Well below the poverty level.They paid all their lives into this fund and when they need it the goverment keeps them below poverty. How can anyone truly expect the goverment to run healthcare when they have failed so miserabily at social security?
2007-10-21 01:40:44 · 10 answers · asked by ken s 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Social security was meant as another income tax - when they passed the laws allowing it, they knew that it wouldn't cost them anything - it'd be a problem for another generation.
As for whether its enought to retire on - it shouldn't be... Nobody ever conceived of it as a full retirement, but rather as a supplement.
How the gov't would run healthcare isn't directly related to the amount people get from SS, but their beaureaucracy, red tape, and gov't horsesh!t are exactly how they'd run healthcare.
Any American can walk into a private practicing doctor's office and get seen - it stuns me how few people realize this. As for payment without insurance - they will set up a payment plan for you... If you go to the ER, they will charge you out the wazoo, because the ER is for emergencies - go to a regular doctor whether you have insurance or not... you will receive the treatment you need at a price you can work out.
2007-10-21 01:55:41 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I get $12,331.20 a year from Social Security, and am able to live on it relatively well, though very modestly. I need the money because my wife of thirty years (from whom I've been separated for five years) is a chronic alcoholic who has virtually drank away our life savings. Now she's in serious legal troubles, all alcohol-related. We're both penniless, and have little to look forward to in our golden years. I was her enabler for thirty years; I allowed it to happen.
I never thought I'd end up at age 64 in this perilous circumstance. I expected to have a comfortable 'nest egg' put aside, and never, ever intended to have to collect any Social Security.
The government's 'failure' is because of the people's demands. Everyone thinks like you do: "I paid into this fund; I deserve to get it back." I don't think so. Social Security was intended as an insurance pool to take care of those who were truly in need as they entered their golden years.
Nowadays, people with million-dollar retirement nest eggs, a home that's paid for and a vacation home in the Ozarks, two luxury cars, a comfortable pension, a sound investment portfolio, and supplemental income from rental properties or other business ventures - STILL demand to collect their Social Security! THAT'S WRONG, IMMORAL, SELFISH and should be ILLEGAL.
You "pay into" car insurance all your life and hope you never have to file a claim. You pay house insurance all your life and hope you never have to file a claim. Social Security should be the same way: you pay into it and hope that you've planned sufficiently for your retirement so that you don't have to file a claim. That would leave more money for people who really, truly need it.
Alexander Tyler once said: "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years."
Politicians are cowards, afraid of senior citizens who would rebel if Social Security was ever takne away from them. Social Security should be reserved ONLY for those who are truly in need - until these millions of wealthy people get off the public dole, this 'entitlement' is one of the most obscene government give aways.
Ironically, it's these same affluent people who are against welfare programs for the poor, and who vehemently protest whenever the government wants to help the sick, aged, underprivileged, disadvantaged, under-educated, hungry, unemployed, or homeless.
Greedy people who demand Social Security benefits when they don't need them are the cause of Social Security's woes. It would be the same with government-provided health care. Those with means would expect to get 'free' healthcare instead of paying into a pool that would be available only to those truly in need.
If my fortunes turn around, and I found myself financially independent once again, I would NOT accept a Social Security check from the government. I would gladly ask that the government use my $12,331.20 a year to help someone who genuinely needs it. -RKO- 10/21/07
2007-10-21 09:06:34 · answer #2 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Thru the years, both democrat & republican congresses have taken (stolen) money from SS fund many times. Mostly to make their budgets look better& their debt look lower. Once it was in the general fund it was never paid back. If it wasn't for their constant thievery of those funds the SS fund would be more than solvent. I would venture to say that the average SS check would be 25% higher with money still in the fund to cover many years into the future........... Keep voting these same people back into congress & they will continue to steal from you!
2007-10-21 08:56:01 · answer #3 · answered by peepers98 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
good point
Look at our VA hospitals and you will get a good idea of how a government run health care system would be ran. Not a very pretty picture is it.
Lets face facts not everyone in this country is going to make 20. to 30.00 an hour a large portion will at best make 10.00 an hour now you try and raise a family on that and put away for your retirement, it's just not going to happen.
2007-10-21 08:49:36 · answer #4 · answered by ULTRA150 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Social Security was never meant to be a person's sole support. It was meant to be a supplement. People are supposed to save for their own retirement. However, I do agree with you that the government would not be able to run healthcare efficiently.
2007-10-21 08:52:14 · answer #5 · answered by la buena bruja 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Government spends too much money on welfare and medicaid. Most people on medicaid and welfare don't have anything wrong with them. That's where all the money goes to.
2007-10-21 08:57:00 · answer #6 · answered by 144289 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
BOTH HEALTH CARE AND RETIREMENT, [[FUND ACCOUNTS]] SHOULD BE SET UP FOR ALL AMERICANS ON THE DAY THAT THEY ARE BORN AND MANAGED LIKE A 401 ACCOUNT.
2007-10-21 08:59:50 · answer #7 · answered by jerry z 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it's supposed to supplement your retirement...if that's all you're getting it's because you haven't put in very much AND if that's all your depending on in your "golden years" then you're getting what you deserve...as for govt. health care, we don't need it, we DO need the govt. to regulate the insurance companies into doing a better and more equitable job
2007-10-21 08:45:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
the sad part is if they put all that money in an IRA, they would be millionaires.
2007-10-21 08:55:37 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
OK
2007-10-21 08:47:46 · answer #10 · answered by Rana 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