Democrats versus Republicans

[sailaway21]

Recent criticism has caused me to expand my horizons in the views that I present here. Do not mistake the posting of the editorial from the looney left's premeir rag to be an endorsement of it's cockamamie content. This posting is for entertainment purposes only. Mind you, if you live in Cleveland you can just skip to the end, you've heard it all before. Herewith the Nation's view on the upcoming elections and their opinions on adult leadership. The ingestation of food or drink during the reading of the editorial is contra-indicated!
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080107/editors

[cardiacpaul]

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA)
Program.
He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400
of their annual incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program
would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust
Fund" rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as
income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are
getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to "put away" you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent
"Trust Fund" and put it into the General fund so that Congress could
spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social
Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking"
deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US .

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to
immigrants?

A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants that moved into this country, at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments
to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

Now, after doing all this, the Democrats tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!

[retclt]

Great Post!

. . . and another good example that shows we are a nation of sheep.

[retclt]

Short article but makes a point. The Clintons can drag Chelsey along to campaign for them but make her untouchable to the press. She's 27!!!

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20071231/D8TS58V00.html

[RAGNAR]

jjj

[sck5]

Heres the problem with your arithmetic and assumptions - You assume that everyone will earn your average rate of return even while you are arguing that they are free to invest it where they want and consume it instead if they like.
Well, this may or may not be news to you but there are fair number of idiots out there. There are even a fair number of supposedly savvy capitalists who have gone bust (just think of the dot com bubble bursting and now the housing market - many more example exist if you want to think about it.

The problem is that a lot of people will NOT have enough to live on at the end of the day if a system like you seem to want is put in place. What are we going to do about them? Do you really think that we will let a large number of grandpas and grandmas starve in the street? I dont want to live in a country that would do such a thing.

Social Security was constructed on the basis of what was politically possible in 1932. If we had it to do again we might design a different system. But now that we have it, and now that about a third of old people rely on it for virtually all of their income and another third rely on it for at least half their income it is very hard to pay for any kind of transition (especially now that we have dug such a deep financial hole in the last 7 years). And as a 51 year old who has been paying extra all my working life to build up the trust fund to prefund my own retirement, I sure as hell want to get my Social Sec. payments in a few years when it is my turn.

Otherwise, how am I going to pay for a slip for my boat?

[sailaway21]

sck5,
Actually the numbers are not off at all. You could make one minor correction and say that the money would need to be invested in a broad based market fund or one indexed to the Dow to eliminate the idea of speculation. and I did not get the impression that Rag's was advocating any type of early withdrawal.

Where you got the idea that SS got in trouble in the last seven years or that the government got in trouble over the last seven years is beyond me. The federal deficit is shrinking. Of course that could change-especially if we increase taxes.

If you're proposing relying on SS for retirement, you're already resigned to grandpa's and grandma's starving in the street. The system is broken and there isn't any more money. The country that you wouldn't want to live in has already spent the money. It's gone. It's good that you have been investing for retirement. Given the actuarial tables, you've got another thirty years to go, which is the good news. The bad news is, social security doesn't. If you think you're going to receive your "fair share", whatever that is, you should be prepared for a shockingly new definition of "fair".

The truly amazing thing is that you want to continue as we are? What about your heirs? Shouldn't they have a shot at a retirement system that is more than a pyramid scam? Why should we wait for things to get worse yet? Usually, when a debt counselor talks to an individual that is in the situation that the SS system is in, they advise them, "you're already in the hole, please stop digging."

[RAGNAR]

777

[cardiacpaul]

" However, the rest of us can and should. (Last: condition for continued SS payments should be a review of recipients' lifestyles.)"

are you suggesting that some gov't body should have a check off sheet that would determine whether I'm smart enough to manage my own money or not? thats scary.

It was constructed in defiance of what was politically possible, by a tyrant who sought alleviate a mess that was created by the principles he enacted to counter it."

Partially true.
With the US In a deep depression, the industrial revolution gearing up, the dynamics of the country were changing. People that had generational family farms were moving to the cities in droves.
As a rural agricultural based economy and lifestyle, families typically had multiple generations living under the same roof. with the moves to the city, that ended (for the most part)

[cardiacpaul]

"-- How does the fact that their are people incapable of looking after their own, simple, 101-level affairs mean that the rest of us, be we the majority or a minority, should sacrifice our lives to these people at the point of a gun? By what right do the unable have such claims on the property of others?
-- I don't see why you assume one needs to do much to get good, safe, financial advice. that 6% is relatively simple to achieve. Most cautious retirement plans, the tool most Americans use and more and more people in general end up with enough to retire, yield that much or more.
-- Further, by unleashing the economy through private retirement accounts, we improve standards of living immeasurably, making it both easier to achieve Retirement Critical Mass and eaier to recover from the consequences of being an idiot."

the only issue I have is... There is a VAST number of people, regardless of socio-economic status or background that would NOT save for the future.
According to some more useless stats, over 20% of the wage earners in the US DO NOT have a bank account, thats right no checking or savings account. They cash their paychecks at wal-mart, the grocery, check cashing establishments. Are you telling me that given that little tidbit, those people would shave off X% and drop it off at charles shwab?