Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:08 PM
 
29,939 posts, read 39,394,651 times
Reputation: 4798

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Mircea,
After reading your post in detail, I have this image of you striding out of the stone forum in your white toga with purple trim after delivering that detailed and vehement expose of the current Social Security System. What a fine oration it was as you accended the stone block which passed for a soapbox in those days and delivered your message. We marveled at your verbage and supporting documentation to make your case.
An insolent plebian made the statement, "It is obvious that based on the facts he has presented, Mirsea has exposed the fatal flaws of our Social Security system and would like to shut it down in it's entirety. There are 54 million seniors depending on it now with another 30 million coming on line soon. What should we do?"
We reviewed the transcripts of the inspired diatribe of Mircea and realized that the solution he proposed was that every person save 6% of every dollar they make and they will be fine in their golden years. If they fail to do so, then they are SOL.
We realized that Mircea's diatribe was just preaching to his faithful faction and had nothing to do with dealing with the Social Security system as it exists. The insolent plebe was censored for his boldness and sent packing.
We as a group decided to work on finding solutions to the existing challenges we face concerning this issue.
I can think of at least three different occasions where Mircea has said (and I'm paraphrasing) "the government made a promise with SS and it should do what it has to to keep that promise."

Pointing out the fatal flaws in a system is the only way to intellectually address them and sticking your head in the sand until they're staring at you in the face is the polar opposite of what you would do if you were to do everything in your power to keep a promise (a promise like the politicians in the federal government have made).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:18 PM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,635,765 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigJon3475 View Post
I can think of at least three different occasions where Mircea has said (and I'm paraphrasing) "the government made a promise with SS and it should do what it has to to keep that promise."

Pointing out the fatal flaws in a system is the only way to intellectually address them and sticking your head in the sand until they're staring at you in the face is the polar opposite of what you would do if you were to do everything in your power to keep a promise (a promise like the politicians in the federal government have made).
So far that promise has never been broken. There have been 2 major tweeks to the system since it's inception. I think another tweek to the system is in order. Not an entire dismantling.
Based on Mircea's projections there is no way financially we can keep the existing system. I also do not see any alternative program offered by his analysis. I personally refuse to accept this as a viable alternative.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:35 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,424,602 times
Reputation: 9618
just eliminate SS for people under 25

set ss for people 25-45 at 30% current

set ss for people 45-65 at 70% current (just like taking ss at 62

FLOAT ss for those currently over 65 until they are no longer on the system (their demise)




the government should NOT be your savings plan...either do it your self..or go find some one else to leach off of

have pride people
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:41 PM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,635,765 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
just eliminate SS for people under 25

set ss for people 25-45 at 30% current

set ss for people 45-65 at 70% current (just like taking ss at 62

FLOAT ss for those currently over 65 until they are no longer on the system (their demise)




the government should NOT be your savings plan...either do it your self..or go find some one else to leach off of

have pride people
Nobody has ever leached off of anyone. I paid into SS for 50 years and paid for someone else's retirement. Now I recieve mine. All the doom and gloom is predicated on nothing more than projections. Not reality and what is happening now. There's another agenda working here by those who call it a falure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:50 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,424,602 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Nobody has ever leached off of anyone. I paid into SS for 50 years and paid for someone else's retirement. Now I recieve mine. All the doom and gloom is predicated on nothing more than projections. Not reality and what is happening now. There's another agenda working here by those who call it a falure.
ok, maybe wrong words

the fact is that SS was NEVER designed to be someones retirement...it was designed to be a SUPPLMENT to YOUR retirement

we (THE PEOPLE) should be personally responsible to save for our OWN retirement...not rely (is rely better than leach?) on someone else

its MY money I earned it...ss should be VOLUNTARY...not a MANDATE that I BUY INTO the ''government savings/retirement insurance"

its like the idiots who say "take the cap off"....guess what..the payroll deduction cap is CONNECTED to the PAYOUT cap...you take one the other comes with it....removing the cap will increase the payout to a rich guy..making ss even LESS SOLVENT

Last edited by workingclasshero; 06-26-2012 at 12:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-25-2012, 11:51 PM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,424,602 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Nobody has ever leached off of anyone. I paid into SS for 50 years and paid for someone else's retirement. Now I recieve mine. All the doom and gloom is predicated on nothing more than projections. Not reality and what is happening now. There's another agenda working here by those who call it a falure.
yep you paid (and most likely HANDSOMELY) for 50 years, and what will you get out of it....scraps

percentage wise there are less americans working today than there were in the 1940's or 1950's or 1960's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2012, 12:07 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,635,765 times
Reputation: 7485
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
yep you paid (and most likely HANDSOMELY) for 50 years, and what will you get out of it....scraps

percentage wise there are less americans working today than there were in the 1940's or 1950's or 1960's

and that is exactly what it is for me and most retired Americans. A supplement. I should remind you that the baby boomer bubble will not last forever and after that the scales will be tipped in the favor of those younger, who are paying into the system.
I honestly believe that those who rail against the system just hate the idea that a person's retirement should be handled by a government program. It smacks of socialism and they hate the word, much less the program.
But I see it a totally different way. A nation's function is to insure the welfare and good health of it's citizens. It should also protect it's borders from enemies foreign and domestic. The days of endless exploitation of unlimited resources, free market and manifest destiny are long gone and we need to work together and define our priorities.
If not the defense of the nation and the welfare of it's citizens, what use is a nation among men?
America is not just this pool of capitalist exploiters. We were founded and prospered on greater ideals than that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2012, 12:26 AM
 
8,652 posts, read 17,209,362 times
Reputation: 4622
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Don't forget all those illegals...paying into Social Security...they will never draw a dime. Keeps the system going.
most illegals work under the table for cash and pay nothing into SS...or they use stolen or fake SS numbers which is a crime and they should be jailed for it...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2012, 03:14 AM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,377,821 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
ok, maybe wrong words

the fact is that SS was NEVER designed to be someones retirement...it was designed to be a SUPPLMENT to YOUR retirement

we (THE PEOPLE) should be personally responsible to save for our OWN retirement...not rely (is rely better than leach?) on someone else

its MY money I earned it...ss should be VOLUNTARY...not a MANDATE that I BUY INTO the ''government savings/retirement insurance"

Yes, it shouldn't be a mandate, and if there must be SOME sort of mandate, the mandate should be to pay into your private retirement fund rather than a government system. (e.g. mandate that the SS tax be replaced with earner-directed equivalent payments into private IRA and 401(k) plans).

But I'm exasperated by conservative logic here:

(1) people should fund their own retirement plans out of their earnings, and if SS must exist, it should be a SUPPLEMENT to your retirement fund, and certainly not its entirety.

(2) minimum wage is not designed or intended to be sufficient to live on independently (e.g. it's for entry level teens living at home and not trying to live on that wage).

(3) low-wage workers are not paying their fair share of taxes; they should be paying more taxes.

By this reasoning, a minimum wage worker can expect only a bare minimal standard of living, yet should be paying more taxes AND socking away a generous amount in order to fund his eventual retirement.

Is there a conservative mathematician in the house who can solve this problem and make the numbers work?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-26-2012, 03:31 AM
 
20,948 posts, read 19,010,344 times
Reputation: 10270
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasper12 View Post
Don't forget all those illegals...paying into Social Security...they will never draw a dime. Keeps the system going.
Small price to pay for breaking our laws.

Send them all back.

We already have an immigration policy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top