Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Social Security Hurts Society and Isn’t Secure
Canada Free Press ^ | 12/11/14 | Dr. Robert Owens

Posted on 12/11/2014 7:51:01 PM PST by Sean_Anthony

This so-called insurance meant from the beginning not merely compulsory insurance it also meant compulsory membership in a unitary system controlled and enforced by the state.

The concept of a social safety net is well accepted throughout the Western World. The idea that some provision should be made for those who through no fault of their own are unable to provide for themselves first appeared as a state policy in Germany in the 19th century as the Iron Chancellor, Bismarck, sought to co-opt the popular appeal of socialism and strengthen the newly founded German Imperial state. The idea struck a chord in the hearts of most people in Europe and in the hearts of its descendants around the world.

In days gone by the family, the parish church and the local community had filled this need. However, with the growth of cities and the near total separation of these urban populations from the land, it became necessary for the wider community to accept this responsibility.

(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; Politics; Society
KEYWORDS: insurance; socialsecurity

1 posted on 12/11/2014 7:51:01 PM PST by Sean_Anthony
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sean_Anthony
I believe the threshold is $15,500. After this for every 2 dollars earned your social security is reduced 1 dollar. So if you own a business, have assets that produce income, or work the "contributions" you paid in to this "pension plan" (where benefits were determined by what you paid in) are reduced.

IOW, the nanny state will decide whether you should get your allowance or not.

2 posted on 12/11/2014 7:59:34 PM PST by wmfights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sean_Anthony

There is a certain amount of truth to this. When I was a kid, I could not screw up because my parents were not in a position to help me very much if I screwed up, and I knew this, and so did they. So, generally, I didn’t. But I saw people whose parents COULD help them out if they screwed up, screw up. Now, you don’t need parents (at least not your own, anyway) to bail you out...and you don’t have to listen to any “I told you so’s”, either.


3 posted on 12/11/2014 8:02:56 PM PST by The Antiyuppie ("When small men cast long shadows, then it is very late in the day.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
The maximum annual income limit you can earn before losing some of your benefit, is adjusted up annually from year to year. When I retired in 2010, it was $14,400. But this is only "earned" income, not income from assets or retirement funds. You have to earn it, like wages or a salary. And then when you turn full retirement age, you can earn as much as you want without being penalized. Full retirement age is different depending on when you were born. For me it was 66 year old. I'm 67 now and can earn as much as I want without a penalty..
4 posted on 12/11/2014 8:48:08 PM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wmfights
The maximum annual income limit you can earn before losing some of your benefit, is adjusted up annually from year to year. When I retired in 2010, it was $14,400. But this is only "earned" income, not income from assets or retirement funds. You have to earn it, like wages or a salary. And then when you turn full retirement age, you can earn as much as you want without being penalized. Full retirement age is different depending on when you were born. For me it was 66 year old. I'm 67 now and can earn as much as I want without a penalty..
5 posted on 12/11/2014 8:48:08 PM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wmfights

“, have assets that produce income,”


Uh,uh,uh.

You could have millions coming in that way and it has no effect.

.


6 posted on 12/11/2014 8:53:32 PM PST by Mears
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: The Antiyuppie
There is a certain amount of truth to this. When I was a kid, I could not screw up because my parents were not in a position to help me very much if I screwed up, and I knew this, and so did they. So, generally, I didn’t. But I saw people whose parents COULD help them out if they screwed up, screw up. Now, you don’t need parents (at least not your own, anyway) to bail you out...and you don’t have to listen to any “I told you so’s”, either.

I believe that you are referring to the well-known phenomenon of moral hazard, right?

Regards,

7 posted on 12/11/2014 9:24:47 PM PST by alexander_busek (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: HotHunt

Right now the sum is one thousand and seventy dollars a month; next year it’ll be one thousand and ninety dollars a month. I know this because I’ve been on SSD for some time working out serious mental problems and restructuring my life. My SSD comes from my work history, which is good. I haven’t liked it, but I’ve been working on building my own business and facing serious demons that I’ve been unable to face in the past. I’ll be off it shortly, so please don’t flame me.

I support SSD and SSI if it means keeping people off the streets.

Not everyone has a family to fall back on and I assure you that not everyone on assistance is lazy or shiftless.


8 posted on 12/11/2014 9:49:01 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sean_Anthony

Rick Perry was right: it is a Ponzi scheme and ought to be eliminated. An intrusive government (FDR and Frances Perkins) spelled the end of the thrifty, self-sufficient American. Similarly, Ronald Reagan was right about the dangers of Medicare. These socialist programs were unheard of during the good governance of President Calvin Coolidge. This Republic would be far better off without these things.


9 posted on 12/11/2014 9:53:19 PM PST by re_nortex (DP - that's what I like about Texas)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sean_Anthony

Excellent analysis.


10 posted on 12/11/2014 9:57:05 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: re_nortex
An intrusive government (FDR and Frances Perkins) spelled the end of the thrifty, self-sufficient American.

It was Government Me-too-ism. SSI tries to replicate what was the model of Life Insurance being Annuitized and becoming an income stream that you probably could have purchased in the late 20's early 30's. It seems everytime they try to replicate something in the private sector ( like health care ) they muck it up.

11 posted on 12/12/2014 3:03:02 AM PST by taildragger (Not my Circus, Not my Monkey ( Boy does that apply to DC...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sean_Anthony

When SS was started, a person had to be 65 years of age to draw however, the average life expectancy was 59 years. dim-0s knew this, and the plan was to rob working age Americans their entire working lives, only to have them die before becoming old enough to draw.


12 posted on 12/12/2014 4:28:03 AM PST by weezel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weezel
When SS was started, a person had to be 65 years of age to draw however, the average life expectancy was 59 years. dim-0s knew this, and the plan was to rob working age Americans their entire working lives, only to have them die before becoming old enough to draw.

Cynic. Next thing you'll be saying is that the 401k is plot to control retirement savings so that they can be easily found and converted into government bonds at 3%.

13 posted on 12/12/2014 4:35:10 AM PST by Stentor (Maybe the Goldman Sachs thing is just a coincidence. /S)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister
Your mental issues must include paranoia because I can assure you, I never made a reply comment to you, at all. I did make a reply comment to someone else about Social Security only counting "earned" income in the limitations for income one could receive without penalty while you are drawing SS before you reach full retirement age.

My wife and I both have drawn SS since we retired three years ago, so I don't disparage anyone who chooses that route.

I don't know what you mean by "don't flame me" but I hope you can get you life back together.

14 posted on 12/12/2014 6:11:35 AM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: HotHunt

A lot of people here flame welfare recipients, I’m yes, testy about it since I dislike being dependent. SSD is different, but a lot of people on here tend to get hostile towards people who are on it.


15 posted on 12/12/2014 2:41:12 PM PST by CorporateStepsister (I am NOT going to force a man to make my dreams come true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: CorporateStepsister
Get it out of your head that Social Security is welfare. It is not. It is an entitlement that you paid into during your entire employed life.

It is easy for some to criticize others that are doing what they imagine they wouldn't do. But if they needed the money when their time comes, they would thankfully take the money. My wife and I have retirement incomes but our SS checks help make retirement a little easier. We are not embarrassed or shamed for taking what we paid for our entire adult lives and are entitled to.

16 posted on 12/12/2014 3:01:28 PM PST by HotHunt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson