Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Retirement isn't a right

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by devildog2067, Sep 16, 2012.

  1. Dukeboy01

    Dukeboy01 Pretty Ladies!

    Apr 30, 2000
    Lexington, KY
    Found a newer poll from July- August of this year. It doesn't break out "tea partiers," but the results are the same. The economic situation has only gotten worse since November of 2011, but still over 80% of the population isn't willing to countenance cuts to Social Security.

    82% oppose reducing Social Security benefits across the board.

    77% oppose reducing Medicare benfits across the board.

    This poll asked some follow- up questions about sticking it to the "rich" by reducing benefits for those with "high" incomes. 57% supported reduced SS benefits for the wealthy and 63% supported reduced Medicare benefits for the wealthy.

    I'd be curious to see how those opinions would change if the "rich" was actually defined with the standard limit of $250K a year usually used when discussing tax reform. Actually, since most retirees would have much less of a yearly income than 250K, in order to make a difference you'd have to start taking into account their total assets when you defined the "rich" for purposes of SS and Medicare. I wonder how people would feel about it once they realized that mom and dad would have to liquidate their inheritance in order to eat if they were over the new income levels.

    The system is broke and will require pain to fix. Over three quarters of our population isn't ready to fix it.
  2. Shinytop


    Sep 5, 2012
    Yes sir, I can. Thank goodness I don't need to.

  3. Diesel_Bomber


    Oct 25, 2008
    It's impolite to mention, but a lot of the SS burden will be off once the baby boomers kick the bucket.

    We pretty much have two options:

    1. Voluntarily limit ourselves. Choose to make the sacrifices necessary to fix the problem. This will not be easy, this will not be comfortable, this will not be trouble free.

    2. Let the whole system fall apart. We will then be making those sacrifices anyway, because there's no choice. This is where we are headed.
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2012
  4. RonS

    RonS Millennium Member

    May 27, 1999
    Oh, USA
    A deal's a deal.

    Sure, some people think that they can work at nothing all day for 20 years and live high on the hog for another 40 on SS alone. Wrong.

    But, the companies like GM who entered into contracts with people, took the fruits of their labor for 20 or 30 years and ran themselves into bankrupcy through their own mismanagement in order to avoid paying their honest debts are just plain criminals. They left the taxpayers to pay for the union retirements and just stiffed the salary retirees for 70-80% of their pensions.

    The bankrupcy and bailout was a scam, pure and simple.
  5. ricka10


    Oct 22, 2010
  6. tarpleyg


    Aug 7, 2002
    North Carolina
    When the government felt compelled to withhold a portion of my paycheck without my consent. Social "security" is anything but and I don't like it.
  7. tous

    tous GET A ROPE!

    Jan 7, 2001
    Plano, Texas, Republic of
    Fixed it fer ya. :supergrin:

    I suggest that temptation of sitting on one's ass and having life delivered to one's front door with no effort is not new, but as devildog notes, it is only recently that society has stopped shunning those folk and decided that it was a good idea to appease them. :upeyes:

    Consider, those that seek sustenance at the public's expense are children and society is the parent that is now compleled to give them a warm bed to sleep in, all the food they can eat, entertainment and most of all, unconditional emotional support.

    To claim that it is one's right to take from those that jave because one was too stupid, unlucky or too apathetic to accumulate a fortune of their own is morally repugnant.

    Oh, by the way ... young'uns, keep working 70 hours per week. I want my Social Security, damn it! :supergrin:
  8. I would gladly give up any future claims to social security benefits if I could get all my contributions returned. Even if it's just the $principle$.
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2012
  9. Averageman


    Oct 22, 2011
    My Grandfather went to the induction center and was declared 4F by the local board. 3 kids, a Farm and 8 hours a day making transmissons for Sherman Tanks got him a repreave from storming beaches with the Marines.
    He went back home and made Corn, Beef, Pork and Transmissons for the next 40 years 18+ hours a day for four decades.
    Somewhere in all of that he designed automatic shift linkages that revolutionised heavy equipment transmissions.
    I think he deserved his Social Security, because other than the $500 he got from Dana that is all he saw out of the deal.
    We still use those linkages in todays equipment BTW.
  10. dango


    Jun 9, 2008
    A bullet to the skull is more Humane than starvation !
    Just shoot us and be done with it !
  11. Averageman


    Oct 22, 2011
    I would much rather have a Beer with you and get to know you.
    Besides ammo is gonna get expensive.
  12. dango


    Jun 9, 2008
    Now that I may have to take you up on , sounds good to me.:supergrin:
  13. unit1069


    Oct 10, 2007
    So. Central US
    The government retirement Ponzi Scheme is quickly coming to collapse.

    Why does America's Radical Left/Democrat/JournoList axis government apparatus refuse to enforce illegal immigration? No, the answer isn't, "Because Americans won't do the dirty work", although that's a small part of the answer. The chief reason is that the axis is planning on "legalizing" illegal aliens and dinging them for SS taxes to continue the Ponzi Scheme.

    As long as government displaces families --- the traditional protectors of senior citizens over all cultures and societies --- we as a people will see a progressive dissolution of our rights along with our obligations.
  14. Flying-Dutchman


    Oct 10, 2007
    The problem with a Ponzi pyramid scheme is the impossibly large number of people needed to keep it going near the end.

    There are not enough people on the planet to support the scheme when the immigrants grow old.

    Notice the FEDGOV always says we need immigrants to pay for retirees. Who is going to pay for the immigrantÂ’s retirement as they quickly grow old too? They must think we are stupid.

    Pyramid schemes always collapse. It is mathematically impossible for a pyramid scheme to survive.
  15. Bush 1 said SSI would be put in a "locked box". What happened?
  16. Detectorist


    Jul 16, 2008
    Everyone received a SS statement once a year. It has the amount of SS tax taken out. It also has the estimated SS payments you will receive once retired.

    If you live at least as long as the average, I think you will receive much more than you paid.

    Maybe I'm wrong..I don't know.
  17. unit1069


    Oct 10, 2007
    So. Central US
    Wrong. It was buffoon Albert Gore Jr. who touted the "lock box" canard.
  18. Flying-Dutchman


    Oct 10, 2007
    Then they must be counting on a lot of people dying before they collect or this further proves it is a scam.

    I wish the FEDGOV had let me put all the SS money I paid in the last 30 years into an S&P 500 account with my name on it that I could leave to my heirs.
  19. RonS

    RonS Millennium Member

    May 27, 1999
    Oh, USA
    The MSM has already been reporting that the breakeven point has been reached, the average SS pensioner now will get less than the amount they paid in SS taxes.

    If you had put that money in a sock under your bed you would be better off. Of course not one American in twenty would have put anything in savings if it wasn't mandatory so I guess this is another of those you get what you have coming deals.
  20. racerford


    Apr 22, 2003
    DFW area
    You are wrong, everyone has a right to a retirement. Everyone has a right to a time when they can stop working and have someone else provide them with a place to stay and all the sustenance they need. That is they day they die.

    One problem with social security is that it has not kept up with mortality. Back when it started the work force was predominately male and the average age of death was near social security benefit age. The number of people that live more than 10 years beyond that was small. Now people live a lot longer and the number of people that will receive benefits for 20 years is sizable. If we had been raising the retirement age of the years things would be a lot better. If years ago we had implemented a system of no mandatory age we would be better off.

    Social security was meant to be supplemental income. It was to provide enough funds to help families take care of there elders. It was not meant to provide them with a stand alone lifestyle free of their family's help.