Posted on 01/08/2008 5:58:42 PM PST by Vigilanteman
I am sorry I just read the answer to my question.
Here’s my idea......there are probably a LOT of people that really don’t their SS money for retirement. I say that if anyone wants to “sacrifice” it for the sake of their country, just as our Military sacrifices, they should be able to and be PRESENTED with A MEDAL of HONOR and SACRIFICE....something to show for their sacrifice. I know it sounds corny, but I hear liberals talk about we aren’t asked to sacrifice anything, and I say this would beone way to do that and have a CERTIFICATE to show for it.
That will help big time especially I find it ridiculous that 50 year old folks from other countries can come here and work 10 years and start collecting a check for the rest of their lives is ludicrous. I think you come here at 50 than the EARLIEST you are eligible to collect as long as you completed 120 quarters would be 80 years old. That would help so much. The quarters MUST BE RAISED!!! People are eligible for SS when they are 28 if they begin working at 18...that is insane!
When was Social Security ever solvent?
People who are realy disabled for example. Surviving children of parents who deceased too early in life.
Why should SS take care of these folks? First disability could be part of the welfare program which is or should be separate from SS. Secondly surviving children should not be receiving SS. Life Insurance is what should be used to raise those children and the surviving parent should also get a job. A friend of mine lost her husband and has five children. She received a million from the life insurance, his company and a check for like three grand a month from SS. Is that really necessary? Please this is not what it is designed for.
When I retire I will have no debts and a monthly income of about $7000.
Don’t let the government know that. I believe that the people making over 4000 a month from pension and other savings are going to be the first hit whenever they decide to make changes to SS. It is a guess but I believe that I will be close to right.
Bingo
Chile proved privatization would work.
When Bush proposed we try just a little bit of that provenly successful program for just a small portion of social security and with 0.01% of the effort and intensity that he put into illegal alien amnesty, do you remember the uproar engineered by AARP and other professional nanny staters?
The oulined plan would blunt said uproar by initially offering the government employee unions an opportunity to grow.
I've known for a long time that all the money SS confiscated from me would never be returned to me. Whether or not it was intended, this ponzi scheme will wind up as one more way to redistribute the wealth.
Oh yeah. You are so right. It is going to be ugly too. I am glad that most of us realize it on this site, but the liberals are going to go postal. lol.
I’d go for it. If the whole of gub’mint were manned by toothless old goobers like me we’d all benifit. I’d have someone to hector all day and revolution would be a lot easier ‘cause toothless old goobers don’t fight that well.
Well, my first thought was that you truly don’t understand what’s going on behind the scenes. But then you mentioned California and decided you might be on to something there. Even I have troubles with sectors of California! Lol.
Well I must admit your article coincided with a very long and trying day. I must admit I’m happy there is someone bringing Social Security issues to the forefront because it truly is a program that affects every one of us.
One thing I can confirm is that there are a lot overpaid and underpaid people in this country (both private side and in the government). Turnpike operators certainly shouldn’t be making $24/hr in Pennsylvania or anywhere else for that matter.
Hospitals pay their least skilled workers exceptionally well too (one of those hidden reasons our health care costs are so high).
I also happen to agree that senior citizens are an enormously untapped resource. What my agency does would be too complex for someone who wanted to work part time or not be stressed out in their senior years so I’m not sure your plan would work in our operation (but your idea does have merit).
I wonder a bit if there are that many seniors that really want to be working though.
We could just dismantle the entire system and only pay people who have paid in (period). But the SSA is a “social insurance program” so people who are crying “socialism” are spot on. It’s intended to protect our most vulnerable members of society. If families are willing to start caring for their largely impaired seniors or disabled members, then we might get by. The prospect of doing so for the average American is not appealing. Do you really want to care for your indigent mother in law? :-)
Just having a bit of fun here this morning.
I couldn’t agree more. In fact I consider parents responsible for carrying life insurance for at least the first 20 years of a child’s life. It’s really a crying shame that parents don’t at least do that much for their kids. Unfortunately the only way to make life insurance replace Social Security Survivor’s benefits is to require people to purchase life insurance. I’m guessing that would go over like a lead brick for those folks who want the government to shrink.
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.