Re: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Re: : Correcting Fantasies About Social Security

How do you know she does not need it?
----- Original Message -----
From: "zeus32117" <zeus32117@yahoo.com>
To: <Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2011 6:48 PM
Subject: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Re: : Correcting Fantasies About
Social Security

What I am saying is that much of the time the government takes from those
who have less and gives it to those who have more. The widow whom I was
talking about does not need financial assistance from the government. She
receives it anyway. Last year 40% of the money the U.S. federal government
had spent was borrowed, according to the numbers that I have seen.

--- In Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com, "Sheep&Goatlady"
<springcreek@...> wrote:
>
> if you check,, you will find that widow is paying more for her medicare
> than
> those that has less,, So she get SS,, so what? some one paid into it,
> Ah,,
> I suggest you check how SS is determined,, it is determined on how much
> the
> person made in their life time and paid into SS,, I see you have no idea
> how
> SS nor medicare works,, the cap for paying into SS is 110,000,, after that
> no SS is taken out of their check,, and I think the maz is like 2000 a
> month for a family,, in SS ,,
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "zeus32117" <zeus32117@...>
> To: <Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 7:39 PM
> Subject: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Re: : Correcting Fantasies About
> Social Security
>
>
> I will break down for you the statement that you were responding to. In
> other words, I will say what I have said already but in way that is easier
> to understand. What I have said is that I am in favor of finding an
> alternative. An alternative to what am I talking about? I am talking about
> an alternative to reducing government spending. I am referring to finding
> a
> good alternative to reducing how much money the government is spending on
> each of those people who need help the most.
>
> The government is spending money on both people who need help and on
> people
> who do not need help from the government. For example, I know a widow who
> had more than U.S.$600,000 in savings when her husband had died. She was
> receiving her Social Security benefits anyway. She still does. The
> Medicare
> was and still is paying for much of the medical services that she was
> receiving and still receives. I think that some of that money probably
> comes
> from taxes that are paid by people who do not make much money. The rest of
> it could be coming from taxes paid by those people who are forced to
> borrow
> money in order not to go out of business.
>
>
> --- In Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com, "Sheep&Goatlady"
> <springcreek@> wrote:
> >
> > Reduce the amount of money? how is that? less medical care, put them in
> > poor
> > housing conditiosn, less education, is that your idea?
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "zeus32117" <zeus32117@>
> > To: <Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 5:19 AM
> > Subject: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Re: : Correcting Fantasies About
> > Social Security
> >
> >
> > I agree with you that circumstances beyond someone's control can do that
> > to
> > someone. That's one of the reasons why I am in favor of finding a good
> > alternative to reducing the amount of money that the government spends
> > on
> > each of those people who need help the most.
> >
> > --- In Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com, "Sheep&Goatlady"
> > <springcreek@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I am glad to hear that, but circumstances beyond one's control can
> > > wipe
> > > you
> > > out,
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "zeus32117" <zeus32117@>
> > > To: <Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, March 25, 2011 7:53 PM
> > > Subject: [Politics_CurrentEvents_Group] Re: : Correcting Fantasies
> > > About
> > > Social Security
> > >
> > >
> > > I save as much money as I can save. I am not counting on ever
> > > receiving
> > > anything from the government.
> > >
> > > --- In Politics_CurrentEvents_Group@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Majors
> > > <majors.bruce@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > *Quote of the Day: * ". . . entitlement to Social Security benefits
> > > > is
> > > > not
> > > > a
> > > > contractual right" -- The U.S. Supreme Court, ruling in Flemming v.
> > > > Nestor
> > > > (1960).
> > > >
> > > > The feedback we received about our Social Security campaign makes it
> > > > obvious
> > > > that many people have been seriously misled by political saviors.
> > > > What
> > > > follows is for those who prefer fact to fantasy . . .
> > > >
> > > > The story of one person can tell the whole story of Social Security.
> > > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States)#Implementation>
> > > >
> > > > Ida Fuller, a law secretary from Vermont, was the first person to
> > > > receive
> > > > monthly Social Security checks.
> > > >
> > > > * Her first check came on February 1, 1940.
> > > > * By the time she received this check she had paid a total of $24.75
> > > > into
> > > > the Social Security System.
> > > > * Her first check was for $22.54.
