English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

What about giving illegals SS , after paying in only a few months , not years , as American citizens do ?

2007-01-07 03:26:54 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Immigration

OMG !! Can that be true ? If it is , America is in deep trouble . How has no one told told the American People about it . It will bring us all down .

2007-01-07 04:33:50 · update #1

OMG !! Can that be true ? If it is , America is in deep trouble . How has no one told told the American People about it . It will bring us all down .
Please go to the website that nonalcoho has , and it will open your eyes about the government has been and is doing with our money !!!!!

2007-01-07 04:46:34 · update #2

5 answers

the only way to stop this is to stop amnesty (by any name)...in 2004 bush & Fox (of mexico) made a deal that when amnesty is given (bush's words) that they will all get ss benefits.....the bill is on bush's desk waiting on amnesty tp pass - we must stop it! I just wish the national media would tell the truth about all this....but then they are big business!

2007-01-07 03:31:49 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 2

It was a bad idea in the first place. People need to be responsible for their finances and make their own investments. But if the democrats hadn't made all those changes to SS over the last few decades it might have worked.

No, I'm not a republican.

2007-01-07 11:35:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 1

Laws like the proposed agreement with Mexico are designed to protect people who work in more than one country during their working years. It could even protect you, if you were to spend some time working outside the United States. We need agreements like this with more countries. Maybe you can't imagine spending some time working in Mexico, but how about Canada? I don't know if we have a similar agreement with Canada, but we should. Suppose you were to work for 8 years in the U.S. and then move to Canada to marry a Canadian. Would it be fair to deprive you of Social Security from both countries when it came time for you to retire? -

Prior to 1983, Social Security was a "pay as you go" system where social security taxes paid by younger workers, paid for the retirement of the previous generation. But in 1983, congress recognized that the retirement of the baby boom generation would place an unfair burdon on the next (smaller) generation of younger workers unless changes were made to the system. As a result of the 1983 Social Security reforms, the retirement age was scheduled to be gradually raised to 67 to account for longer lifespans, and social security taxes on worker's wages were raised by about 1/3 to build up a real trust fund to help pay for the retirement of the baby boom generation.

When the social security reform legislation was signed into law by Presdent Regean in April of 1983, he said:

"We're entering an age when average Americans will live longer and live more productive lives. And these amendments adjust to that progress. The changes in this legislation will allow social security to age as gracefully as all of us hope to do ourselves, without becoming an overwhelming burden on generations still to come.

So, today we see an issue that once divided and frightened so many people now uniting us. Our elderly need no longer fear that the checks they depend on will be stopped or reduced. These amendments protect them. Americans of middle age need no longer worry whether their career-long investment will pay off. These amendments guarantee it. And younger people can feel confident that social security will still be around when they need it to cushion their retirement."

By one measure, the 1983 reforms have been wildly successful as the trust has built up a surplus of over 2 trillion dollars.

Early in his first term, President Reagan also promised to balance the budget by 1983. The real problem is that we have have massive budget deficits under administrations of Reagan and Bush I and II . The government has borrowed over 2 trillion dollars from the Social Security trust fund, every penny of which was paid from social security taxes on the wages of working people - and the government has no plan in place to pay it back when it is needed to fund the retirement of the Baby Boom Generation. Because the baby boom generation has not yet started to retire, this year congress will be able to suck over 150 billion dollars in new surplus being paid into the trust fund by workers. This borrowing has masked the true size of the federal budget deficit and made it easier for the government to give tax cuts to the rich. - President Bush has called the government bonds held by the social security trust fund a worthless bunch of IOUs because he wants to find a way to avoid paying them back so he can preserve his tax cuts - He wants debt relief. - It is the rest of the government that needs fixing, not social security.

Blaiming the Social Security problem on illegal aliens, is just another way to distract the public from what has really been going on.

2007-01-07 13:59:14 · answer #3 · answered by Franklin 5 · 1 0

the illegals collecting is another question but should a bank still have to pay their customers even though they were robbed. Yes!!

2007-01-07 11:31:54 · answer #4 · answered by anya_mystica 4 · 2 2

Read this and you tell me!

2007-01-07 11:29:04 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers