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.
Ever heard of anyone getting rich by constantly complaining on city-data about how they can never get ahead because the entire world is conspiring to hold them down?
Contrary to the stereotypical complaint of the poor that "The Man is keeping me/us down", there is no conspiracy at all. Rather, there are people independently trying to maximize their own utility, using their own yardsticks. (Some choose income, some choose assets/net worth, some choose leisure or travel or big toys, some choose philanthropy, etc.)
The problem is that often these independent interests of others conflict with the interests of the poor, and when that occurs, the poor usually lose and the non-poor usually prevail..
e.g. where I live, the resident drunk wants everything his way all the time, which entails drinking 24/7, moping around the house all day without a job (going out interferes with his drinking), dictating to everyone else in the house, and exploding in anger a lot. Since I want peace and quiet and solitude, and apparently do not have enough money to purchase those things, I am despondent and unproductive here while unable to move elsewhere..
Chris Christie says if you have saved 4-5 million dollars at retirement and you are receiving 200k a year on your hard work, you should forgo your SS....for who? And for what reason?
Is this guy on drugs or an insane enabler who wants to punish people who were smart with their money?
I don't want anyone touching my SS. That is my money, who cares if I "need" it or not. It is not my job to GIVE my money away because someone says I don't need it because I have enough. If people are not smart with their money and/or not hard working enough, nor live within their means allowing them to create a nest egg when they get old, too bad; there are consequences that THEY have to pay not me.....WTH?
Work hard and give all of your hard working benefits to the people who don't work hard or just sponge off of others.
The older I get, the more conservative I get on economic issues..... People are effing lazy and they deserve what they get!!
Edit: not including the truly mentally, physically, and emotionally disabled; the people who are born that way, not the ones who are created by bad parenting. What we should do with the latter is another discussion.
I agree. I earned it, and my employers contribution was part of my pay. It's my money. Further, if I had been allowed to have it in the first place and invested it, it would have amounted to far more than the government pays me in benefits.
If you took off your ideological goggles and put on a thinking cap...
The Social Security program redistributes income in five major ways:
From richer workers to poorer workers through a progressive benefit formula that provides higher returns to the first dollars of worker earnings and lower returns to the last dollars;
From shorter-lived groups (such as men and the less educated) to longer-lived groups (such as women and the better educated) through annuities whose lifetime value depends upon life expectancy;
From singles to married couples (and from higher earners to lower earners within couples) through spousal and survivors' benefits, paid as a pure transfer without any additional contributions required;
...you would recognize that the so-called progressivity you claim is largely negated therein, because poorer workers disproportionately are in the shorter-lived group and also in the singles group. Some conservatives, for example, have noted that black men, due to shorter lifespans, get a particularly bad deal from the program.
Not at all. When they're dead, they don't need the SS benefits anymore. Same is true with anyone who is eligible for SS benefits. So, no, the progressivity is not negated. Poorer workers get a larger monthly benefit for their contributions to SS than do those with higher incomes, no matter how long or short either lives.
We were lied to about SS and Medicare, just like Obama lied to us about Obamacare.
MANY administartion say things to make their agency'e look better in the eyes of the voters..
"Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax
/ˈfaɪkə/ is a United States federal payroll (or employment) tax[1] imposed on both employees and employers to fund Social Security and Medicare[2]—federal programs that provide benefits for retirees, the disabled, and children of deceased workers. The tax also provides funds to the health care system for institutions that provide healthcare for workers that do not have health insurance and can not afford healthcare treatment. Social Security benefits include old-age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); Medicare provides hospital insurance benefits for the elderly. The amount that one pays in payroll taxes throughout one's working career is associated indirectly with the social security benefits annuity that one receives as a retiree.[3] This has caused some to claim that the payroll tax is not a tax because its collection is tied to a benefit.[4] The United States Supreme Court decided in Flemming v. Nestor (1960) that no one has an accrued property right to benefits from Social Security. The Federal Insurance Contributions Act is currently codified at Title 26, Subtitle C, Chapter 21 of the United States Code.[5]"
MANY administartion say things to make their agency'e look better in the eyes of the voters..
"Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) tax
/ˈfaɪkə/ is a United States federal payroll (or employment) tax[1] imposed on both employees and employers to fund Social Security and Medicare[2]—federal programs that provide benefits for retirees, the disabled, and children of deceased workers. The tax also provides funds to the health care system for institutions that provide healthcare for workers that do not have health insurance and can not afford healthcare treatment. Social Security benefits include old-age, survivors, and disability insurance (OASDI); Medicare provides hospital insurance benefits for the elderly. The amount that one pays in payroll taxes throughout one's working career is associated indirectly with the social security benefits annuity that one receives as a retiree.[3] This has caused some to claim that the payroll tax is not a tax because its collection is tied to a benefit.[4] The United States Supreme Court decided in Flemming v. Nestor (1960) that no one has an accrued property right to benefits from Social Security. The Federal Insurance Contributions Act is currently codified at Title 26, Subtitle C, Chapter 21 of the United States Code.[5]"
Oh, I fully realize that. My intention was to point out the fact that Americans were lied to about SS and Medicare to get them enacted way back then just like Obama and the Dems lied to Americans about Obamacare to get it enacted just recently.
How about going after government workers who double-dip their pensions?
The days of double dipping were drastically altered with the Windfall Elimination(WEP).
Hubby was federal civil service(CSRS) although he also had many quarters of SS work. He only needed to work an additional 4 quarters to get a SS benefit. The WEP would have eliminated all of his potential payment. In addition he is not eligible to collect a survivor benefit based on my SS work history, for the same reason.
The are some public employees, Federal Employees Retirement(FERS)is one, that pay both for a pension and SS tax on their wages and collect both.
The double dipping is a worn-out argument.
Last edited by JIMANDTHOM; 07-08-2015 at 06:42 AM..
The problem is that often these independent interests of others conflict with the interests of the poor, and when that occurs, the poor usually lose and the non-poor usually prevail..
I've got news for you. That's the way the world works. Go take a look at all the people in the college forum and employment forum doing everything they can to ensure they get a high-paying degree (paid for by scholarships) and a good, well-paying job when they get out into the real world. You didn't do this when you had the chance so now you get to fight the uphill battle like everyone else who screwed up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
e.g. where I live, the resident drunk wants everything his way all the time, which entails drinking 24/7, moping around the house all day without a job (going out interferes with his drinking), dictating to everyone else in the house, and exploding in anger a lot.
Ever heard of the golden rule? Whoever has the gold makes the rules.
His house, his rules. This is america, so if you don't like it, you are free to leave at any time. If you can't afford anything else, then you can always join the homeless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
Since I want peace and quiet and solitude, and apparently do not have enough money to purchase those things, I am despondent and unproductive here while unable to move elsewhere..
Well guess what. Nobody owes you your so-called peace and quiet and solitude. When you bring enough value to society to be able to afford those things, then you can have them. Most people I know in CA that aren't married have roommates. Nobody likes it, but it's all they can afford.
Until you accept the realities of the world and realize that the only one holding you back is yourself, you're always going to be stuck in the same miserable rut. Here's a hint: think of all the time you spend on city-data and how much money you could have made if you spent that time working at a job. Or you could have spent that time working on an engineering degree.
Well guess what. Nobody owes you your so-called peace and quiet and solitude. When you bring enough value to society to be able to afford those things, then you can have them. Most people I know in CA that aren't married have roommates. Nobody likes it, but it's all they can afford.
...Until you accept the realities of the world and realize that the only one holding you back is yourself, you're always going to be stuck in the same miserable rut. Here's a hint: think of all the time you spend on city-data and how much money you could have made if you spent that time working at a job.
Exactly.
The constant whining about the consequences of that poster's own actions is EPIC.
The constant whining about the consequences of that poster's own actions is EPIC.
Looks like I actually scared him away. Either that or he finally decided to take my advice.
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.
