Borrowing from the fund is not the only problem --

Posted By: Amanda on 2009-05-05
In Reply to: Oh, I am so angry and so tired! sm - tired

I don't want to start an argument, but part of the problem is people like my grandmother (God bless her). She drew social security benefits off my grandfather for at over 20 years. She had never paid a penny into social security. Before that, he had drawn for at least 15 years. I know that he only paid in for very few years before he started drawing. So, just the two of them drew out many more thousands of dollars than they paid in.

Now think of all the people who never paid in and are drawing and the people who paid in very little and are drawing. Then think of how many more people are drawing than are paying in right now.

The funds are just not there for people to draw all their lives. I mean get real, when it was set up, people did not live as long, they did not pay in very much at all (in fact, my grandfather regularly paid in 10 cents a week before retirement), it just does not balance out. Now with the baby boomers getting ready to draw, we are really in trouble because the days of having 6-10 kids that would be contributing are over. Most of us only have 2 or less... Do you think we will ever get back the money we have contributed? No way!!!

That's why even though I feel bad for people having to go without a raise for a couple of years, I am not going to really get too upset because at least they are benefitting somewhat - My money is just lost!

Some things to think about....

Complete Discussion Below:

marks the location of current message within thread

Oh, I am so angry and so tired! sm - tired
- Its not just the elderly drawing SS - lots of recipients have never paid a cent
  - I use to work for SS and if you are sm - MT30+
    - Thanks much for that clarification! - assume this work horse will die in harness
      - You are very welcome. Its hard sm - MT30+
- Do you draw social security or do you know - Sallysue
- My son is being told in high school - Sunflower
- Borrowing from the fund is not the only problem -- - Amanda
- I think the quickest way to fix Social Security... - Zville MT
  - I totally agree with that! nm - passing thru
  - I want the platform that Ron Paul .. - Evelyn
    - I agree completely with Ron Paul - nm
  - I've always said................ sm - m
  - Amen, Zville MT, Amen - MTPockets
  - That is the truth!!!!!!!!!!! nm - MT30+
- At the risk of sounding cold - AnudderMT
  - there has been an increase the last sm - MT30+
  - It doesn't just sound cold - cj
    - Oh my...seriously... - Trigger Happy
    - you are right it is cold, selfish and sm - MT30+
    - Maybe you need to read it again - AnudderMT
      - Interesting that there is money for........... sm - m
      - I bet the Washington "bigwigs" didn't sm - MT30+
        Of course not. Duh! LOL! - Trigger Happy
      - what you are not getting - cj
        This is just another example why - Trigger Happy
        That is not the case - AnudderMT
        oversimplified - cj
        Most beneficiaries draw out FAR more than they ever paid in. - CrankyBeach
        Social Security is a retirement "insurance" sm - MT30+
        But still not simple enough - AnudderMT
        I give up - cj
  - The reason "they" have their houses paid off - sm - sammypot
    - My parents were smart like that too. - Trigger Happy
      - in the same boat! If hubby loses sm - MT30+
    - Eligible for Medicare.............sm - m
      - What problems did we cause? - AnudderMT
      - Elderly parents - MT2
        Wow. We've become a 3rd world country. :( NM - AnnuderMT
  - Right on! If we workers made more money, we'd - be putting more into SS. - Topaz

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Other related messages found in our database

We have been borrowing money from them for
xx

Printing money we dont have? Borrowing money
nm

Iraq war fund

Iraq War Funding Imminent, Timeline Absent

James Joyner | Thursday, December 13, 2007

After months of ranting and raving, congressional Democrats have backed down and approved funding for the war in Iraq without a troop withdrawal provision.

Democratic lawmakers and staffers privately say they�re closing in on a broad budget deal that would give President Bush as much as $70 billion in new war funding.

The deal would lack a key provision Democrats had attached to previous funding bills calling for most U.S. troops to come home from Iraq by the end of 2008, which would be a significant legislative victory for Bush.

Democrats admit such a move would be highly controversial within their own party. Coming just weeks after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-California, vowed the White House would not get another dollar in war money this year, it would further antagonize the liberal base of the party, which has become frustrated with the congressional leadership�s failure to push back on Bush�s Iraq policy.

�The base will not be happy,� said one senior Democratic aide, who requested anonymity to candidly discuss budget negotiations that have not been completed.

The Democratic aide acknowledged the president is likely to get new money for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan before Congress adjourns for the year. �Yes, in the end, that�s where we will be,� the aide said.

The bizarre thing is that everybody knew that months ago. Of course the president was going to �win� on this issue. No Congress is going to pull funds from an army currently in harm�s way. That Pelosi and company allowed this to be framed as a partisan issue was amazingly incompetent.

Why not? Pacifists have to fund
Get a grip.

Taxpayers do not fund PBS
You obviously do not watch PBS. It is solely viewer funded and publicly owned. (Although lately I HAVE seen paid commercials on there)

I'm beginning to see the reason some of the posters here sound so ignorant.

If the cigarette tax would completely fund...
the 6 billion in revenue expanding this program is going to cost,that would be one thing. It won't. You say you wouldn't mind "having your taxes raised a little." Isn't 35-40% off the top of your gross now enough? I think it is. I think they need to proritize the spending, that is all I am saying. It seems the consensus here is that health insurance for children is the most important. Then that program should be funded first. Then decide what is the next most important issue, and fund that, and on down the line. We cannot keep adding programs, adding taxes, adding programs, adding taxes. At some point it has to stop, or those paying the taxes are going to need help from a program to eat while they are working for taxes for programs. And as more and more people opt for programs and not working and paying into the system...the situation will only get worse. You do realize that realistically this cannot continue forever....right?

