My brother is quadriplegic. SHould he be cut off of social security?

Question

Is he considered a 'moocher' of social programs?

Unemployment is not a social program, it is insurance paid by the employee and the employer.

Social security was never intended as a retirement program. Hence the drains on it.

Answer 1

Of course not! In fact, he probably doesn't receive enough govt. money to live a worry-free life.
(unfortunately a lot of people do whatever it takes to get a free ride & i hope the truly needy are not offended when we complain about freeloaders)

Answer 2

Well, I would hardly call your brother a moocher. My sister has Down Syndrome, she collects social security; but she also has a job and works harder than most slackers I see today.

Of course, this has nothing to do with a useless social program that should have been abolished 40 years ago. Social Security is a giant pyramid scheme that is only legal because it is run by the government.

What if I told you that I have an investment plan that required you to contribute 7% of your wages as well as forced your employer to contribute 7% of your salary to it, and this investment fund gave on average a 2% return. However, you were not allowed to collect any proceeds until after age 65, and if you die at any point, none of the contributions can be inherited by your children, would you sign up now and invest?

Well that's exactly what Social Security is! Social Security was created in the 1930s to end poverty in the elderly. It was created during the Great Depression during a time when the US economy was immature and had not grown to a level to provide better support for workers. Moreover, socialists have expanded it to pay for things it was not intended for.

The US economy as well as the country itself has changed greatly in the past 70 years, so why anyone would except a program designed during the Great Depression to solve 1930s problems to be effective in today's society is beyond me.

Answer 3

No he shouldn't be cut off. The drug addicts and drunks that draw should be.

The government has been borrowing the Social Security surplus and spending it on general government programs for several years. The net effect has been to disguise the true size of budget deficits in past years. For example, in fiscal year 1995, the government experienced a $226.4 billion deficit in its operating budget. However, since the Social Security Trust Fund had a surplus of $62.4 billion that year, the government simply borrowed the Social Security surplus and spent it as part of it general operating budget. The $62.4 billion Social Security surplus was deducted from the $226.4 billion deficit and the government reported an official deficit of only $164 billion.
In 1997, since there was a surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund of $81.4 billion, the actual $103.4 billion on-budget deficit was reduced by that amount and the government reported a total deficit of only $22.0 billion. It was in 1998 that the American people first had the wool pulled over their eyes on a grand scale. In that year, the operating budget of the federal government was still in the red with an actual deficit of $30 billion. It was the $99.2 billion surplus in the Social Security Trust Fund that enabled the government to report a budget surplus of $69.2 billion. During a year in which the United States Government spent $30 billion more than it collected in general revenue, it announced that there was a $69.2 billion overall surplus!


From that point on, the American people seemed to believe that there truly was excess money in the federal budget, and cunning politicians began building schemes to further mislead the people into believing that money was available for new programs and/or for cutting taxes. Any reader who has doubts about whether the government had a deficit or surplus in 1998 need only check out the size of the national debt in 1997 and 1998. The United States Treasury Department maintains a web site on the internet that provides public debt figures updated on a daily basis.
The total debt at the end of 1997 was $5,369.7 billion ($5.37 trillion). By the end of 1998, the debt had risen to $5,478.7 billion ($5.48 trillion). How could the national debt rise by $109 billion if the government had a $69.2 billion surplus? It couldn’t. The United States Government had to borrow $30 billion to pay the on-budget deficit. In addition, since the Social Security Surplus was all invested in United States Treasury securities as required by law, the governments debt to the Social Security fund also went up.

Answer 4

No one should ever have their Social Security benefits cut and especially a quadriplegic. The only reason their is talk about Social Security is because the lying, thieving politicians have stolen from it for years and the American people are dumb enough to allow it to continue. The American people should take an example from the tea party and refuse to pay in until the stealing stops and the stolen money put back.

Answer 5

He couldn't help himself. He hopes that this "trump card" gives him so much power that he'll win the battle here. The sad losers of this battle are the American Public. I'm sure social security checks will come out. I'm sure that there are funds to cover all that, it's the extras and other things that have to go. I'm so tired of this game they are playing.

Answer 6

No he should not be. A Moocher is one who is able to do for themselves, but refuses to do so. Your brother is a person who faces more challenges than the average man....and deserves governmental help more than most. You should think about looking into voice recognition software or other technology/service to enable him to fully express himself.....in writing, drawing, or any endeavor he so chooses. (He may be able to join this forum). That is the most devastating aspect with such injuries, and even with brain trauma...being able to articulate and express oneself and regain the productivity one lost.

Answer 7

Absolutely not. Disability is not one of the social programs despised by Conservatives.

Neither is Unemployment. And it is a social program, which are not defined by who pays.

Government agencies to "help the poor" spend the majority of the money on the bureaucracy. And not enough of the money on teaching the poor to buy into the American dream so they can become self-sufficient.

Answer 8

I've never heard of any one wanting to do away with ss for disabled or elderly. My beef is the ones who are able that I see loading their Cadillac with the food they just got with food stamps. If we could get rid of all the moochers there would be more for your brother and people like him.

Answer 9

What an excellent question! It's amazing how some conservatives rail on and on about people "mooching" off the government. And granted, there are some people who, unfortunately, take advantage of the system. However, there are also a lot of people out there who really do need the help, so what are they supposed to do? Fall by the wayside?

Answer 10

A 'moocher' is someone that can help themselves but chooses not to. Your brother doesn't have a choice.