Posted on 09/19/2014 6:25:51 AM PDT by logi_cal869
I’m sorry for your work situation and made a typographical misstatement. It’s about $1600 before you have to pay back the leeches that stole your FICA and interest.
Is that $1600 per month or something else?
I took SS at age 62, and have been very pleased with the result. I kept my money in my investments, ....I worked the figures (because I didn’t have anything else to ) and found that over the years with the year end statement I got from SS, I would have $950,00, or more, amoritized to more than 3X, what I have from this scam. I only want my investment back. I’m gonna die before I get it back. If I could invest in the S&P over the last 59 years, my family could be rich.
Sorry, I replied in another post and took care of my mistake. $16,000 is the answer. I get that part time as a security guard.
There are several aspects to consider but the main one is simple. Don't take Social Security if you are still creating income.
I started taking Soc Security when I was 65, though I was still working. I did so because the law changed to let me draw full Soc Security without penalty for earned income. Because I was still paying into Soc Security my benefit increased as a result. I worked for 2 1/2 years after I started taking Soc Security.
I get it. I get in a hurry and don't read things all the way through sometimes, too.
If you read the linked Politifact article, the 'fireside chat' was proffered as supporting George Will's assertion that SS was intended to free up jobs.
Furthermore, FDR is, IMHO, being unusually frank in that discussion, likely because the SSA had already passed the prior year and it wasn't an election year. I don't know if it was even broadcast.
The first is to make provisions intended to relieve, to minimize, and to prevent future unemployment; ...Our social security legislation is an attempt to answer the first of these questions.
Find that printed anywhere besides this 'chat'...19 whopping results come up for a partial quote on Google, most of which for obscure books. Hence my post.
“she DID PAY into it”
That’s beside the point. I was responding to the claim that SS was intended to benefit those who pay into the system (in a manner of speaking), which is wrong for a number of reasons, the least arguable one being the first beneficiaries could only pay into the system by jumping in a time machine. But for the record, no, she didn’t “PAY into it,” since there’s no “it” to have paid into.
“You are the Muzzie lover, right?”
If by “lover” you mean I don’t want to kill all billion+ of them, which comprises almost a quarter of the earth’s population, yes.
You’re right, sometimes they let things slip, sometimes they’re franker than they’d like to have been, and sometimes time obscures what was plain in the past. It’s just that as a general rule I don’t go to what politicians say, especially in prepared speeches, to learn what their policies are about. I’ve learned this from a lifetime of listening to them make no sense.
....and why not?
Is this a serious post? Because if the argument’s about whether SS has to give you back the very same bills you never gave them in the first place then yes, I concede. Back in reality, people put their money into what are known as “demand deposits,” which, as implied by the name, entitle you to your money back upon demand. Because of this receipts can be traded as currency unto themselves. Various things can get in the way of this: bankers hours, fees, this, that, and the other, but in the meantime the bank keeps track and pretends your money’s in the vault. Granted, with fractional reserve banking 9 out of 10 or so dollars belong to two people at once, and should there be a run on the banks they’ll fail and you might not get your money back. But that’s not what we’re talking about.
SS taxes, meanwhile, go into a pile with the rest of federal revenue, are spent, then years later you may or may not get something back if they feel like it. The very idea that there’s more than a hypothetical connection between taxes and benefits when benefits are paid from the general fund and our federal government is several trillion dollars in debt is laughable.
“the truth is that they squandered the SS Trust Fund long ago”
The truth is there was no trust fund. That’s yet another thing they made up to trick you into supporting socialism.
“As we’ve seen in Cyprus...”
As we’ve seen here they can abrogate contracts at will. You might as well argue they can outright steal from us, as they’ve done, at gunpoint. But that’d make a poor argument for SS benefits somehow being your property. Call it the “hey, there’s no such thing as property anyway, sp be thankful for what they give you” argument. SS benefits aren’t like bank deposits, face it.
“it splits a paycheck seven ways”
The essence of socialism.
“what they give me is a claim against future SS taxes”
Can I see this claim? Did you get it in the mail? Would a judge admit it as evidence should you be forced to sue?
By the way, what if there are no future SS taxes? For you, specifically? Not an idle question, given our 17+ trillion dollar debt.
It’s a Ponzi Scheme only if you’re defrauded. In your case you should say only government can take money from you at the point of a gun, and we should be grateful for every cent they’re kind enough to flip back.
I agree. That's why this little tidbit is so unique.
Search for the emphasized passages on Google; how many things has anyone ever searched for that EVER turned up less than a couple dozen hits? (Well, post-2000 anyway...after Algore 'invented' the 'net /s...or when things were still being indexed.)
Suppressed...that's what it is. IMHO
I did get it in the mail, or at least I got proof that the claim exists. Every year I get a letter from SS telling me what my benefits are for the next year. I don't know where this year's one is, but I will show you next year's as soon as I get it.
I suspect a judge would admit it as evidence. It is an official communication from a government agency to me.
“While the truth is that they squandered the SS Trust Fund long ago,”
They haven’t squandered it. SS has always been a pass through program, with current SS taxes matched to current SS payouts. At one time SS taxes had to be adjusted yearly but IIRC during LBJ they began purchasing Treasury bonds with any excess money taken in.
Your analogy of how a bank works is a good illustration of how the SS system was designed to operate.
That is most certainly not how a bank works.
“They haven’t squandered it [i.e. the phantom “trust fund”]. SS has always been a pass through program, with current SS taxes matched to current SS payouts.”
What, then, does that have to do with a “trust fund”? There isn’t one, the way you describe it. There are taxes, and then there’re payouts. In reality there is all government revenue and all government spending, but let’s pretend SS taxes are special for argument’s sake. By the time you receive benefits whatever you paid is gone, and your SS income is dependent on taxing whoever happens to be working then.
So why didn’t you tell the other poster that, instead of saying “they haven’t squandered it”? What is the “it” they haven’t squandered? “It” doesn’t exist!
You’re being unresponsive. The claim you previously described is the one you have based on all the taxes you paid your whole working life. What you describe here is a year by year thing, apparently, prepared after you’re already receiving benefits. What does that have to do with what we’ve been talking about? They could give you that sort of statement without your ever having worked in your life.
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.