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.
OK,, Then nobody under a given age should be allowed to utilize them since "YOUR" government didn't pay for it... Incidently that would include your water service, your electric service, your sewer service... You didn't pay to construct any of it. You just use it without a thought.
The fact that my parents paid doesn't give me access?
It gives them access, you are throwing them under the bus too... Why should it give you access? You didn't pay for it? They did
Because if I don't get access as a consequence of my parents' participation, then you are establishing that the government should intervene in the passing of wealth from parents to children. The wealth in this case is their share of the public property.
I just don't understand how that makes sense to you. That SS money was spent by your government (the group of politicians who represented you and the citizens of yesteryear). Why does it seem reasonable to you that today's government, the young, should compensate you for what your government bought?
Yes, and I'm suggesting the same point in both: the government (you) has no moral right to intervene in the movement of wealth. In the earlier post, I'm challenging the forced redistribution (Social Security) from young to old. In the latter post, I'm challenging a theft of wealth from the parents that rightfully belongs to the children. What point are you making?
I am suggesting that your logic has more holes in it than a strainer... Read them separetely and then merge them.. You're a smart boy, I think if you look at it, you can figure it out. Your logic is irrational.. I'm going to bed now.. That's your homework for tonight.. Come back and let me know when you figure it out...Here's a hint. The theft of the wealth from the parent does not belong to the children. It belongs to the parent. See if you can figure the rest out... Laterz
The part you leave out is how many hours and how many years people had to work to get those wages.
Most baby boomers went through the majority of their working lives in a situation where one salary was all that was needed to make ends meets, where the 40 hour work was actually the norm, and you might have actually had a pension in the job you were in.
So all this stuff about "working hard"? Americans work harder now than they did 30 years.
Are you sure? Are you really, really sure about that????
My guess would be that you were way too young to remember anything like it, but some 30 years ago, I was putting in 10 to 20 hours a day, 6 and 7 days a week. My average paycheck stub stated 40 hours of straight time, and 60+ hours of overtime. There were many, many times, for years on end, that I would go home, get about 3 hours of sleep, and get up to go back to work again. Can you match that today? Can you?
And, forget celebrating the holidays. That was the busiest time. Easter, 4th of July, Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Years. That was when all the industries shut down and wanted all their equipment gone through, maintained and repaired.
Now, let's see you match that today.
Then, have a look at the official Social Security website. Listed in black and white, it states: "THE AVERAGE RETIREE COLLECTS SOCIAL SECURITY FOR 18 MONTHS." So, take another look at the figures for "PAID IN". Then, think about the $2000 a month in benefits. Times 18 months is $36,000 before they die. And, that's not to mention all those that paid in, then pass away just before they are old enough to retire.
What I want a look at is the "Administrative costs" for Social Security. Seems someone is lining their pockets, and it's not me.
Bingo! At least the younger generation today should know enough to save at least 10% in a 401K or something similar. When the boomers started out we didn't have any such thing. Even after we did, it took a while to catch on, before employers offered it and employees figured out what it was all about.
I believe you'll have to come up with something better than 401K. Mine vaporized. It all went somewhere over the last few years before I retired. No benefit for me there. For that matter, look at the folks that worked for ENRON for how many years. Company folded, and so did all their pensions. They had been making good money, but there was nothing left for their retirement. Social Security may not have much in it, but at least it's still there today.
I say we bring back the draft if the younger people think they have it bad now. How many boomers escaped that or enlisted to avoid it?
I avoided it by enlisting. Joined the Navy. Figured that if the Viet Cong were going to try to lob a grenade at me, they were going to have to swim out 3 miles to do so. Funny, how things don't work out the way you planned. The Navy also has shore stationed positions. Viet cong didn't even have to get their feet wet.
Why only cut those who have paid into the system all their lives? Where is all this "adjust slowly and gently" for the giant and growing welfare class? And they never paid in a single dime but keep taking and taking.
In fact it's far better to cut off all the young, able-bodied types, eliminate food stamps, Section 8, TANF, WIC and all the rest because unlike someone who is 80 and arthritic, those 25 year olds could work for their living. Time for them to start paying something. Just like the college students who could work to pay their tuition and costs but are too lazy.
You really cannot single out the elderly and take away a program they paid into while keeping handouts going for all those who have never paid for their programs.
I agree, but I go just a bit further..
Someone, please explain to me... On the day I was signing up for SS, there was a pretty good sized crowd in the waiting room. I'd say that about half of them were about half my age or younger. Just in front of me were a couple of "kids" in their early 20s, with a little girl (perhaps under 2 years old), and by their conversation, both of them were getting disability from Social Security. Periodically, they'd take turns going to the back of the room with the little girl, and dance with her while playing a little portable radio. I saw no disability in either of them.
I also know a woman in her late 50s that has been confined to a wheel chair for the last 8 years. For the last 8 years, she's been trying to get disability, and keeps getting turned down.
So, someone please explain to me how a couple of kids that can walk, run, and dance can get disability and a woman that paid into the system for several decades and is now in a wheel chair can not get it.
Another woman, in her late 50s worked and paid into the system until she got cancer in 2001. Since then, she has been unable to work because of what the cancer did to her, but does not qualify for disability. Could someone please explain to me just how this all works?
You talk about "boomers", but the simple fact is that with all the young people on disability, it means that there are people that are draining the system, and not paying anything into it. And, it seems, they will never pay into it. But, they're collecting all the same. I don't mind someone getting benefits if they can not work. Someone that is blind from birth, someone that is confined to a wheel chair, the disability is obvious. But someone that can walk, run, and dance, with nothing visible, just what is their disability? How do they rate?
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.
