Contributor ⭐

Share your concerns about Social Security

Forum|Forum|14 years ago
September 27, 2011
337 replies
187704 views

1) In the article, Social Security Fears, many Social Security myths are addressed. What concerns you the most about Social Security?

This topic has been closed for replies.

Show previous replies

JANMB

Contributor ⭐⭐

In Response to Re: Share your fears about Social Security:

Jan, The Plutocrats in Congress dont want to talk about the almost 4 TRILLION in lost tax revenue from the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy,nor do they want to talk about the TRILLIONS of dollars the unnecessary Iraq War cost. We cant get a total cost for the Iraq War because we are still paying to repair the broken lives of our brave wounded soldiers, who have returned mentally and physically disabled. We are still rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure, but the Halliburtons of America are doing just fine, thank you. Those no bid contracts did wonders for our deficit too. I get a kick out of people who blame President Obama for our deficit, as If President Bush paid all the debt he created when he left office. No to the contrary, the cash register is still ringing loudly from President Bush's " Mission Accomplishments ". : According to the US TREASURY ---Over 10 years, the total revenue loss from the tax cuts to the weathiest .... comes to $3.9 trillion. Social Security does not contribute to the deficit. So---Washington doesn't want to increase taxes but willing to make " cuts" (no matter what they may call it ) to Soc Security for the ones who need it or will need it the most. Should they vote to cut Soc Security and not raise taxes on the richest and I WILL support a primary challenge to kick all of these thugs out of office and have called or e-mailed all the republicans--and democrats saying the same thing. Posted by JANMB

Posted by mandm84

A few families being fabulously wealthy contributing less in taxes is not democracy.....and the vast majority of the workers who don't get a good enough share of profits they made in this bountiful country is not democracy.
The most ridiculous accusation I hear is that the "left wants to steal money from the rich" It's not stealing ....these are called taxes. Unless everyone is willing to take time out of their busy schedule to police the streets, repair the roads, teach your children math, and maintain the justice system, the military ... they better keep paying them.

The young folks were born in a country where the older folks had already built--bridges, roads, tall buildings, everything good we have today and some retired today were paid a dollar an hour in the 60's.
If the young folks think people are lazy and are stealing from them uh-huh.......I would like to see these young-folks just start from scratch on their own....go back to the early 1900's that well prepared them for their adult lives. Or today, do without all those services and products that they get SO CHEAP that puts more money in their pockets when half the country isn't paid enough for the work they do.

Then when the same ones need social benefits....they are called moochers ....and even by some in congress who have been on the dole of the taxpayers for years.

A

AARPBetty

Contributor ⭐⭐

Direct Deposit for Social Security!

To apply for direct deposit for social security, you can go to your bank, or you can call Social Security Administration.
If you receive benefits, the deadline to switch to direct deposit is: March 1, 2013

f you already receive Social Security or SSI benefits and you have a bank account,
you can sign up for Direct Deposit by:

obtaining a password and starting or changing Direct Deposit online (Social Security benefits only), or
contacting your bank, credit union or savings and loan association, or
calling Social Security toll-free at 1-800-772-1213 (TTY 1-800-325-0778), or
filling out a Direct Deposit Sign Up Form and taking or mailing it to your Social Security Office. The form is available here in PDF format for downloading and completion. To read and print the form, you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader software installed on your computer.

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/deposit/howtosign.htm

Watch this video for more information:

http://www.youtube.com/GoDirectUSTreasGov

L

louisie

Contributor ⭐

In Response to Share your fears about Social Security:

1) In the article, Social Security Fears , many Social Security myths are addressed. What concerns you the most about Social Security?
Posted by AARPMiller

What concerns me the most is the new terminology, "Entitlement" . it is not an entitlement in the sense of welfare, or free cell phones , or section 8, but, instead it is worked for, from your money, and your employer's money. There is no government money at all!! So , the only entitlement involved, is perhaps, after you have earned it, your employer spent it, and you gave it to the government to hold for you, you should be entitled to get it back, with interest!!!!

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 I 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 govt . 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.
Another thing with me.... I have two deceased husbands who died in their 50 's , (one was 51 and the other one was 59 before one percent of their social security could be drawn. I worked all my life and am drawing 100% on my own social security). Their S.S. money will never have one cent drawn from what they paid into S.S. all their lives.
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 Congressional benefits? --- free healthcare , 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 ?
We're "broke" and we can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, or Homeless. Yet in the last few months we have provided aid to Haiti , Chile and Turkey . And now Pakistan ......home of bin Laden. Literally, BILLIONS of DOLLARS!!! And they can't help our own citizens in New York and New Jersey ! They sure rushed to help Katrina victims in 10 days!!!!! I guess minorities have more clout!

Our retired seniors living on a 'fixed S.S. income' receive no additional federal aid nor do they get any financial breaks, while our government and religious organizations pour hundreds of billions of $$$ and tons of food to foreign countries!

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?

P

pkyoungs

Contributor ⭐

I am not on Social Security yet, (I am 57) but I am getting more more upset by the propaganda being shoveled out by AARP. Another advertisement in the Chicago Tribune two days ago with half truths and misleading messages used to scare people, divide the generations, and show the elderly as selfish people that only care about themselves.

People need to understand how Social Security was created, how is is funded, and what is was intended for. You will never see AARP do that. They try to give the impression that the discussion is open, but the organization has only one agenda and you can see it in the way they advertise and the letters they send out to the members.

The bottom line is that Social Security was never iintended to be ones sole source of retirement. What you put into it does not mean you are going to get a certain amount out of it as it was not set up as a self retirement plan. It was intended to be a source for those that really need it due to a life situation, not to be one's only source of retirement funds. I am more than happy to see need testing and phased out benefits for those that should not get it. By the way, most wealth in this country is held by those who are retired. They AARP will not tell you that either. But, a large number of them (including my father) cry about that also being selfish. What has happened to sacrafice and responsibility? I compare my gradparents to the current retirees my parents age and as a whole they are a selfish generation. Today that pattern continues. For example, only 30% of people today with company saving plans take advantage of the free money offered by employers matching 401K contributions. Only 30%!, so let's reward the 70%? Those are the same 70% who are going to cry about the increase when they go on Social Security in the future and expect the government to come to the rescue. Showing an old lady in an AARP advertisement crying that she paid full into it (she had no choice) but is blaming the lack of increases is insuting to those who scrafice and are responsible. If she had a life situation where she has no retirement money available then she should get full social security, if she did not, she has no one to blame but herself.

M

mandm84

Contributor ⭐⭐

It just aint fair. If the far right wing Republicans in Congress get their way, big corporations and the wealthiest will continue to coast with tax loopholes. While those same Republicans will cut our earned Social Security and Medicare benefits instead, claiming our Seniors and Disabled are just too costly to maintain. It just aint fair !!!

JANMB

Contributor ⭐⭐

In Response to The Social Security Propaganda from AARP:

I am not on Social Security yet, (I am 57) but I am getting more more upset by the propaganda being shoveled out by AARP. Another advertisement in the Chicago Tribune two days ago with half truths and misleading messages used to scare people, divide the generations, and show the elderly as selfish people that only care about themselves. People need to understand how Social Security was created, how is is funded, and what is was intended for. You will never see AARP do that. They try to give the impression that the discussion is open, but the organization has only one agenda and you can see it in the way they advertise and the letters they send out to the members. The bottom line is that Social Security was never iintended to be ones sole source of retirement. What you put into it does not mean you are going to get a certain amount out of it as it was not set up as a self retirement plan. It was intended to be a source for those that really need it due to a life situation, not to be one's only source of retirement funds. I am more than happy to see need testing and phased out benefits for those that should not get it. By the way, most wealth in this country is held by those who are retired. They AARP will not tell you that either. But, a large number of them (including my father) cry about that also being selfish. What has happened to sacrafice and responsibility? I compare my gradparents to the current retirees my parents age and as a whole they are a selfish generation. Today that pattern continues. For example, only 30% of people today with company saving plans take advantage of the free money offered by employers matching 401K contributions. Only 30%!, so let's reward the 70%? Those are the same 70% who are going to cry about the increase when they go on Social Security in the future and expect the government to come to the rescue. Showing an old lady in an AARP advertisement crying that she paid full into it (she had no choice) but is blaming the lack of increases is insuting to those who scrafice and are responsible. If she had a life situation where she has no retirement money available then she should get full social security, if she did not, she has no one to blame but herself.
Posted by pkyoungs

unhuh > DID YOU EAT TODAY ? The food workers are the most underpaid of all categories.... You have more money in YOUR pocket and everyone else complaining like yourself about "poor people" because some people were not paid enough for the work they did for decades ....and couldn't save money for retirement....they may have had a catastrophic event in their lives or a layoff or just did the dirty work hardly anyone wants to do that is necessary to keep this country going as cheap labor. So it's so easy to stick your nose up in the air and be arrogant when you have had good fortune that other's didn't have and still be provided with all those good services you and other's enjoy. at the expense of the " poor people." you have such distain for.

QUOTE : " To reform entitlements, we should assess what these programs were meant to do in the first place. “Entitlement” sounds selfish and at odds with the dignity and peace of mind that Social Security and Medicare are meant to provide. It distorts the animating idea behind these programs, which is social insurance.

FDR didn’t have strong feelings about benefit levels, retirement ages or eligibility standards. He focused on what he called guaranteed return. By that he meant that having paid into the system through a kind of insurance premium (though in fact it was merely a payroll tax), Americans should rest easy that some money would be there for them if they lived long enough to need it. The whole point was “insurance against need.”

“Guaranteed return” and “insurance against need” should continue to be the two guiding principles of social-insurance reform.

