|
Author
|
Topic: Social Security
|
ukcatfannfl
Player
Member # 1425
|
posted 07-21-2022 06:56 PM
A woman, or man dies at age 65 before collecting one benefit check. She/He and her employer paid into the system for almost 50 years and she collected NOTHING
Keep in mind all the working people that die every year who were paying into the system and got nothing.
And these governmental morons mismanaged the money and stole from the system, so that it's now going broke.
BEAUTIFUL!
And they have the audacity to call today's seniors "vultures" in an attempt to cover their ineptitude.
DISGRACEFUL!
The real reason for renaming our Social Security payments is so the government can claim that all those social security recipients are receiving entitlements thus putting them in the same category as welfare, and food stamp recipients.
THIS IS WORTH THE FEW MINUTES IT TAKES TO READ AND DIGEST!
F.Y.I.
By changing the name of SS contributions, it gives them a means to refute this program in the future. It's free money for the government to spend under this guise.
The Social Security check is now (or soon will be) referred to as a Federal Benefit Payment ?
I am forwarding it because it touches a nerve in me, and I hope it will in you.
Please keep passing it on until everyone in our country has read it.
The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a "Federal Benefit Payment."
This is NOT a benefit.
It is OUR money, paid out of our earned income!
Not only did we all contribute to Social Security, but our employers did too! It totaled 15% of our income before taxes. (This should be enough for you to forward this message, if not read on.)
If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that's close to $180,000 invested in Social Security.
If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers’ contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you'd have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved .
This is your personal investment. Upon retirement, if you took out only 3% per year, you'd receive $39,318 per year, or $3,277 per month .
That's almost three times more than today's average Social Security benefit of $1,230 per month, according to the Social Security Administration. (Google it – it's a fact).
And your retirement fund would last more than 33 years (until you're 98 if you retire at age 65)!
I can only imagine how much better most average-income people could live in retirement if our government had just invested our money in low-risk interest-earning accounts.
Instead, the folks in Washington pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did (or Lyndon Johnson).
They took our money and used it elsewhere. They "forgot"(oh yes, they knew) that it was OUR money they were taking.
They did not have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them...and they didn't pay interest on the debt they assumed.
And recently they have told us that the money won't support us for very much longer. (Isn't it funny that they NEVER say this about welfare payments ?)
But is it our fault they misused our investments? And now, to add insult to injury, they are calling it a benefit, as if we never worked to earn every penny of it.
This is stealing !
Just because they borrowed the money, does not mean that our investments were for charity!
Let's take a stand.
We have earned our right to Social Security and Medicare. Demand that our legislators bring some sense into our government.
Find a way to keep Social Security and Medicare going for the sake of the 92% of our population who need it.
Then call it what it is:
Our Earned Retirement Income .
--
--------------------
ukcatfannfl
Posts: 8771 | From: Inverness, FL | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiptree
Administrator
Member # 844
|
posted 07-22-2022 05:39 AM
OK, rank mode on.
"1% compounded monthly" sounds like a little, something that anybody can achieve with bonds and other conservative assets. But 1% compounded monthly is a very, very high return on investment --it comes out to a 12.58% annual rate of return.
That is higher than the historic returns of the stock market indexes (a litle more than 8% without dividends, a little less than 11% with dividends). It is flat out impossible to get that kind of return using conservative investments or annuities.
Articles that prey upon people's fears, and especially those that assume we are too stupid to see how they manipulate us, really infuriate me. Using incredibly optimistic math because most American's are innumerate is just wrong.
Once I see that kind of disingenuity, the rest of the article doesn' matter. They are liars.
end rant.
--------------------
Tiptree
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 13600 | From: Terre Haute, IN | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
ukcatfannfl
Player
Member # 1425
|
posted 07-22-2022 08:56 AM
tip u r the smart one here but most people that I know rely on SSN once they retire to live on. Its not much but the folks in the area where I lived way back put their faith in the small check they would receive once retiring or at least when they get old.
If ssn goes broke then they have nothing coming in albetit a small amount.
--------------------
ukcatfannfl
Posts: 8771 | From: Inverness, FL | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiptree
Administrator
Member # 844
|
posted 07-24-2022 04:14 AM
Ed,
I also rely upon Social Security to pay my bills; I am not disputing that Social Security is in some danger of default. It concerns me greatly.
I am disputing the idea that had the SSA "just invested our contributions" that the return would have been anywhere near what the author claims. That claim is absurd.
BTW, in a perverse way, renaming Social Security as a "benefit" might actually protect it. Entitlement payments are mandatory for the US government. "Other" things, like defense, are optional. Something to think about...
--------------------
Tiptree
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 13600 | From: Terre Haute, IN | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulCat
Player
Member # 513
|
posted 07-24-2022 09:51 AM
People should have the option of not putting into SS, instead choosing to secure their own retirment. But of course that will never happen because if it did, I'd say less than 1% of the workforce would choose SS. The government would probably miss that amount of money.
Posts: 10330 | From: Erlanger, Ky. USA | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tiptree
Administrator
Member # 844
|
posted 07-25-2022 03:44 AM
PaulCat,
You are damn right they would miss it. Every dollar of your social security contributions goes straight into the general fund, NOT to the SSA. Instead, the government spends that money on current social security recipients, and then everything else from welfare, gender-identity programs, shuttling illegal aliens around the country... whatever it wants. The government then puts an "IOU" in the SSA representing your contributions, and hopes it will be able to pay YOUR earned distributions in the future.
It is a ponzi scheme of the worst design ever.
--------------------
Tiptree
“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.” Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 13600 | From: Terre Haute, IN | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic