Senior citizens cutting back on their necessities

#26
#26
overseasorange2 said:
I never rely on anyone to take car of my retirement, except me.....especially Uncle Sam. By the way, if the government owes us nothing, then why the heck are we paying taxes for all these years. ....For the privilege of calling ourselves U.S. citizens:eek:lol::eek:lol:
Click to expand...

The short answer would be this is exactly the way our elected government feels about it's citizenry.
 
#27
#27
overseasorange2 said:
I never rely on anyone to take car of my retirement, except me.....especially Uncle Sam. By the way, if the government owes us nothing, then why the heck are we paying taxes for all these years. ....For the privilege of calling ourselves U.S. citizens:eek:lol::eek:lol:
Click to expand...

beats me. to pay for unemployed losers?
 
#31
#31
MG1968 said:
the government should offer lump sum payments. use a formula something like "number of years paid into system" x 3.14159 x the average monthly payment amount for all current recipients.

it would probably be cheaper than the payment in perpetuity plan that is happening now

yeah, I know, it's probably a bad idea
Click to expand...
:unsure:
 
#33
#33
A market analyst spoke to my office a couple months and he said Medicare and the Obama health plan were a far greater issue for our future than ss.

Ss was created to give seniors incentive to retire so jobs would open up for the younger generations. It does say right on your ss statement that its not guaranteed if I'm not mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#34
#34
It's not guaranteed and it's not your money. If the government wanted to they could seize the whole pool and deny another cent of it gets handed out. Of course there would be rioting in doing so but no law guarantees this money belongs to those who put in.
 
#35
#35
Vols520 said:
A market analyst spoke to my office a couple months and he said Medicare and the Obama health plan were a far greater issue for our future than ss.

Ss was created to give seniors incentive to retire so jobs would open up for the younger generations. It does say right on your ss statement that its not guaranteed if I'm not mistaken.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...


If that's what the analyst said to you then I wouldn't give much of what he says any weight.
 
#36
#36
lawgator1 said:
If that's what the analyst said to you then I wouldn't give much of what he says any weight.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said. But think about when the program was created.

It's not a far fetched idea. People needed an incentive to retire, and open up the job market for new families.
 
#37
#37
KentheOrange said:
When I started paying there was a fund. Not my fault they raped the fund and changed the rules.
Click to expand...

The democrat party is the one who raped the fund, from the days of FDR they have been responsible for every policy shift that has made SS have the bleak future that it now enjoys.



droski said:
there was never a fund. they called it a fund, but the fund never existed. this was well known. can't blame anyone but yourself if you relied on that to be there forever.
Click to expand...

Dropski you are either ignorant of or misrepresenting the facts.

SS started out as a retirement fund that was billed as insurance.

At some point the dims diverted the fund into the general fund and spent it.

Later on it was changed from SS insurance to SS tax.

BTW, if you were born in 1943, retirement age is 65 + 10 months.

If you were born in 1947, reitement age is 66.

People who have been forced to pay up to and over 12% of their income during their working life have every right to expect a return!!
 
#38
#38
CSpindizzy said:
It's not guaranteed and it's not your money. If the government wanted to they could seize the whole pool and deny another cent of it gets handed out. Of course there would be rioting in doing so but no law guarantees this money belongs to those who put in.
Click to expand...

Ya don't think anyone in the Obama SS administration would be cooking the books do you??

In the whole history of SS these are the first two years that there will be no col raise.

Any fool can go to the local supermarket and see prices are increasing.

Last year Obamamma said the $250 stimulus would cover the lack of a raise but then democrats voted not to fund that part of the program from the hundreds of billions remaining in the stimulus fund.

Fool me once shame of you, fool me twice, shame on me.

varvel.jpg
 
#39
#39
gsvol said:
The democrat party is the one who raped the fund, from the days of FDR they have been responsible for every policy shift that has made SS have the bleak future that it now enjoys.





Dropski you are either ignorant of or misrepresenting the facts.

SS started out as a retirement fund that was billed as insurance.

At some point the dims diverted the fund into the general fund and spent it.

Later on it was changed from SS insurance to SS tax.

BTW, if you were born in 1943, retirement age is 65 + 10 months.

If you were born in 1947, reitement age is 66.

People who have been forced to pay up to and over 12% of their income during their working life have every right to expect a return!!
Click to expand...


:good!:
 
#40
#40
Younger people like me have every right to be outraged to be forced into paying into the system knowing full well we will never benefit from it. It's slavery.
 
#41
#41
gsvol said:
People who have been forced to pay up to and over 12% of their income during their working life have every right to expect a return!!
Click to expand...

so it will never end? Eventually someone will have to be weaned off the gov't teat
 
#42
#42
IPorange said:
Younger people like me have every right to be outraged to be forced into paying into the system knowing full well we will never benefit from it. It's slavery.
Click to expand...