401K/retirement fund

You can't "take" your pension and 401K out of the stock market if you are not retirement age. We are stuck with whatever the companies we work for invest in. my husband and I have some choices about where we invest our 401K but they all involve mutual funds, stocks, bonds, etc.

RNC fund-raising letter

Michael Steele, Chairman

Republican National Committee

310 First Street, Southeast

Washington, DC 20003

Mr. Steele,

In response to your urgent ''roll call'' of Americans... (and solicitation of a donation) I can assure you that I certainly am fed up with the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. But I must inform you that I am equally fed up with the Republican party as well. What�s more, I feel great sense of betrayal because I expect Democrats to act exactly as they have, but not Republicans.

TARP and other bailouts were not a good idea just because they were begun by Bush. The further bailouts, stimulus, deficit increase, nationalization of American business, universal healthcare and other travesties against capitalism are not bad ideas simply because Obama owns them. These are wrong, no matter who is in charge. Bush threw the ball, Obama knocked it over the fence. Way to go.

Only in Washington, DC does it make sense to say, ''I�ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system.'' What makes our free market possible is the freedom of losers to fail and winners to succeed. No one and nothing is too big to fail. It�s how we weed out bad ideas. You might remember this next time you are tempted to run a RINO for president.

The Republican party allowed Obama to be elected by fielding such a poor presidential candidate. McCain: Heck of a guy, admirable character, but not a true Republican. By the time I voted in my state Ohio primary, any other appealing Republican candidate had dropped out. In November I was forced simply to vote the NObama ticket. I did not want a candidate who would ''reach across the aisle.'' I wanted a conservative Republican candidate. Had it not been for Sarah Palin, I might as well have stayed home.

I will not be attending the Republican ''listening tour.'' Listen to this: The dismantling of the American way of life is on Republican as well as Democrat heads. I now consider myself an Independent. In 2012, if the Republican party manages to run a strong conservative candidate I will vote for that candidate. If the party persists in ''moving to the center'' and watering down its traditionally conservative principles, it will find itself in this identical situation.

Thanks for asking, I feel much better now.

RNC fund-raising letter

Michael Steele, Chairman

Republican National Committee

310 First Street, Southeast

Washington, DC 20003

Mr. Steele,

Thanks for asking, I feel much better now.

Err, you mean the link to Commonwealth Fund report
"It has to do with Medicaid." Yes, Medicaid is mentioned in the report, but ONLY within the context of expanded eligibility (by various states) based on INCOME, not on age. Furthermore, the feds are actually trying to limit, as in RESTRICT, this type of expanded Medicaid coverage.

It also talks about the interplay between Medicaid and private companies and how it is picking up some but not all of the fallout from private insurance eligibility restrictions. The report goes on to say that Medicaid is functioning AS IT WAS INTENDED, thus lending credence to the assertion in the OP that the SCHIPS program being administered like Medicare and Medicaid is a good thing.

Here's a suggestion. Do a find/search on Medicaid within the article and then try to identify any single statement that indicates Meicaid AGE guidelines have been revised upward. Certainly, you will find nothing anywhere to support the hogwash in the other post that suggests it is now or ever going to be 30.

Here's a few more clues for you. In the excerpt from the other post, terms and phrases such as "nothing to do with federal mandate, their parents' INSURANCE POLICIES and allow INSURERS to set their own dependent age limits" can in no way be interpreted as referring to state funded insurance programs.

Bottom line, once again, is that the aim of health care reform is to INSURE folks, not EXCLUDE them. Raising age (and other) restrictions by private insurance companies is one of many creative ways of keeping folks OFF of state and federally funded health insurance programs.

Why shouldnt gov fund religious programs?
I should be able to get some funding just like everyone else if I have a religious program. I mean we fund abortion here in the US and abroad. We fund wars, we fund all kinds of CRAP so why NOT religion? Isnt it supposed to be equal and fair? Why is it the religious people of this world, namely the Christians get the short end of the stick?

I guess because they/we fund it maybe? Not a birthday gift. nm
X

The congress which raided the SS fund was republican at the time
and at the rate the republicans are carrying the country, in ten years, it will resemble Argentina (who also ended up in the same place, as a debtor nation).

Israel has the republican party as it stands in his back pocket as does corportate america. The republican party isn't conservative anymore. It is a giant siphon of American assets into the pockets of the rich, at the expense of the taxpayer. Anyone can see this but the sheople who voted these clowns into office and didn't benefit from the tax cuts ::rolls eyes::.

Obama also voted not to fund troops in combat....
It should be apparent to all of us by now that whatever you can find on one politician you can find on another... :)

http://www.johnmccain.com/informing/news/PressReleases/454ad652-5f6d-4cb1-808d-d52a8aa6f4ac.htm

the drug companies that fund the research for new drugs
really don't have all that much time to make money on the drugs before generics are allowed. Do you think generic companies are going to start contributing to research? For all those people who gripe about the drug companies, I would like to see the day come when the drug companies aren't willing to spend another dime on the research. The gov can pay for all the research then. They still pay for the meds, and it might be more, factoring in the waste for the gov being involved.

Well surely Obama doesn't fund all sources
a name please of a source you would consider credible.

And govt shouldn't fund religious programs....
schools, facilities, etc.