Soooo Close!

[Jennifer]

@M36:

That seems like a pretty fucked up plan to me Jen. So the thousands that I put into the SS system just disappears?

Why not just get rid of the whole system, and give EVERYBODY their money back. There’s already a fucking 10 trillion dollar debt, a few trillion more won’t hurt.

Because we cannot afford a refund.  The Democrats have been spending all the money in the lock box for decades.  It is not there.  Every dollar you put in goes out immediately to some retiree or some government program.

Furthermore, your options are to lose all that money NOW, or keep paying into the program and lose all that money + interest + future payments into the program later.

Honestly, I’d rather take my lumps now, he out the few dozen thousand of dollars and not have the 33% encumbrance on my checks from this point forward.  In the long run, it’s MUCH cheaper!  (Otherwise I’d have 34 years of paying 33% of my paycheck and at the end, STILL not get any social security anyway.  Or, I could take the same 33% and invest it somewhere and actually earn a return on that money.)

[Guest]

How about refunding the young people who need the money instead of the old fools who will be kicking the bucket any day?

[Guest]

My personal thoughts on Social Insecurity:

1.  Anyone currently getting it will continue to do so.
2.  Anyone 50 or older has the option to stay in the program as currently written (with FULL current social security tax rate for the remainder of their working years), or to opt out.
3.  Anyone under 50, or anyone over 50 who opts out, will continue to pay HALF of their current Social Security taxes (in order to fund the payments to current recipients). 
4.  Anyone under 20 is forever exempt from ANY Social Security taxes (the number of people collecting will be zero by the time they form the majority of the taxpayers so they do not need to pay).
5.  Any shortfall in SS revenues will be made up with transfers from General Revenue (as SS over collections have been transfered TO General Revenue for the past 70 years)

Once you opt out, that is IT.  You can never go back. If you are under 50, it does not matter if you paid in for 30 years… it was a tax and you paid it and now the program is GONE.

That would effectively eliminate Social Insecurity in about 30 years, with complete and total elimination in 50 years (a few THOUSAND folks would collect for another 10 years after that, and a few DOZEN folks might collects for a few more year, but that is IT).

[Guest]

Complete and immediate elimination. All those under 30 get their money refunded.

Thats more to my liking.

[dezrtfish]

Hey there wipper snapper, some of us in our thirties would like to see some of that cash.  Besides it’s not like you young’uns have made a huge contribution yet.  :wink:

[Jennifer]

We all want a refund, but let’s be honest.  That money is gone, forever.  We can either write it off now, or keep throwing money at it and write that money off later.

Better to just let the government wipe out the debt to us, cancel the program for anyone under 45.  Between 45-65 I could see a small rebate (33% or lower) to give them seed money to invest into their own retirement, since they have significantly fewer years to recoup their loss then those under 45.  Anyone 65 and older can keep it because they have 0 years left to invest their money.

[Jermofoot]

@Cmdr:

The best thing this nation could do is to default on all it’s socialist programs and tell the states to either pick up the slack on the important ones, or default on them as well.

Socialist programs are now THE LARGEST item on the US Budget.  Not the war.  Not the military.  Not transportation.  Not emergency services.  HAND OUTS TO SENIOR CITIZENS (not even the other stuff, JUST THE SENIORS) is the largest segment of the budget and it exceeds 35% of our annual income from taxes.

Think of what we COULD be using that money for!?!?  Diplomatic missions.  We could fund research for cancer cures or AIDS cures.  We could pay off the national debt!

I’m sorry, they are not.  Military by far is the largest item.  Much of the “socialist programs” pay for themselves.  Not all, of course.  But they are also cannibalized for other things.  But Military by far, is the most expensive item we have.  And not all of it is even budgeted.

[balungaloaf]

take away all the useless things we have to pay for.

like translations!  :evil:

[dezrtfish]

Well, maybe they’re being tricky, but I just looked up the 2008 budget and:

Total outlay for:
Dept of Defence = 583,283 Million
Social Security Admin = 656,282 Million
Dept Health & Human Serv. = 700,980 Million

that apears to be the big three

[Jermofoot]

@dezrtfish:

Well, maybe they’re being tricky, but I just looked up the 2008 budget and:

Total outlay for:
Dept of Defence = 583,283 Million
Social Security Admin = 656,282 Million
Dept Health & Human Serv. = 700,980 Million

that apears to be the big three

Yeah, at cursory glance.  But there is more than meets the eye (tricky bastids).  :wink:

[Guest]

To get total “defense” budget you would need to add in the budget for Homeland Security, and personally I think Veterans Affairs as well.

For total social spending you would need to add Education, HUD, etc to the mix.

And even with “wartime” budgets for the DOD and the brand new Homeland Security department, social welfare spending FAR exceeds security spending.

Also please note that, of all the spending we are discussion, most of it is entire Cabinet departments (DOD, HUD, HHS, etc.)  But SSA is only a SUB-DEPARTMENT.  2nd largest budget line item, and it is not even Cabinet level spending…

[Jermofoot]

@ncscswitch:

To get total “defense” budget you would need to add in the budget for Homeland Security, and personally I think Veterans Affairs as well.

Yes, but you also have to include military spending in departments other than Defense, monies appropriated for the War on Terror not declared, veterans’ benefits (if that’s what you are referring to as Affairs), and a few other things.  Some even include the portion of interest on our national debt that was accrued through military spending, which is also a hefty sum.

For total social spending you would need to add Education, HUD, etc to the mix.

Education & HUD is already included in the budget.

And even with “wartime” budgets for the DOD and the brand new Homeland Security department, social welfare spending FAR exceeds security spending.

No, it doesn’t.  Military spending outweighs all non-military spending slightly, or just about even if you don’t include interest considerations.

Also please note that, of all the spending we are discussion, most of it is entire Cabinet departments (DOD, HUD, HHS, etc.)  But SSA is only a SUB-DEPARTMENT.  2nd largest budget line item, and it is not even Cabinet level spending…

Yes, but Social Security is a trust fund that is separate from federal funds. And the budget you are looking at is not at all the entire picture of all that is going on.  Social Security is still something to think about, especially with all the boomers retiring, but it is not in danger of running dry anytime soon, even though there are still some criticisms of it that deserve to be heard and addressed.

My whole point is that if we are looking to cut fat, the first place to start is the military expenditures.

[Jennifer]

If we are going to get ridiculous, then everything under the Executive and Judiciary should be included in the Military budget too….

Or we could be rational and say that Homeland Security is really police/law enforcement and that VA Benefits are really social services.

So yes, the Government is spending the MOST on handouts.  If we want to trim the budget, we should PROBABLY start there, huh?  Maybe drop that budget from 35% of our national budget to like, 15%.

[Jermofoot]

@Cmdr:

If we are going to get ridiculous, then everything under the Executive and Judiciary should be included in the Military budget too….

Why the hell would that be?  I’m talking about things like nuclear weapons being budgeted in the Department of Energy and not listed on DOD expenditures.

Or we could be rational and say that Homeland Security is really police/law enforcement and that VA Benefits are really social services.

A point I was going to make.  And your college money.  I wonder how people would react if they thought of that.  But sadly, I don’t think veterans get enough as it is.

So yes, the Government is spending the MOST on handouts.  If we want to trim the budget, we should PROBABLY start there, huh?  Maybe drop that budget from 35% of our national budget to like, 15%.

Well, the “handouts” are accounted for.  Military expenditures mostly aren’t and what’s more, they are taken out as loans and we pay interest on them.  This is why our debt is growing.

[Jennifer]

Some have said that Homeland Security and VA Benefits should be military.  They are not.  Homeland security is law enforcement.  VA benefits are welfare and humanitarian benefits.

That’s why I said, if we are including those as military, we need to include the President, his staff, all law enforcement people, the FBI, ATF, CIA, Judges, City Planners, etc too.

And I agree with you, Jermo.  VA Benefits are really lacking.  But I’d make the sacrifice in benefits if it meant a solvent US Government provided my sacrifice didn’t go into the pocket of some leech in another program.  That’s the problem.  Almost out entire deficit could be wiped out in a matter of years if we just used some common sense in determining who is eligable for entitlements.  And the people need to start providing their own retirement securities.  Billions of years humans have been around and only in the past 100 years did we need the government to steal our money and give us bread and water to live on in retirement.  Honestly, if I could invest it all myself, I’d be living on Caviar and Vodka in retirement.

As for accounting for military expenditures, I submit they are better accounted for then most government agencies becuase they are under much higher scrutiney.  Our debt is growing because entitlements are growing.  If you want the debt to shrink, cut the entitlements down.  There’s a direct correllation between the two.

[dezrtfish]

@Jermofoot:

Yes, but Social Security is a trust fund that is separate from federal funds. And the budget you are looking at is not at all the entire picture of all that is going on.  Social Security is still something to think about, especially with all the boomers retiring, but it is not in danger of running dry anytime soon, even though there are still some criticisms of it that deserve to be heard and addressed.

While the fund is technicaly seperate it is meant to be invested by the goverment in “reliable” ways to increase it’s value.  So hey what’s more reliable than US Savings Bonds… that have to be payed back at some point.  So they’re borrowing money in the form of bonds, from our retirement fund, and then taxing us to pay it back with interest.  Clear as mud to me…

[Jennifer]

It’s SUPPOSED to be a trust fund, and on paper it is.  In reality, it is borrowed against, loaned from, and plundered in excess of it’s actual original value.  The government since the 90’s at least, has been plundering the “trust” and spending it on projects with the “promise” to refill it before it the money is missed.

The current balance in the Social Security Trust is negative.  Thus, it IS a program that does require government funding just to keep it writing those monthly checks to senior citizens every month.  There is NOTHING in there.  The instant that money comes out of your check it disapears to someone else along with some of the tax dollars you lose to the government, to make up for the short fall.

Why in the world do you think real conservatives are pushing for the abolition of the Social Security Trust and the expansion of IRA and 401k programs!??

[dezrtfish]

I hope your not trying to argue you point with me, I think Social Security sucks.  That was the point I was tring to make it’s big government diging in my pockets and then bulshiting me about what they’re doing with it.

[Jennifer]

I just want the programs to stop.  We still have the Tennessee Valley Authority to bring electricity to people in Tennessee and that’s been around for what, 60-70, 80 years???  In 80 years you can’t string power lines and you’re the big, bad Federal Government of the greatest and most powerful nation on the planet?

Top this off with wasted spending in retirement accounts which do not even keep up with inflation, resulting in people LOSING money in the program, and having an open safe to any government spending the government wants.

Then, you want to tell me you want to create a universal health care plan?  Let’s forget how big of a failure such plans have been proven to be everywhere they are tried.  You cannot even handle running POWER LINES to 1/50th of your nation!!!  Imagine how bad that track record would be for life saving medical treatment!  1 in 50 will DIE.

No, the only responsible thing to do would be to shut down this experiment in socialism and return to free market capitalism.