Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,422 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 193,795
Pageviews Today: 259,830Threads Today: 98Posts Today: 1,054
02:10 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT COPYRIGHT VIOLATION IN REPLY
Message Subject We need to cut back medicare and social security from retired boomers
Poster Handle Weisshaupt
Post Content
...


Older people do NOT get as much back in Social Security as they pay. The problem is multi-faceted. 1. The govt raided the accounts and left IOUs in their place. 2. We pay millions of people disability, including little kids who should not even be receiving disability, out of the account, and those people didn't pay in much, if anything. 3. Medicare is the real financial drain as people on average get a whole lot more than they pay in, yet neither Republicans nor Democrats seem interested in taking on Big Pharma for the good of the American people.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 83983638


Good facts!

Another thing that's wrong, but wouldn't be helpful in light of the facts you just presented, is that for instance: my husband died so I get his SS. But I'm not allowed to get mine, that I paid in as well. It's one or the other. IMO, that's just wrong.
 Quoting: Raniaashi


Yep ! When my husband passed away, I got his Social Security, which was more than mine. I couldn't get mine and his together, even though I worked and contributed into the system also.
 Quoting: tiger1


Once you die, you get nothing. Your spouse can choose yours or theirs, not both. It isn’t to be paid like insurance, in that you get paid once someone dies. Except…

Except for young children, who get payment when daddy dies. I knew two young teens who each got $2,000+ cards each month from SS after daddy committed suicide after raping stepchild.. crazy! They use SS like a insurance police for children under 18. Which in my opinion is wrong. But spouses get nothing.

SS isn’t insurance for the bereaved. It is for survival after retirement.
 Quoting: Texas Best


Its not "insurance" at all . The Supreme court ruled there was no contract for benefits in return for a premium. It is a tax, and the government can do anything it likes with the money. They can change and alter any benefit at any time, including providing NO benefits. "insurance" spreads risk over a group. There is no risk being spread here, other than the risk you are an irresponsible leach who didn't prepare for your old age. Insurance also allows for voluntary participation. This is a ponzi scheme with mandatory participation the government has used to pay itself by "investing" in government bonds

The upshot is that peolpe in Gen x or later pay both the social security taxes as well as higher general taxes to pay back those bonds to social security with interest, and will never see a dime of their money back because the system will collapse before 2036 - and even the government admits this.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for copyright violation:







GLP