Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Social Security

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: Social Security
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was just watching Hannity & Combes. While I do not normally watch that show, I stopped flipping through channels because Jon Snow, the SecTres was speaking.

During the show, one of the two suggested that people be able to totally opt-out of the system. Jon Snow (essentially) said the government was unwilling to allow that. Snow did explain that 'individual accounts' would have a higher interest rate, and would be free from the government dipping into them.

It is rare that people amass a significant amount of money before they are 18. With that as a starting point, people are adults when they truly enter the Social Security program. Why should we not be able to voluntarily withdraw from the Social Security program?

I will add, as a side note, that it seems to me that one of the two (Hannity & Combs) seems to have a very libertarian leaning. I like that [Smile]

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ooh, I know the answer! Because I've been asking that question ever since I got my first job. "All the rich people will opt out, and then the system will collapse." Because you don't get what YOU put into the system, the money you put into the system gets sent out next month to somebody else. Less charitable people have called this a pyramid scheme.

The New Deal wasn't about forcing people to save, it was about the redistribution of wealth to those in poverty - of which there were quite a few. Ultimately, this was a socialist program designed to take some of the anger away from those unemployed masses and keep them from joining the Communists.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
ATW
Member
Member # 1690

 - posted      Profile for ATW   Email ATW   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They won't be allowed opt out of the system for several reasons.

1) First and foremost is the tax money coming in to the government is paying not only for social security but for the rest of the government to run. After all that changes by 2018 and all that tax money is needed just to pay social security obligations, they still aren't going to let people quit paying in: the money is going to be "needed now more than ever".

2) While people whether rich or poor *can* save the money which would otherwise be going to their social security taxes and come out HUGELY better than drawing social security after retirement, the fact is that most people *won't* save that money unless somehow coerced.

So the country would be enduring a majority of seniors retiring penniless and have no system in place to help them. You'd be gettting rid of social security perhaps for a few years but then the government would be starting up a similar organization. People won't let the government allow retirees sink or swim. The retirees *will* be thrown a lifesaver whether any of us here agree that it should be done or not.

[ December 17, 2004, 12:28 PM: Message edited by: ATW ]

Posts: 575 | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I thought all the Seniors were getting drafted into the Army?
Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Drake, you have been on a roll for the last couple of days. LOL on a bunch of your posts. [Big Grin]
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ivan
Member
Member # 1467

 - posted      Profile for Ivan   Email Ivan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
The New Deal wasn't about forcing people to save, it was about the redistribution of wealth to those in poverty - of which there were quite a few. Ultimately, this was a socialist program designed to take some of the anger away from those unemployed masses and keep them from joining the Communists.
The New Deal was about stimulating market demand to stimulate production of goods. You can argue wether or not economics works that way or not, but that's what the New Deal's intent was.

Social Security did this by putting money into the pockets of impoverished old people who did nothing but spend it. Now granted, people didn't much live past 65 at that time, so it was obvious why these people hadn't saved, but they were impoverished nonetheless. Since they were poor, starving, and had a low marginal propensity to save, they seemed like good targets for New Deal spending.

Incidently, the poverty rate among the elderly has fallen from somewhere around 30% to around 10% or something. The elderly went from being the "most likely" demographic to be impoverished to being the "least likely".

And if you want to complain about a government program that unfairly taxes the rich to the benefit of the poor, how about choosing one that isn't steeply regressive? I mean, there are plenty of programs that arn't funded by a flat tax that is capped at $80,000 of income and that don't give more money to individuals with higher life-time earnings. Heck, isn't this the type of "fair" program the Right thinks we should have more of?

Because if you want a progressive Social Security system, I for one would gladly support it. [Wink]

-Ivan

Posts: 1710 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I was thinking I'd rather have had the money I'd put into social security in my own account. That way I could have put it all into google at the IPO.

--Firedrake

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
And if you want to complain about a government program that unfairly taxes the rich to the benefit of the poor, how about choosing one that isn't steeply regressive? I mean, there are plenty of programs that arn't funded by a flat tax that is capped at $80,000 of income and that don't give more money to individuals with higher life-time earnings. Heck, isn't this the type of "fair" program the Right thinks we should have more of?
Because if you want a progressive Social Security system, I for one would gladly support it. [Wink]

-Ivan [/QB][/QUOTE]

Cap is crap. That's my new slogan. I wasn't really talking about the rich being disadvantaged, or the progressivity of tax. I'm in favor of the Fair Tax proposal, which would scrap this. It would remove the 15% payroll tax on the working poor.

For me, it is about freedom. I can be the grasshopper or the ant, it is my choice. The opposite of charity is justice.

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1