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.
Some 53 million Americans received Social Security benefits last year, while 156 million workers paid taxes that support it. The current withholding rate is 12.4% -- half of which is paid by workers, the other half by their employers.
If you think about it, every person that cashes a Social Security check is part of one great big Socialist enterprise. That's like 1/6th - 16 percent - of the entire population of the United States of America.
Think about this. That 309 million is TOTAL US population.. including children.... who DON'T pay taxes. So, that 153 million is a bigger number than it appears to be. It appears to be only a tad shy of half of the population.
It takes 3 workijng adults' taxes to support one person on Social Security.
Interesting.
You can thank LBJ and the D-cats in power at that time for passing legislation to start the drain of SS funds into general tax revenues. Thanks guys!
You can thank LBJ and the D-cats and Ronald Reagan in power at that time for passing legislation to start the drain of SS funds into general tax revenues. Thanks guys!
Fixed.
Case in point, not all of the seniors who collect Social Security or Democrats. Though if Republicans try to mess with it, they will be. It's not going anywhere.
You may not like it being called welfare, but Social Security IS welfare... welfare work.
:
Then what is it? You collect money from the government THATS NOT YOURS.. Thats welfare..
Interesting, considering the link you provided to explain welfare says this... "the efforts or programs of an agency, community, business organization, etc., to improve living conditions, increase job opportunities, secure hospitalization, and the like, for needy persons within its jurisdiction"
So, welfare goes beyond government involvement. Having said that, the constitution itself makes room for government involvement in welfare. No? If not, what exactly does "General welfare of the United States" imply?
SS is a socialistic program, but only because it is run by the government. In essence, it is not much different than say buying an auto-insurance that all pay into a pool and a few use it.
Too bad republicans didn't do anything about this when they were in office, or held majorities in the senate or house....
Couldn't! The Republicans were not given enough of a majority in the Senate to override Dems filabuster threat/action on anything Dems didn't like. So, now where does that put the blame?
Some 53 million Americans received Social Security benefits last year, while 156 million workers paid taxes that support it. The current withholding rate is 12.4% -- half of which is paid by workers, the other half by their employers.
If you think about it, every person that cashes a Social Security check is part of one great big Socialist enterprise. That's like 1/6th - 16 percent - of the entire population of the United States of America.
Think about this. That 309 million is TOTAL US population.. including children.... who DON'T pay taxes. So, that 153 million is a bigger number than it appears to be. It appears to be only a tad shy of half of the population.
It takes 3 workijng adults' taxes to support one person on Social Security.
Interesting.
Any debacle with SS would be one of the right wing dreams come true... "starve the beast" at work.
first of all social Security is an INSURANCE system designed to provide a minimal income to people that have lost their savings to a bank collapse or a burst financial bubble. It is not and never was supposed to be a public pension.
Any of the current problems with the Social Security program can be fixed by applying the tax to all income from all sources and limiting the payments so anyone with an all sources income over the 90th percentile does not receive any payments. Anyone over the 90th percentile of income is well enough off that they do not need income insurance payments.
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
.... Having said that, the constitution itself makes room for government involvement in welfare. No? If not, what exactly does "General welfare of the United States" imply?...
At the time of writing those words, it meant protecting citizens from invasion of our borders, arbitration between States when problems arise, etc. Welfare was the charge of churches and local groups with no government being involved. Today's welfare was created to garner votes and it has exploded way out of reality. NO ONE is entitled to welfare from the government as we know it today. It needs to go back to Churches and local groups. Cheaters and illegals need to be expunged.
I guarantee that handing out $'s to people who don't want to work or women having children out of wedlock, etc., was what they had in mind.
Social Security was mean to be a supplement income for retirement. If Congress had kept their hands off and these $'s had been invested with the provision that Congress could not touch interest earned either, there would be absolutely no problem.
At the time of writing those words, it meant protecting citizens from invasion of our borders, arbitration between States when problems arise, etc.
No. Welfare meant the same then as it does now. For definition, see above. You're assuming that the government's role was limited to defense and keeping states together. But let us look at the first clause of Article I, Section 8, which talks about how to pay for it all: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States"
It talks about empowering the legislative branch to collect taxes and handle a variety of tasks. General welfare implies betterment of the society as a whole. It doesn't enumerate what it entails but is largely subjective (and not unlike the need for the ninth amendment that ensures that the government doesn't protect only the enumerated rights, but those that should be people's rights on top of those enumerated, there is that subjectivity again).
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorrysda
I guarantee that handing out $'s to people who don't want to work or women having children out of wedlock, etc., was what they had in mind.
One could argue that tax breaks to married couple, for children are also a form of welfare. Creating conditions for businesses to thrive would be corporate welfare. And it would be hard to argue against. Again, something not specifically enumerated in the constitution. As for handing out $$$ to people who don't want to work... the logic applies as much now as it did then. BTW, who are these people you speak of? The currently unemployed?
Social Security was NOT meant to be supplemental retirement income but is an insurance system to protect people that have lost their private pensions to a market collapse or their bank accounts to failed banks. That is why I believe everybody should pay in but only the needy (income under the 90th percentile) should collect.
Interesting, considering the link you provided to explain welfare says this... "the efforts or programs of an agency, community, business organization, etc., to improve living conditions, increase job opportunities, secure hospitalization, and the like, for needy persons within its jurisdiction"
So, welfare goes beyond government involvement.
of course welfare goes well beyond government involvement. Churches for example, provide food and support for the poor. We have food banks, a thousands of non profits that operate in this country, they all provide welfare support..
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Having said that, the constitution itself makes room for government involvement in welfare. No? If not, what exactly does "General welfare of the United States" imply?
No, the general welfare of the United States, not the general welfare of the individual.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
SS is a socialistic program, but only because it is run by the government. In essence, it is not much different than say buying an auto-insurance that all pay into a pool and a few use it.
its vastly different than buying auto insurance because insurance revenues go into an investment account, which provide account receivables. In addition, you pay auto insurance to enjoy the priviledge of driving and your coverage stops the minute you stop paying. Paying into SS insnt an option and its coverage begins when you stop paying. They are opposite of one another.
But hey, why not have the government go into the auto insurance industry as well?
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.
