you call this soc security, old people eating dog food.
2007-03-26 10:44:58
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Social Security saved me when I needed it. I paid into the system for many years & never dreamed that I would end up physically disabled & unable to work. The biggest problem is that so many people choose to work for cash & do not pay into this system, yet they gladly cash their monthly check when the government sends it to them! Employers are also a big part of the problem, because many of them take these deductions out of their employees wages & NEVER pay them into the system! Social Security is a good idea that has been exploited by dishonest people who are just plain UNAMERICAN! The U.S. Government needs to start cracking down on fraud & criminal activity. They need to start seizing property, selling it, & putting the funds back into the system, & jailing the people who work against our American System. Unless you have a new system that can take it's place & provide similar services, then I don't think you should be complaining about the many lives that it has helped & will continue to help in the coming years. Social Security isn't going away. Don't believe all of these scare tactics.
2007-03-26 18:31:17
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am against it in its present form, or the way the government is stealing from it to pay for other programs.
I actually am grateful to Social Security, because when I was suffering from an illness and could not get welfare or any other help, I was able to get SSI and later SSD. This helped me with money and necessary funds, to help pay rent and live until I was able to go back to work. I was temporarily disabled for a while. I am still permanently, partially disabled, but now I am able to work. If it were not for the help of SSA I would have had to move in with family, or been sent to some sort of shelter program. I am sorry that you do not like it, but it is helping some get on their feet, and others stay off the streets.
Find the humanitarian bone in your body and be grateful. I am now working and paying fully into the system, I am just like you. But know if you ever need SSI or SSD, it is there for you, if you ever become disabled.
2007-03-26 17:49:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by Cat 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yep, basically, in the present form. When an employer takes the money from you, they pass it off to the government who redistributes to the retired and disabled. Sounds good, but doesn't work too well for the worker. How about this. You can opt out of social security, take the 7.65% of your income that goes to medicare and social security, get your own mutual fund and disability insurance. I as an employer have to match that money, which I do already, for a safety net for people who chose to stay end and fund people that didn't have the choice, because they are nearing retirement, retired or disabled. But I, being self employed, get to choose to save the full 15.3%, being self employed the amount I pay into social security and medicare, of my income to invest as I please. Over time more people would opt out if the savings are mandatory, and employers can reduce their match.
Edit: To honest, I don't the logistics. Above was a suggestion, but I think something along those lines would work. Perhaps, I, as an employer can opt out of 7.65% or even pay more, so other people can opt out. Or as the funds reach break even the amount employer’s pay in can be reduced. So for ten years, I pay in 7.65% of my income, save 7.65%, after twenty years, I pay in 5% and save 10.3%, etc. But this shouldn't be a partisan issue. And the government should encourage private investment to wean us off social security. It would also encourage entrepreneurship.
2007-03-26 17:57:35
·
answer #4
·
answered by robling_dwrdesign 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Social Security should be voluntary.
Consequently it would be a private institution.
The economic woes are going to spill over. We need someone who understands the issues at hand.
Vote Ron Paul!
Advocate of sound money!
The avg american savings have dropped from 5-8% to negative 2%.
The country has so much debt!
If you earned it, it yours!
2007-03-26 17:44:30
·
answer #5
·
answered by JL 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I really loved Bush's idea of personal account in social security so i am not completely against it
2007-03-26 17:35:26
·
answer #6
·
answered by Jahpson 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
COMPLETELY opposed to SocSec,.
It is an ill-conceived retirement plan, that was obsolete DECADES ago, but is being kept alive for political purposes.
Let Americans KEEP the SocSec taxes currently stolen from their paychecks, and you would see investment and growth like never before.
AND, the govt would get MORE in tax revenue, and could actually FUND a program to protect seniors who retire with insufficient resources.
2007-03-26 17:36:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
No. Things before social security were a disater. The elderly often lived in extreme poverty.
I am also against george bush's plan (dead plan) . It makes no sense that ceo's would get a cut from the money we invested in the markets.
2007-03-26 17:38:20
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Social Security is fine, but the Dems stealing from the fund isn't. Put the money in a lock box and use it for NOTHING but what it was intended for. It's OUR money, NOT theirs.
-
2007-03-26 17:36:28
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
Yes I am somebody who is against socialist security.
2007-03-26 17:34:40
·
answer #10
·
answered by Jace 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
I am paying social security even though it will be gone.
It isn't fair that someone from 1943 get's it, but I am not gonna get it, but I am paying for it.
2007-03-26 17:34:34
·
answer #11
·
answered by infobrokernate 6
·
1⤊
1⤋