Turn back the clock to what Social Security was intended. Use the surplus funds to draw interest rather than letting the Government grab it for General Purposes.
2007-01-25 08:23:46 · 9 answers · asked by Imnoke 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
They seem to think it's their money.
The problem is, once they got away with it the first time, they set a precedent. Now the public has become accustomed to that practice. Shame on us!
I would like to see a Libertarian get elected this time just to clean up some of the shenanigans like the one you describe.
2007-01-25 08:31:29 · answer #1 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How many must this be said for people to "get it?"
THERE IS NO SOCIAL SECURITY FUND!!!! There are no "surplus" funds. There is no separate accounting of the money collected for social security...it ALL goes into the general fund.
But, yeah, the whole thing is a scam. If any private citizen or company tried to set up a fund the same way social security is run...they would be arrested immediately. The funding and payout method is called a ponzi scheme, and they are illegal for everyone except the government.
2007-01-25 08:34:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
certain they ought to proceed to fund it. This become in essence a social contract between the Gov't and the human beings. we were paying into this gadget for years. In my case on the grounds that 1966. this isn't an entitlement. that is an coverage software at its coronary heart. I actually have paid into this technique and could get what i become promised.That being stated, there are issues. Congress has to end spending this money as area of the final funds. in addition they want to enact some adjustments to this technique. they want to get rid of the cap on deductions. It presently stands at +- 107K consistent with 3 hundred and sixty 5 days. if you end up making more advantageous than that you pay no longer some more thing advantageous. All income (no count number the source) ought to count number. This contains capital effective residences deferred funds, inventory recommendations taken in lieu of charge. It you'll search out it and spend it, that is income. bill Gates will pay an same quantity into SS as I do. It also ought to no longer be a capture-serious about funds for incapacity and the different component Congress comes to a call to placed less than its umbrella.
2016-12-03 01:17:53 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The government, and honestly all governments, are continually dealing with the issue that citizens want the government to do everything, but they don't want it interfering with their daily lives. Unfortunately, programs are expensive, so the government needs more and more resources to enact such programs. However, people do not want to pay more in taxes for said programs. As a country, our lifestyles are accelerating faster than our economy. Social security is a large pool of money basically sitting in a government account. Thus, it siphons off money for other projects. Locking down SS may slow down the rate of its depletion, but it won't fix the funding problem, which is the root of the issue.
2007-01-25 08:36:03 · answer #4 · answered by Eudaimon 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They think they have to dip into the SS fund because that is the only way they can afford to pay for all of their pet projects.
Politicians love spending money. They love to bring federal money to their district. Whether it is to build a bridge to nowhere (like in Alaska), money for a Peanut Fesitval (like in Alabama), or for a people mover in Downtown Denver, people in a district sometimes like it (afterall, that politician is making things happen), or the construction company that gets the contract to build it like it. Regardless of who it helps, the politician make friends. To fund all of this, it is not popular to raise taxes, so they dip into the SS fund.
Fortunatly, people seem to be a lot more aware of this than 10 years ago. Now that people see that SS is running out of money, and will devastate the economy when the baby boomers begin to retire, it is an act that, hopefully, will begin to come to an end.
2007-01-25 08:51:02 · answer #5 · answered by j-man 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Politicians try to get their hands on as much money as possible. Social Security is mone just sitting around so they figure is there is no money in the budget for my programs, let me take some of this money. You dont start collecting social security until you are like 65 anyway so they figure you wont miss it.
2007-01-25 08:33:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm with you. No administration, even though they talked about it, created a "Lock Box" which meant that no money could be used for other purposes.
The Bush Administration is trying to take us back 75 years when there was no welfare or entitlements for the public. The middle class pays taxes for these entitlements. The only weapon we have is the "Vote".
2007-01-25 08:35:13 · answer #7 · answered by madisonian51 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Keep voting big government. That is the reason I say privatise everything. This is the ONLY way to ensure these things becoming less corrupt. Gov't takes your money, or you go to jail. Gov't spends it however the hell they like and we vote for them anyway.
2007-01-25 08:32:30 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's another case of over spending. One of the few issues I agree with the current democratic party on. don't spend it if you don't have it.
2007-01-25 08:32:53 · answer #9 · answered by joevette 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