Social Security

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Countryside : One Thread

I received this today. Thought it was interesting.

Thanks for reading. dsb

Subject: Social Security ~ Interesting Info...

(This is worth the read; it's short and to the point!)

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions in this election year. Our Senators/Congressmen do not pay into Social Security and, therefore, they do not collect from it. Social Security benefits were not suitable for them. They felt they should have a special plan. Many years ago they voted in their benefit plan. In more recent years, no congress person has felt the need to change it. After all, it is a great plan. For all practical purposes their plan works like this:

When they retire no matter how long they have been in office, they continue to draw their same pay until they die, except it may be increased from time to time by the cost of living adjustments. For example, former Senator Bradley and his wife may be expected to draw $7,900,000.00 over an average life span, with Mrs. Bradley drawing $275,000.00 during the last year of her life. Their cost for this excellent plan is "0," nada, zilch.

This little perk they voted in for themselves is free to them. You and I pick up the tab for this plan. Retirement plan funds come directly from the General Funds. Our tax dollars at work!

Social Security, which you and I pay into every payday for our own retirement, with an equal amount matched by our employer, we can expect to get an average of $1,000.00 per month. Or, we would have to collect our benefits for 68 years and 1 month to equal the Bradley's benefits. Imagine for a moment that you could structure a retirement plan so desirable, a retirement plan that worked so well, that Railroad Employees, Postal Workers, and others who were not in the plan would clamor to be included.

This is how good Social Security could be, if only one small change was made. That change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan out from under the Senators/Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us. Watch how fast they fix it!!! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed will be planted, and maybe good changes will evolve.

How many people can YOU send this to?

-- Dianne in Mass (dianne.bone@usa.net), June 20, 2001

Answers

"Watch how fast they fix it!!!

It cant be "fixed", its working just as it was intended. Its just a federal ponzi scheme to relieve you of extra cash for them to use as they please and a numbering system to track the herd. There should have never been a Social Security program and the only way to "fix" it is to get rid of it.

-- William in Wi (gnarledmaw@lycos.com), June 20, 2001.


well,well,well,WELL!!!as soon as i get a new printer , i'll make as many copies as i can and hand them out at wal-mart. maybe put some at the local quick marts too!brings up another question i had on this subject.after you reach a certain income level, you no longer have to pay into s.s. for the remainder of the year.i remember reaching that limit about 12 years ago(or so),the limit was around 40-50,000.i reached the limit on my last paycheck of the year. i imagine the limit is up from that now(i don't know i don't make that much anymore).so i'm guessing the bill gates of the world only put in for that first half week in january.i should have just been a little more picky when i chose my parents! or i can always run for senate;^$

-- fred in wi (sixuvusmeyers@aol.com), June 20, 2001.

"You will see the rise of men of the double standard-- the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money--the men who are hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law--men who use force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims--then money becomes the creators' avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they've passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest of production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force, is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

Do you wish to know when that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society's virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion--when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing--when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods, but in favors--when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them but them against you--when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice--you may know that your society is doomed."

- Atlas Shrugged, 1957, (original paperback) pp. 389-91

-- William in Wi (gnarledmaw@lycos.com), June 20, 2001.


Hard to believe that was written 44 years ago. Could have been written today.

Thanks for sharing.

-- Dianne in Mass (dianne.bone@usa.net), June 20, 2001.


Good job Dianne. Keep posting interesting things. If the fat cats had to "make do" like millions of americans You bet they would fix the SS system.

-- Kenneth in N.C. (wizardsplace13@hotmail.com), June 20, 2001.


Social Security cannot be fixed. Anyone who thinks Social Security is a good thing, should go do a little research on what is called a "Ponzi scheme". It is illegal. I personally knew a man who started one of these money-making chains, and he was caught and sat in prison for years. I think he is still there, because he refuses to cooperate with authorities.

If it is illegal for the rest of us to play around with taking money as an "investment', and using it to reward earlier "investors", then it should be illegal for the government to do so. But of course, how can we force our government to act legally? Through the court system? If you think that is actually a workable option, I have a bridge to sell you.

What we need is another Patrick Henry and a modern Boston Tea Party.

-- daffodyllady (daffodyllady@yahoo.com), June 20, 2001.


Letís back off for a minute.

This post implies anyone who has ever served time in the Congress is entitled to a life-time pension at their last salary, plus inflation. As far as I know that is not so. If you serve in Congress you are entitled to a pension dependent upon the number of years in which you serve. I do not know what the average time a member services in Congress, but would be surprised to find it is over ten years due to the high turnover in the House.

Are they worth it? Consider being a member of Congress is pretty well a 24/7 job. They have very little personal time or even family time. Many come into DC for Tuesday through Friday, then back to their district for glad-handing, baby kissing and whatever, including hundreds of BBQs and chicken luncheons each election cycle.

You are expected to have an excellent working knowledge of every piece of legislation before Congress, which tend to be both numerous and complicated.

Many of these could have easily not run for Congress and continued in lucrative jobs in the private sector with compensation far, far beyond what they are receiving. For them, I rather doubt the thought of perhaps a better retirement system factors much in their decision to serve in Congress. Some retired CEOs of Fortune 500 companies make millions of dollars each year in retirement income and cashing in stock options obtained before they retired. Sorry, but the U.S. Congress does not come with stock options.

Could you call a CEO earning perhaps $3M a year in a total compensation package and ask them if they would be willing to forego that for a $210,000 job in one of the federal departments?

Could a less expensive Congress attractive the caliber of people they do now. Maybe, maybe not. Something very similar is Tennessee has a hard time recruiting teachers since the pay is well below the national average and recruiters are not allowed to offer any incentives. As a result, the quality of education in the state suffers.

One largely gets what one pays for.

-- Ken S. in WC TN (scharabo@aol.com), June 20, 2001.


Go to http://www.snopes2.com/, search on the term Social Security, and you will pull up the Urban Legends commentary of this email, which has been circulating for quite a few years. Always pays to check one of the hoax/urban legends sites . . . .

-- Joy F [in So. Wisconsin] (CatFlunky@excite.com), June 20, 2001.

Yeah!! Let's see how well they would do... But, don't forget to take away their PRIVATE pensions too!!! Don't forget... most of these folks not only had their own businesses, but were making far more than you or I could even imagine before they went into office. These ain't just the normal Joe down the street... They are making hundreds of thousands, if not millions, before they ever get into office in the first place!

Their idea about letting folks invest is a good one, but they are trying to require it being in the stock market. Hmmmm.... Seems to me there is an old saying to the tune of "Don't gamble money you can't afford to lose." Isn't the stock market just another form of gambling? Or, during the past few years did we forget that what goes up must naturally come back down?? Just let me have the money I've 'invested' (gambled) in SS, and I will provide for my old age a lot better than any government ever could....

-- Sue Diederich (willow666@rocketmail.com), June 22, 2001.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