> > > > * By the time Fuller received her second check she had already
> > > > received
> > > > more
> > > > than she had contributed to Social Security.
> > > > * She lived to be 100 and collected a total of $22,888.92.
> > > >
> > > > It should be perfectly clear to anyone who can handle basic math,
> > > > that
> > > > Ms.
> > > > Fuller's benefits did NOT come from amounts she had contributed into
> > > > a
> > > > trust
> > > > fund. Instead . . .
> > > >
> > > > Ms. Fuller's benefits came from the Social Security taxes paid by
> > > > her
> > > > children and grand-children over the remaining 35 years of her life.
> > > > In
> > > > other words, the taxes WE pay go to fund the benefits of previous
> > > > generations, NOT our own benefits.
> > > >
> > > > *The way Social Security functioned for Ida Fuller is how it still
> > > > operates
> > > > today. *
> > > >
> > > > * Social Security benefits do NOT come out of a trust fund
> > > > * They do NOT come from payments beneficiaries have made to the
> > > > system
> > > > * There was NEVER any trust fund
> > > > * Payments into the system have always been LESS than the size of
> > > > future
> > > > obligations
> > > > * Current taxpayers have always paid for the benefits of previous
> > > > generations, NOT their own benefits
> > > >
> > > > *So why do politicians talk about a trust fund? There are two
> > > > reasons
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > > *
> > > >
> > > > First, politicians are con artists. They lie. Just because they use
> > > > the
> > > > words "trust fund," and even include those words in legislation,
> > > > does
> > > > NOT
> > > > mean that such a fund actually exists. The Social Security Trust
> > > > Fund
> > > > is
> > > > a
> > > > legal fiction. There are NO actual funds being held in trust.
> > > > Instead
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > *All Social Security taxes are spent as soon as they're received.*
> > > >
> > > > Second, in 1983 the Social Security tax was raised a little higher
> > > > than
> > > > was
> > > > needed to keep paying current benefits. This surplus was then spent
> > > > by
> > > > the
> > > > politicians on other things. Treasury Bonds equal to the surplus
> > > > income
> > > > from
> > > > Social Security taxes were then credited to the so-called Social
> > > > Security
> > > > Trust Fund, but . . .
> > > >
> > > > *These bonds are essentially worthless, because . . . *
> > > >
> > > > The real source of the money to pay future benefits will be future
> > > > taxes,
> > > > NOT bond redemptions.
> > > >
> > > > * Money to pay off these bonds will come from taxes that will then
> > > > be
> > > > paid
> > > > to Social Security recipients, so . . .
> > > > * If you ignored the bonds entirely and just took the taxes and gave
> > > > them
> > > > directly to Social Security recipients, you could bypass the
> > > > ceremonial,
> > > > bond-redemption process
> > > >
> > > > Let's bring the Trust Fund lie down to a very personal level . . .
> > > >
> > > > You can't create an asset by writing yourself an IOU. If you take
> > > > $10
> > > > out
> > > > of
> > > > your right pocket, spend the $10, and then write yourself an IOU for
> > > > $10,
> > > > the IOU is worthless, EVEN if you place it in your Left-pocket Trust
> > > > Fund.
> > > >
> > > > The Social Security Trust Fund is really the Left-pocket Trust Fund.
> > > >
> > > > And these so-called bonds are just another political con-job
> > > > designed
> > > > to
> > > > dupe the American people.
> > > >
> > > > But what if you took these bonds seriously?
> > > >
> > > > Well, they still wouldn't amount to much. As Robert Samuelson of the
> > > > Washington Post has observed: "The trust fund's $2.6 trillion would
> > > > provide
> > > > only 3.5 years of benefits."
> > > > <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/06/AR2011030602926.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions>
> > > >
> > > > Meanwhile, the unfunded future liabilities for Social Security
> > > > amount
> > > > to
> > > > many tens of trillions of dollars. This huge burden will crush the
> > > > life
> > > > out
> > > > of future taxpayers, or result in huge benefit cuts, unless action
> > > > is
> > > > taken
> > > > soon to lower costs in ways that won't hurt those who are dependent
> > > > on
> > > > Social Security.
