Posted on 08/29/2013 8:50:43 AM PDT by barmag25
There are no more panhandlers or homeless people. Obama has fixed everything.
I’m suggesting that Conservatives vote in a principled manner for smaller government. Some of that shrinkage might have a bad effect on some people. Perhaps even on you. But if you use the ballot box to vote some goodies for yourself (and continuation of social security would be such a “goody”) then you are just a Liberal. Conservatives vote in a principled manner for smaller government. That’s all I’m saying. I talk the talk and I walk the walk. No brag, just fact.
Exactly.
I see your point. But leaving people who paid in their whole lives destitute is not a workable option. Giving less money people who saved up money in addition to SS is also not a good option, but it’s less bad. But it’s still bad and I don’t like it.
“Means-testing” should never be used, but it probably will be. I’m asked “Is it fair Bill Gates gets to collect SS?” I answer, “Did he pay in the necessary number of consecutive quarters? If so, yes it’s fair.”
I pretend to be deaf and use sign language(which I do know)
“What’s your logic?”
You and I were robbed. The sooner you realize that the sooner you can come to terms with it.
SS was a con job from the beginning. It was a way to get the middle class to pay higher taxes without going to the streets. It was just a higher tax, the money was spent with general revenue. The promise to give you welfare when you got old is no different than promising affirmative action to minorities, it was a plan to take from one group to give to another in order to gain votes.
Your money was spent, it isn’t there anymore. The only thing you can do is vote for they guy that will tax the next generation to keep your checks coming in. Your best bet is voting for the democrat although, the average republican doesn’t have the backbone to touch SS.
so if I paid in $9 a quarter for 8 quarters or whatever it is, I get to live forever on SS and its not welfare?
lol
$9 is not sufficient. Nice try, LOL.
I had a similar situation at a gas station once. FSA (Free Sh!t Army) type asked me if I could give him some money for gas while I was filling my truck at the pump. I told him I didn’t have any cash on me, to which he responded that I could just stick my credit card in the reader at the pump for him. Uh, no... I could only imagine what a cluster that would have turned in to.
In that area if you have only been pushed for money 4 times in 3 days you’re doing pretty good.
Private investments and 401Ks are not guaranteed benefit plans.
I had a pan handler in New Orleans tell me if I didn’t give him money he would come to my house that night. I replied yes, I had a couple friends who would like to meet him, Smith and Wesson.
Supreme Court Rulings
The “analogy between social welfare and ‘property’ cannot be stretched to impose a constitutional limitation on the power of Congress to make substantive changes in the law of entitlement to public benefits.” Furthermore, “[t]he fact that social security benefits are financed in part by taxes on an employee’s wages does not in itself limit the power of Congress to fix the levels of benefits under the Act or the conditions upon which they may be paid. Nor does an expectation of public benefits confer a contractual right to receive the expected amounts.”
—Richardson v. Belcher, 404 U.S. 78 (1971)
“It was doubtless out of an awareness of the need for such flexibility that Congress included in the original [Social Security] Act, and has since retained, a clause expressly reserving to it ‘[t]he right to alter, amend, or repeal any provision’ of the Act. 1104, 49 Stat. 648, 42 U.S.C. 1304. That provision makes express what is implicit in the institutional needs of the program.”
—Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603 (1960
Top it off with I pay DOUBLE because I'm self employed....and it's MANDATORY. And I shouldn't expect to get MY money back????
What's your logic?
The government told the people that they were owed the money the put into the system. However the government lied from the start and spent the money.
The current system is to try and raise the money to cover these obligation by making promises to new workers and using their money. (Classic Ponzi Scheme) The problem as Margaret Thatcher pointed out eventually you run out of other peoples money.
So we either need to bite the bullet and quit paying benefits, breaking the promise to those who have paid in. Or we have to continue to tax people to pay for the existing benefits promised and tell them they will never receive a penny for themselves. I think the second option is more honest, but you can't expect the younger generation to accept this system.
Given the options, I wouldn't expect the government to stay liquid long enough to keep this up much longer. I, being what is called a millennial, don't expect to see one dime of Social Security.
A friend of mine did that and it totally backfired on her. The panhandler knew how to fingerspell and started slowly and deliberately spelling out “C-A-N-Y-O-U-G-I-V-E-M-E...”
Did you know that technically he could have had you arrested for making a threat with a gun?
My Pop...a Marine in WW2..and Korea...gave to the U.S.of A....
Then worked his whole life...very successful.
Paid every dime they asked for.
Died just shy of 65.......The Ponzi worked perfectly on him.
And I'm following in his foot steps...........
Just another pawn in the game........
Please....don't think for a minute I don't understand.
Never said I expected to see my money..............
http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/09/TheNationalPonziScheme.htm
And the problem with entitlements in general: http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/11/OurMoralDilemma http://econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/articles/11/HandoutsMoralityAndCommonSense
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.