I said the same thing when I was young, but now that I have paid in for 30 years, yes I want my piece of the pie
 
#43
#43
gsvol said:
Dropski you are either ignorant of or misrepresenting the facts.

SS started out as a retirement fund that was billed as insurance.

At some point the dims diverted the fund into the general fund and spent it.

Later on it was changed from SS insurance to SS tax.

BTW, if you were born in 1943, retirement age is 65 + 10 months.

If you were born in 1947, reitement age is 66.

People who have been forced to pay up to and over 12% of their income during their working life have every right to expect a return!!
Click to expand...

you've had 30+ years to figure it out. let's not act like this changed recently. i'd like to think i have the right to get back some of the hundreds of thousands of $$$ in taxes i've already paid, but i don't see that happening either. fact remains that you are far more likely to take out far more than you put in. forgive me for not wanting to get raped by the old.
 
#44
#44
overseasorange2 said:
I said the same thing when I was young, but now that I have paid in for 30 years, yes I want my piece of the pie
Click to expand...

what happened to you caring abuot the poor? does it bother you that the old are the richest people in this country and that the young are the poorest? we should merge it with welfare. if you are going to starve to death you'll get some money. otherwise screw you.
 
#45
#45
I don't think it will that bad. obamacare (if not repealed) will deny meds to keep senior citizens alive, they'll eventually die, leaving more money in ss pot. so in a way, he's actually helping ss save.
 
#46
#46
overseasorange2 said:
I said the same thing when I was young, but now that I have paid in for 30 years, yes I want my piece of the pie
Click to expand...

Thats the problem, everyone wants their piece of pie and it has already been spent. Now they're trying to get another piece of pie from other generations.

At some point one of the following generations is going to take whats left of the pie and the rest are going to starve.
 
#47
#47
IPorange said:
Younger people like me have every right to be outraged to be forced into paying into the system knowing full well we will never benefit from it. It's slavery.
Click to expand...

I said the same thing in 1968.

Not particularly about SS, which is funded by deductions from wokers wages but about how we monetize the debt.

Looking for someone who can explain that in terms everyone can understand.

You wanna give it a try? Dropski refuses and mg1968 obviously doesn't know.


utvolpj said:
so it will never end? Eventually someone will have to be weaned off the gov't teat
Click to expand...

You don't know the half of it.

Those who may be weaned off the government teat shouldn't be the same ones who have been funding the government teat all their life.

Some republicans have been trying to advance some sort of realistic SS reform for twenty years but all the democrats can do is put more people on the rolls (some very undeservedly) while using scare tactics at town hall meetings telling elderly people that republicans are trying to do away with SS.
 
#48
#48
gsvol said:
Some republicans have been trying to advance some sort of realistic SS reform for twenty years but all the democrats can do is put more people on the rolls (some very undeservedly) while using scare tactics at town hall meetings telling elderly people that republicans are trying to do away with SS.
Click to expand...



Like what? Privatizing it?

That works great in principle if 1) the options for investing are limited to sound vehicles over a very long period of time; and 2) no one retires during a downturn.

It's bad enough that so many people hit retirement age with nothing to speak of except social security. I'd hate to think what would happen to the millions of people retiring in the current 5-10 year span if their social security had been whalloped by the market plunge post dotcom and again in 2007.

The irony is that people would have one heckuva an incentive to reitre early if they were in their late 50's so as to cash out from the markets if there are worries about a coming down cycle that will kill them in their 60's and 70's, hastening a disaster if they all leave in a short period of time and take their investment marbles with them..
 
Last edited:
#49
#49
lawgator1 said:
It's bad enough that so many people hit retirement age with nothing to speak of except social security.
Click to expand...

please tell me whose fault that is and who is responsible for providing the money so they can retire at some arbitrary age
 
#50
#50
lawgator1 said:
Like what? Privatizing it?

That works great in principle if 1) the options for investing are limited to sound vehicles over a very long period of time; and 2) no one retires during a downturn.

It's bad enough that so many people hit retirement age with nothing to speak of except social security. I'd hate to think what would happen to the millions of people retiring in the current 5-10 year span if their social security had been whalloped by the market plunge post dotcom and again in 2007.

The irony is that people would have one heckuva an incentive to reitre early if they were in their late 50's so as to cash out from the markets if there are worries about a coming down cycle that will kill them in their 60's and 70's, hastening a disaster if they all leave in a short period of time and take their investment marbles with them..
Click to expand...

the only bad part about privatizaton is that we still need to fund the current retirees. i.e. we'd have to double fund to privatize it. therefore it doesn't make a lot of sense.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top