> > > >
> > > > It is to achieve these goals that we have made our proposals about
> > > > Social
> > > > Security. We hope you will be moved to support our effort. You can
> > > > send
> > > > a
> > > > letter to Congress using DownsizeDC.org's Educate the Powerful
> > > > System.<https://secure.downsizedc.org/etp/campaigns/142>
> > > >
> > > > Here's what I wrote in my personal comments, which you can borrow
> > > > from
> > > > or
> > > > copy . . .
> > > >
> > > > The old and the young must protect each other. Otherwise, America
> > > > will
> > > > go
> > > > bankrupt, like Greece. And when that happens real, deep, painful
> > > > cuts
> > > > will
> > > > be FORCED on America's seniors in the most inconvenient way at the
> > > > most
> > > > inconvenient time. Therefore . . .
> > > >
> > > > * Slowly raise the retirement age. I'm asking you to do this even
> > > > though
> > > > it
> > > > will impact me, directly. I'll pay this price.
> > > >
> > > > * Means-test benefits so that we don't cripple young people for the
> > > > benefit
> > > > of those who have independent means of support.
> > > >
> > > > * Reduce Social Security's future unfunded liabilities by allowing
> > > > young
> > > > people to forgo future benefits for the sake of lower taxes now.
> > > >
> > > > * Cut other spending so as to enhance the Social Security opt-out
> > > > for
> > > > young
> > > > people. Make real cuts, not the puny cuts Congress has debated so
> > > > far.
> > > > Include sacred cows, like so-called national defense and the
> > > > Department
> > > > of
> > > > Education.
> > > >
> > > > END LETTER
> > > >
> > > > Please educate and recruit people to help by sharing this Dispatch
> > > > with
> > > > others.
> > > >
> > > > Jim Babka
> > > > President
> > > > DownsizeDC.org, Inc.
> > > >
> > > > *D o w n s i z e r - D i s p a t c h*
> > > >
> > > > Official email newsletter of DownsizeDC.org,
> > > > Inc.<http://www.downsizedc.org/>& Downsize
> > > > DC Foundation <http://www.downsizedcfoundation.org/>.
> > > >
> > > > SUPPORT <http://www.downsizedc.org/contribute/> the "Educate the
> > > > Powerful
> > > > System".
> > > >
> > > > Feel Free to Forward or Reprint, as long as attribution and action
> > > > links
> > > > are
> > > > retained/included. But we recommend you delete everything in this
> > > > footer,
> > > > i.e., below the words "Downsizer-Dispatch".
> > > >
> > > > Your subscription comes to this email address: majors.bruce@
> > > >
> > > > If you have difficulties or inquiries, simply hit reply to this
> > > > message.
> > > > We're eager to help, including with requests to unsubscribe.
> > > >
> > > > If you do not want to receive any more newsletters (to unsubscribe),
> > > > click
> > > > here<http://www.downsizedc.org/newsletter/unsubscribe?lk=ea35cef1a783c813d2da4a2ec48ed25a>
> > > > .
> > > >
> > > > Sponsored by DownsizeDC.org, Inc. -- a non-profit educational
> > > > organization
> > > > promoting the ideas of individual liberty, personal responsibility,
> > > > free
> > > > markets, and small government. Operations office: 1931 15th St.
> > > > Cuyahoga
> > > > Falls, OH 44223, 202.521.1200. Normally published 3-6 times per
> > > > week.
> > > > The
> > > > Downsize DC Team would like to thank you for subscribing to the
> > > > Downsizer-Dispatch, which you did by going to
> > > > http://www.downsizedc.org/newsletter or by using our "Educate the
> > > > Powerful
> > > > System" to send a message.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -
> > > >
> > > > powered by phplist <http://www.phplist.com> v 2.10.5, © tincan
> > > > ltd<http://tincan.co.uk/powered>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Please Note: If you hit "*REPLY*", your message will be sent to
> > > > *everyone*on this mailing list (
> > > > ronpaul-214@)
> > > > This message was sent by bruce (majors.bruce@) from Anne Arundel
> > > > Ron Paul 2008 Meetup Group <http://www.meetup.com/ronpaul-214/>.
> > > > To learn more about bruce, visit his/her member
> > > > profile<http://www.meetup.com/ronpaul-214/members/10075860/>
> > > > To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click
> > > > here<http://www.meetup.com/ronpaul-214/settings/>
> > > >
> > > > Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 |
> > > > support@
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>

------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links