CAN THE SECOND AMENDMENT AND SOCIAL SECURITY COEXIST?

JFPO ^ | April 17 2002 | JFPO

[Atlas Sneezed]

In todays age of computerization, the only rule necessary to stabilize the Social Security system is as follows:
This month's total SS receipts = next month's total SS distributions. To maintain this equilibrium, monthly payments to eligible recipients would be variable rather than fixed.

There is a better way. Just adjust the retirement age annually to keep things solvent. Those who thought they would be retiring at age 68 plus 3 months might have to work an extra month if funds are low this year, but that is no major crisis. If the economy is doing better, then they might be able to retire a month early. Those who are retired when there are lots of young workers retire younger, those on the other side of a boom retire much older. Importing immigrant workers reduces retirement ages, etc.

[Atlas Sneezed]

When it's time to start burying your guns, it's time to dig them up!

[mabelkitty]

They will never do that.

They farm out their child rearing, as well as their parent care. Who do you think is complaining about having to pay for their parents' drugs? It ain't Generation X.

[Centurion2000]

bump

[Xenalyte]

Why does this guy not capitalize Social Security? It's the name of the program and the administration - it's a proper name. Irritated me enough that I had trouble reading the whole thing.

[Shooter 2.5]

So why don't you run for the Board of Directors?

The election is in April and they'll be taking nominations for next year. Have fun.

[Poohbah]

But that requires surplus labor to be available to take care of the parents--and eldercare is rather labor-intensive. It will be expensive as hell.

If it isn't affordably available, then SOMEONE has to do it, and that's most likely to be the wife.

[metalurgist]

Future violent old geezer bump

[Fixit]

I'm just guessing here, since I didn't write this piece, but I suspect the author intentionally omitted capitalization to denigrate the compound newspeak lie represented by the name "social security."

[Ancesthntr]

Bump!

[FSPress]

The NRA has established itself as a Unitied Nations NGO - non governmental organization. As such, its relationship with the UN is governed by the following:

PRINCIPLES TO BE APPLIED IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CONSULTATIVE RELATIONS

The following principles shall be applied in establishing consultative relations with non-governmental organizations:

1. The organization shall be concerned with matters falling within the competence of the Economic and Social Council and its subsidiary bodies.

2. The aims and purposes of the organization shall be in conformity with the spirit, purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

3. The organization shall undertake to support the work of the United Nations and to promote knowledge of its principles and activities, in accordance with its own aims and purposes and the nature and scope of its competence and activities.

http://www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/res/1996/eres1996-31.htm

[Shooter 2.5]

Thanks for the information. A lot of NRA haters ignore the fact that the NRA worked with the Bush administration to tell the UN to take a hike when they tried to have a global small arms ban.

[FSPress]

My philosophy with the NRA is don't put all the eggs in one basket. I belong to several gun organizations and donate to others, including political candidates and proposition drives. When the NRA makes the anti-gunner types go off foaming at their mouths I send the NRA extra $$. When they do things like support anti-gunner McCarthy's Lady of Peace act they get nothing except smoking hot emails while they work their way back to good standing with me and my wallet.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

Oh man, just six more years and I can start sucking off of the government! Oh please let it last at least 10 more years. By then I'll have gotten out all I paid in and be living on the baby boomers.

Doesn't matter because they will just tax your SS check so high that the NET column only needs room for 2 digits.

That's one reason Why I haven't gotten one of those Roth IRAs. They say you pay the tax now and when you take out the money 30 years from now it's tax free. Yea right!

Like they would never change that law if they needed the cash. Or better yet they will get rid of the income tax and replace it with a national sales tax so you get taxed now and then.

[CurlyDave]

I believe that the maximum any now-retired person could have paid over their working tenure only amounts to a few years. Four is close as I recall; may be exactly right. What is certain is that even the people who paid the max every year will be collecting welfare off your and my check.

There is a lot more to it than a simple addition of money paid in vs. money received.

If the money paid in were placed in a bank account, the interest earned over the years would be more than the total funds deposited.

If the money were invested in accordance with any type of view toward modern portfolio theory the returns would be even greater.

I would much rather have the real value of what I have contributed, with interest, than a promise of some kind of payment from the government.

[AK2KX]

Bumping this old article up for a new look. Seems more feasible as time goes by.