T O P I C R E V I E W
Member # 1659
posted August 04, 2015 08:10|
Who died before they collected Social Security ?
Want to see your representative do the "Washington-two-step".
Ask this question.
Who died before they collected Social Security?
KEEP PASSING THIS AROUND UNTIL
EVERY ONE HAS HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO READ IT...
THIS IS SURE SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT!!!!
THE ONLY THING WRONG WITH THE
GOVERNMENT'S CALCULATION OF AVAILABLE SOCIAL SECURITY IS THEY FORGOT
TO FIGURE IN THE PEOPLE WHO DIED BEFORE THEY EVER COLLECTED A SOCIAL SECURITY CHECK!!!
WHERE DID THAT MONEY GO?
Remember, not only did you and I contribute to Social Security but your employer did, too. It totaled 15% of your income before taxes.
If you averaged only $30K over your working life, that's close to $220,500 .
Read that again.
Did you see where the Government paid in one single penny?
We are talking about the money you and your employer put in a Government bank to insure you and me that we would have a retirement check from the money we put in, not the Government.
Now they are calling the money we put in an entitlement when we reach the age to take it back.
If you calculate the future invested value of $4,500 per year (yours & your employer's contribution) at a simple 5% interest (less than what the Government pays on the money that it borrows).
After 49 years of working you'd have $892,919.98 . If you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $26,787.60 per year and it would last better than 30 years (until you're 95 if you retire at age 65) and that's with no interest paid on that final amount on deposit!
If you bought an annuity and it paid 4% per year, you'd have a lifetime income of $2,976.40 per month.
THE FOLKS IN WASHINGTON
HAVE PULLED OFF A BIGGER PONZI SCHEME
THAN BERNIE MADOFF EVER DID.
Entitlement my foot; I paid cash for my social security insurance!
Just because they borrowed the money for other government spending, doesn't make my benefits some kind of charity or handout!!
Remember the benefits for members of Congress?
outrageous retirement packages,
67 paid holidays,
three weeks paid vacation,
unlimited paid sick days.
Now that's welfare, and they have the nerve to call my social security retirement payments entitlements?
They call Social Security and Medicare an entitlement even though most of us have been paying for it all our working lives, and now, when it's time for us to collect, the government is running out of money.
Why did the government borrow from it in the first place? It was supposed to be in a locked box, not part of the general fund.
Sad isn't it?
99% of people won't have the guts to forward this.
I'm in the 1%
I JUST DID!
Member # 780
posted August 05, 2015 00:45|
You, sir, are surely going to get your Social Security payments in full.
I have received a letter from the SSA for the last few years letting me know that unless Congress acts, based on current projections, I'll be lucky if I get 70 cents on the dollar for what I'm supposed to receive. I'm paying into the system right now, but the chance I'll get to see it on the flip side is fairly slim.
Member # 2950
posted August 07, 2015 07:35|
I admit it is a scandal, and the US are not the only ones to have pulled this trick... successive UK governments put their hand into the "Social Security" (or Welfare State) pot that everyone had paid into since WWII... and hoped that somehow it would all come right - I suppose if the disastrous recessions hadn't knackered the economy a few times in the last 3-4 decades perhaps they may have got away with that stunt - but recessions did happen and the economy never had the money to put back... so now what is paid in by workers has to be used to pay for those who need to claim their rightful entitlement.
And this is now portrayed as "how it is" as if that was always how it was meant to work... as we now have an ageing population and a declining pool of "productive population" we are now "in crisis" and some of us will have to "tighten our belts" (seems I have had to "tighten my belt" the whole of my life... just born into the "lucky generation" I guess...
As such chances are I will never see anything... the Government is already upping the "state retirement age" and effectively freezing the like return people my age or younger will get. I have never had the money to save, or run a "decent" pension so chances are I will either die at my keyboard still working to cover my bills, or end up in poverty living on whatever pitiful stipend the Govt of 25-30 years hence is will or able to provide me.
As usual the Politicians, the Bankers and the Rich have come out fine and the average working Joes have got bent over the barrel...
Here in the UK there is a very good chance that it may be several generations before average working people will be able to enjoy the "golden years of retirement" that my grandparents and parents have had the pleasure to experience.
The Famous Druid
Member # 1769
posted August 07, 2015 22:38|
I've been asking myself this question for 20 years now...
With the changing demographics, the pension system's going to get more and more expensive. The incentive to shaft the elderly will get stronger, but so will the political cost of shafting a growing percentage of voters. Which way will the politicians jump?
Looks like we have our answer.
Here in oz, the conservative government (elected on a promise of no changes to pensions) has just tightened up eligibility for the pension, and tried (but failed in the senate) to increase the pension age to 70.
Member # 2950
posted August 14, 2015 10:36|
The biggest problem is still that the Govts put their hands into the pot in the past... if the money that was put in had stayed there and been properly "ring fenced and invested" as it was always supposed to be then what we pay in now wouldn't be going direct to the pockets of those drawing on their well earned entitlements.
To make up for or cover up this state of affairs we are now told that "the paying population can afford to support the ever aging population" - we all know that the PROBLEM is that wasn't ever how it was meant to work... the architects of the Welfare State KNEW that it wouldn't and couldn't work that way. However are now getting "Big Brother Ministry of Truth" versions which make out that it is our problem and not the fact that previous administrations criminally used the working people's investment fund to "fix" various "short term" problems in the past and could never make good what they took.
The Famous Druid
Member # 1769
posted August 15, 2015 03:01|
"Borrowing from the future always ends badly, but here's hoping it won't happen during my term of office"
-- Every politician ever.
It's not just Social Security in merkinistan that's been shafted, there's a similar thing going on with public employee pension entitlements.
Generations of politicians have traded off public employee wage claims for ever more generous pension entitlements, and then put nothing aside to fund them.
And now, millions of public employees are nearing retirement, and their employers are pleading poverty, there's no money in the kitty to pay those pensions. The finger of blame, of course, is pointed at the employees, how dare they expect to be given what they were promised when they took the job! Greedy bastards!
Here in oz, employer pension entitlements are funded in the month they're earned, paid into an independently managed outside fund that the employers can't dip into.
Member # 1659
posted August 15, 2015 06:37|
Well fellow Geeks, I was promised a Pension! I get Twelve USD a month from my prior employer, however I get 1275 USD from the US Government Pension Guarantee Board, the company I worked for went Bankrupt. I also get 1700 USD from Social Security.
Those totals are about 500 USD less than I was promised during my working years, however the CEO got a Platinum Parachute. funny they get there's but not the workers.