon which premiums were paid, over time, paying off on their end of the contract.

And before you reply with anything about the debt... Funny fact. When Clinton needed some image rehab over a certain chubby girl, * BAM * the debt magically was balanced. Awesome, huh... how it ( and us ) can all be manipulated that quickly and easily.

Strange world we live in.

~Heff

Originally posted by bintim

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
reply to post by CB328

 

I don't have to steal it. It is already gone. You are living off of the sweat of your children and grandchildren now. You are living off of money they haven't even earned yet. Do you feel good about enslaving your grandchildren?

No, not at all. As I said before, our government did this to us. We worked and paid into it all our lives, they stole it. Do I want my children and grand children to have to pay for this? NO .......... I want the damn government to fix it. Quit fighting foreign wars for big business, and quit sending money in foreign aid, and fix the # they broke.

How? Where will that money come from? SS is dead broke, There is no money in the so called trust fund. The politicians spent it, allot of it went to buying votes. Now your children, their children, and their children's children will have to pay it. Is your life more important than that of your children? The recipients of SS and all of the other socialist programs all continue to vote these crooks back into office. Thus they are all complicit in the enslavement of even unborn generations. Is their enslavement worth the money you take from them?

reply to post by Hefficide
The budget might have been "balanced", but the debt remained and continued to grow. The last president to pay off the debt was Andrew Jackson. The debt is here. WE ARE ENSLAVING OUR KIDS! That is the truth. It must be dealt with, one way or the other.

I read a theory some time ago about funding SS retirement by using the money deducted and matched to buy into 30 year treasury Bonds.

Perhaps something like a special bond fund.

The idea seemed to use the interest coupons every six months to equal the current monthly payments.

The principal value would be "sold" or rolled over if a recipient lives long enough.

The principal bond value and coupons would also be "inheritable" ....

Does anyone have details on that idea ?

I can't locate the original story.

They even had some funding for disability and all the other SS benefits.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


So, if I were to suggest that we stop the Bush tax cuts on the rich and maybe even make businesses and the exceptionally wealthy help out a little more - for the sake of the kids. You'll agree with me?

~Heff

reply to post by Hefficide

If you wrecked your car and your insurance company told you "Sorry dude. But we're a bit tight right now. We can't have you profiting off of the premiums of others. Therefore we are not paying you, even though you had every right to collect...." Would you accept that?

I wanted to address this separately. First, if I was at fault for wrecking my car my insurance would not cover it. I have CHOSEN to not have that coverage. Second, if it was someone else's fault then their insurance would pay or I would use the court system to get compensation from them. Third, private insurance companies are nothing like the SS program. The government is not subject to any oversight save that of the lazy electorate. The same electorate that, by and large, is exemplifying the "screw the future generations as long as I get mine" mentality that seems to afflict all liberals and socialists. If corporate execs looted the insurance company's coffers the same way the congress has looted social security, there is a chance that they might actually get punished. Politicians who loot? They get reelected.

Originally posted by DarthMuerte
How? Where will that money come from? SS is dead broke, There is no money in the so called trust fund. The politicians spent it, allot of it went to buying votes. Now your children, their children, and their children's children will have to pay it. Is your life more important than that of your children? The recipients of SS and all of the other socialist programs all continue to vote these crooks back into office. Thus they are all complicit in the enslavement of even unborn generations. Is their enslavement worth the money you take from them?

Other posters are being way to nice..

Don't give me that its for the children crap...
I'm sure this guy loves his kids and/or grand kids..
Stop trying to guilt trip this guy under the guise of
being real. This guy nor i or the rest of us in this thread
screwed up SS. We do our part the gov. needs to do theirs.
To try and act like they shouldn't ever receive it is sick...
lay off[

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

So, if I were to suggest that we stop the Bush tax cuts on the rich and maybe even make businesses and the exceptionally wealthy help out a little more - for the sake of the kids. You'll agree with me?

~Heff

No. I would not. If you give the government more money, they will just waste it. Spending needs to be cut. Fiscal sanity, fiscal responsibility, needs to be embraced. The nation does not have a revenue problem. It has a serious spending problem.

Originally posted by popcornmafia

Other posters are being way to nice..

Don't give me that its for the children crap...
I'm sure this guy loves his kids and/or grand kids..
Stop trying to guilt trip this guy under the guise of
being real. This guy nor i or the rest of us in this thread
screwed up SS. We do our part the gov. needs to do theirs.
To try and act like they shouldn't ever receive it is sick...
lay off

Nice is not going to solve this problem. When reality slaps you in the face it hurts. Don't believe me? Ask the Greeks. Ask the Spanish. Ask the Argentinians. Open our eyes and see where uncontrolled social spending leads. Other countries are going over the financial cliff. Do we just continue to follow their bad example? Socialism does not work. That experiment has failed. Time to drop Keynesian economics. We need to wake the hell up and make the hard choices now. It will only get worse the longer we wait.

reply to post by DarthMuerte


Social Security IS insurance.

In the United States, Social Security refers to the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) federal program. The original Social Security Act (1935)[2] and the current version of the Act, as amended encompass several social welfare and social insurance programs.
Social Security is primarily funded through dedicated payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA). Tax deposits are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund which comprise the Social Security Trust Fund.

And to claim that private insurance companies are managed better.... Ummm three letters. AIG.

AIG suffered from a liquidity crisis when its credit ratings were downgraded below "AA" levels in September 2008. The United States Federal Reserve Bank on September 16, 2008 created an $85 billion credit facility to enable the company to meet increased collateral obligations consequent to the credit rating downgrade, in exchange for the issuance of a stock warrant to the Federal Reserve Bank for 79.9% of the equity of AIG. The Federal Reserve Bank and the United States Treasury by May 2009 had increased the potential financial support to AIG, with the support of an investment of as much as $70 billion, a $60 billion credit line and $52.5 billion to buy mortgage-based assets owned or guaranteed by AIG, increasing the total amount available to as much as $182.5 billion.[6][7] AIG subsequently sold a number of its subsidiaries and other assets to pay down loans received, and continues to seek buyers of its assets.

Taxpayers saved AIG's insurance obligations. Do you judge them as harshly? Shall we demand that AIG quit doing business this instant?

~Heff

reply to post by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by DarthMuerte

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by DarthMuerte

 

So, if I were to suggest that we stop the Bush tax cuts on the rich and maybe even make businesses and the exceptionally wealthy help out a little more - for the sake of the kids. You'll agree with me?

~Heff

No. I would not. If you give the government more money, they will just waste it. Spending needs to be cut. Fiscal sanity, fiscal responsibility, needs to be embraced. The nation does not have a revenue problem. It has a serious spending problem.

This post should be in textbooks worldwide as an example of selective thinking, partisanship, and fundamentalism at all costs.

So you only care about the kids if it doesn't inconvenience the rich?

Oh, and you didn't even bother to relate to my earlier posts when I said that if we STOPPED government corruption and the practice of lobbying, then maybe there'd be enough to cover taking care of the sick, old, and disabled. You apparently think that crooked politicians are less of a burden than the elderly and sick?

~Heff