Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The major problem is not SS benefits, but the cost of Medicare. Medicare costs going forward dwarf SS benefits, and there are going to have to be some serious adjustments made to the way we are doing things. When Medicare first came about medical costs for the elderly was minimal. Today with medicines ability to replace organs and joints as well as the extraordinary measures for life support, costs for elderly medical care has skyrocketed. Most of the money goes to support the last few years of life. There is going to have to be some kind of cap put on medical care if costs are ever to be brought under control. It is simply not worth spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in ICU units to treat people who are going to die within a year or so regardless.
I don't know that Medicare squanders unnecessarily on the dying, but you didn't mention the enormity of fraud engulfing the Medicare system. Phony care claims and overvalued medical hardware that not only robs the pensioners of adequate care but inflates the tax bill for the rest of us.
People are responsible for their own financial well being. The government is not responsible for them.
The government is responsible for, and exists for the purpose of, promoting the general welfare, according to the Constitution. Establishing a Social Security system, flawed as it might be, was intended to promote the general welfare, and it did that with spectacular success for 80 years now.
The demographic demands on it, in that time, increased about ten-fold. It was predicted that if the econmy also grew at the same rate, there would be no problem. Well, in fact, the economy DID increase more than tenfold, but pure abject selfishness on the part of the American people diverted that economic increase to bling, without allowing for the burgeoning economy to contribute to "promoting the general welfare" and now the money that might have ensured the well-being of retiring Americans has instead been spent on better and better lawn tractors.
In short, the Social Security system has in fact been looted by the growing middle class, who refused to grant enough of the newly created wealth to be applied to the people whom it was intended to benefit.
The government is responsible for, and exists for the purpose of, promoting the general welfare, according to the Constitution. Establishing a Social Security system, flawed as it might be, was intended to promote the general welfare, and it did that with spectacular success for 80 years now.
The demographic demands on it, in that time, increased about ten-fold. It was predicted that if the econmy also grew at the same rate, there would be no problem. Well, in fact, the economy DID increase more than tenfold, but pure abject selfishness on the part of the American people diverted that economic increase to bling, without allowing for the burgeoning economy to contribute to "promoting the general welfare" and now the money that might have ensured the well-being of retiring Americans has instead been spent on better and better lawn tractors.
In short, the Social Security system has in fact been looted by the growing middle class, who refused to grant enough of the newly created wealth to be applied to the people whom it was intended to benefit.
The general welfare clause does not pertain to individual rights. The general welfare clause is referenced in plural form, e.g. the general welfare of the united states as a whole. This is VERY different from the general welfare of specific individuals within the country. Along with that, the general welfare clause is supporting the text which grants congress the right to tax the people. The right to tax and the right of program creation are two extremely different things. The right to tax pertains to congress being allowed to pay to protect the rights specifically mentioned in the text, rights which retirement nor health care is not.
It is also fairly short sighted to call social security a 'spectacular success' for eighty years. First of all, the program is NOT 80 years old, as it was signed into law in 1935. Second of all, the program has flirted with insolvency since the 50s. A program that operates in ever-increasing deficit for decades is not a 'spectacular success', it is a ticking time bomb.
jtur - from your posts it is obvious you hate anyone who makes money, or anyone who has a job that pays well, but try to put your personal prejudices aside and see this program for what it is - a sandcastle built on a beach with an incoming tide. Sometimes people have to stop relying on others and actually work to help themselves. You call many Americans selfish? I call the Americans who make that claim lazy. Work harder to support yourself. That is the ethic on which this country was founded. If you have nothing, shut up and get back to work. That is what those of us who are successful do.
The general welfare clause does not pertain to individual rights.
.
The "general welfare" clause pertains to making this a more perfect union which does not allow itself to endure a destitute underclass wallowing in poverty in the gutters of our society, which was so conspicuous in the 18th century England from which we fought so hard to escape. To which you so ardently wish to return, through your own hatred of anyone who works as hard as he is able, but doesn't make a lot of money or have a job that pays well.
It's pretty hard for you to credibly accuse me of personal prejudices, when your posts are so lavishly embellished with your own.
For a person who is gifted to tell one who is not gifted "you'll just have to work harder" comes perilously close to the mindset that brought us slavery. Apparently, something else that we fought hard to get rid of, which brings about your nostalgia.
I don't know that Medicare squanders unnecessarily on the dying, but you didn't mention the enormity of fraud engulfing the Medicare system. Phony care claims and overvalued medical hardware that not only robs the pensioners of adequate care but inflates the tax bill for the rest of us.
"Last year, Medicare paid $50 billion just for doctor and hospital bills during the last two months of patients' lives - that's more than the budget of the Department of Homeland Security or the Department of Education."
(60 Minutes Nov. 22, 2009)
"General welfare" is NOT "particular welfare". All of our "social programs", and practically all of "our" collectivist crimes against ourselves, are of the "particular welfare" variety.
I understand what you are saying completely, and I really sympathize with those people. Again - I don't see what those problems have to do with government.
People are responsible for their own financial well being. The government is not responsible for them.
They have put into the system as well and they are punished not because they are incapable but because of mythos and a bottom line. It is not because they are lazy and it isn't because there is something wrong with them. It is simply because coproations can, and do, discriminate.
There is a point in time where we cannot always side with corporations. This is not the early 1900's. If the corporations cannot act responsible or be held accountable then people have every right to take from the system that they have put into.
"General welfare" is NOT "particular welfare". All of our "social programs", and practically all of "our" collectivist crimes against ourselves, are of the "particular welfare" variety.
Let us suppose, for a moment, that one of the several states completely abolishes every single governmental function that smacks in any way of socialism. Everyone is welcome to move there and populate that state. Who do you think is going to do the grunt work? Do you expect an army of workers to come rushing into your utopian state, to work for low wages cutting your grass and washing your clothes and repairing your roof and serving your french fries, when there is no prospect of any kind of a safety net for them in times of need? Who will bring their children to live in your state, to earn low wages and then have to pay school tuition for their kids?
Or would you happily agree to pay $30 an hour to menial workers to come and be of service to you, so they will have enough to invest in a retirement plan to provide for them when they are retired?
You want to live in a nation in which you can have all the benefits of a working class who does menial work, but not pay them. That is why I hate your economic philosophy. You can harangue each individual for not rising above the menial, but your own well-being still depends on all the rest of that menial class being kept down there. That's why the general welfare is the sum of the particular welfares, and you can't separate them.
The "general welfare" clause pertains to making this a more perfect union which does not allow itself to endure a destitute underclass wallowing in poverty in the gutters of our society, which was so conspicuous in the 18th century England from which we fought so hard to escape. To which you so ardently wish to return, through your own hatred of anyone who doesn't make a lot of money or have a job that pays well.
If the authors of the Constitution intended there to be programs like Social Security they would have created them. Social Security was modeled after the Soviet model at a time when Roosevelt's cabinet was impressed by the economic gains of the early Soviet Union. We all know how well that all worked out. It was, and is a failed experiment in socialism and falls victim to the same fundamental flaws that all programs which take from the productive members of society and give to the unproductive.
If the authors of the Constitution intended there to be programs like Social Security they would have created them.
Of the authors of the Constitution intended for women to vote, they'd have said so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