“Guaranteed return” means no privatization or voucher system for these programs. FDR would have strongly opposed President George W. Bush’s plan to allow Social Security contributions to be invested in the stock market. He thought subjecting retirement income to what he called “the winds of fortune” was a breach of the social contract . Imagine what would happen to someone who retired in 1929 or 2008? No guaranteed return. " (END OF QUOTE

(Entire article is a good read---refer to --)

http://www.nationalmemo.com/why-democrats-must-get-smart-on-entitlements/

M

mandm84

Contributor ⭐⭐

Well said Jan. How in the world can a worker making minimum wage build a 401k or take advantage of a company match contribution ? The workers stuck at the low level work just as hard, if not harder than those above them, but are not always rewarded enough to get ahead and build a secure financial future without Social Security. You are so right Jan and let's not all lose sight of what F.D.R wanted Social Security to provide, " A chance to survive with dignity ". Response to Re: The Social Security Propaganda from AARP:

In Response to The Social Security Propaganda from AARP : unhuh /> DID YOU EAT TODAY ? The food workers are the most underpaid of all categories.... You have more money in YOUR pocket and everyone else complaining like yourself about "poor people" because some people were not paid enough for the work they did for decades ....and couldn't save money for retirement....they may have had a catastrophic event in their lives or a layoff or just did the dirty work hardly anyone wants to do that is necessary to keep this country going as cheap labor. So it's so easy to stick your nose up in the air and be arrogant when you have had good fortune that other's didn't have and still be provided with all those good services you and other's enjoy. at the expense of the " poor people." you have such distain for. QUOTE : " To reform entitlements, we should assess what these programs were meant to do in the first place. “Entitlement” sounds selfish and at odds with the dignity and peace of mind that Social Security and Medicare are meant to provide. It distorts the animating idea behind these programs, which is social insurance. FDR didn’t have strong feelings about benefit levels, retirement ages or eligibility standards. He focused on what he called guaranteed return. By that he meant that having paid into the system through a kind of insurance premium (though in fact it was merely a payroll tax), Americans should rest easy that some money would be there for them if they lived long enough to need it. The whole point was “insurance against need.” “Guaranteed return” and “insurance against need” should continue to be the two guiding principles of social-insurance reform. “Guaranteed return” means no privatization or voucher system for these programs. FDR would have strongly opposed President George W. Bush’s plan to allow Social Security contributions to be invested in the stock market. He thought subjecting retirement income to what he called “the winds of fortune” was a breach of the social contract . Imagine what would happen to someone who retired in 1929 or 2008? No guaranteed return. " (END OF QUOTE (Entire article is a good read---refer to --) http://www.nationalmemo.com/why-democrats-must-get-smart-on-entitlements/
Posted by JANMB

P

ppllpp

Contributor ⭐

I joined AARP to have a strong lobby for us elderly. This is our voice and I am hoping we continue to be strong. We need all the help in the future years for our health care needs and more. Right now as I see it, the biggest need for elderly is assisted living, not necessarily the full nursing home needs. People in 80's need help to have a quality of life - safe environment with meals made, etc. This has to be on the radar screen for financial assistance - make it more affordable. Only the people with money can afford this environment. They talk about people staying in their homes - really! People need interaction with other old people - that's the way it is. They need help with daily things such as cleaning their apartment, meals, etc. Assisted living - model apartment living with elderly interaction is what is badly needed for all.

A

AARPBetty

Contributor ⭐⭐

In Response to Re: Share your fears about Social Security:

I joined AARP to have a strong lobby for us elderly. This is our voice and I am hoping we continue to be strong. We need all the help in the future years for our health care needs and more. Right now as I see it, the biggest need for elderly is assisted living, not necessarily the full nursing home needs. People in 80's need help to have a quality of life - safe environment with meals made, etc. This has to be on the radar screen for financial assistance - make it more affordable. Only the people with money can afford this environment. They talk about people staying in their homes - really! People need interaction with other old people - that's the way it is. They need help with daily things such as cleaning their apartment, meals, etc. Assisted living - model apartment living with elderly interaction is what is badly needed for all.
Posted by ppllpp

Thanks , ppllpp, You said that very well,and , yes, they do need help with daily living , and connections to other seniors.

For social security , they need to know how much they have to live on , before they retire, too.

Social Security Tool

judygram

Contributor ⭐

The act has expanded over the years, also gives money to states to provide assistance to Aid to Families with Dependent Children, Maternal and Child Welfare, public health services, and the blind. And now they want to add
millions more non elderly to SS.
We owe the older generation for everything they did. Look at the Hoover Dam. community's benefits from this creation, and it has been said it could not be done in this day and age. Why, because of a government drain on societies and labor. We need to cut Congressional pay, pork spending, everything until we pay back the last generation the benefits they deserve. They were promised 55 and not an escalated age. Where does it stop, 100 years old. There is no point to benefits if you increase the age.

Sign up

Login with SSO

Login to the community

Login with SSO