did know our social security system is the biggest Ponzi scheme ever..

[miraclesrule]

All I know it that I became disabled today, I would get to collect a lot more than if I retired. No wonder so many people take that route. It''s reprehensible.

 

[miraclesrule]

I remember that SDL, when I worked for the City of SD, we didn''t pay into Social Security or State Disability. It was great for the extra money on your paycheck, but it you left the City and then found yourself in an auto accident and unable to work, you couldn''t collect State Disability benefits. A lot of people found that out the hard way. I think they have an option ability now.

One thing about SD city employees, they were benefit rich.

 

[diamondfan]

Date: 5/22/2008 7:40:28 PM
Author: brazen_irish_hussy

Date: 5/22/2008 3:06:11 PM

Author: diamondfan

To me, if you pay in all your working years you should be able to count on it.


I am not for big gov't in most things, but think at the end of the day, there will be people who have not planned well and need help. As people are living longer and healthier lives it is a reality we have to face. As unpleasant as it may be. I would hate to pay to support someone who was totally frivolous and lived beyond their means and now has nothing put away, but what are we supposed to do as a nation?

Not everyone has a save for a rainy day mentality unfortunately, and that leaves us in a lurch!

Not everyone who needs social security is a deadbeat or hopeless with money.

Do you realize that to maintain the standard of living you had while working takes roughly 70% of that income each year assuming there are no health problems, which is unlikely in old age.


With that in mind, take the case of my uncle. He is 62 and will be retiring at 65. He has worked helping people deal with alcohol addictions for a non-profit since he was in his 20s. His parents both lived into their late 90s so it is very possible he will be retired for 30 years. How is he supposed to support himself for that long? Is he irresponsable for not saving at least 70% of his annual income for more than half his working life so he doesn't need SS?


I deal with scummy financial planners everyday who won't need SS because they make questionable transactions for their clients to pad their commisions, should my uncle have been one of them rather than helping people so he wouldn't need help in old age from the same people he devoted his life to?


He has no children and while my dad has always helped him out, there really isn't anyone but the government to support him once he runs through his savings. Do those of you who don't like SS give money to help people like my uncle? I suspect not. If you were in his position what would you do? It sounds great on paper, but real, good people get hurt when you take away social programs. I will probably never need SS, but I am glad to pay it out of my hard earned paychecks if it helps even a few good people who need it.

Brazen, did I say ANYWHERE in my post that everyone who gets S.S. is a deadbeat or helpless with money? I do not see that in what I wrote so please do not write as though I did. I said SOME people, which in the entire US, I feel is a fair observation. For various reasons, there will be people in this country who will have problems if, among other variables, they cannot rely on their social security.

PS, to me, S.S. is NOT a handout. I would not classify it as a social program like welfare. It is money I would have paid out of MY paycheck, a sort of enforced savings plan so when you retire you have it. Now, my point was, if we CAN'T count on S.S. for whatever reason, those who DO find themselves in trouble for whatever reason (and YES, some might be bad savers), we have a problem. Cost of living is high, inflation is high, but cost of living raises aren't covering the gap. Catastrophic health issues, even when one HAS insurance (god forbid you don't or your coverage is poor) can wipe someone out unexpectedly. The whole point of S.S. was to be money one could count on in later life. Now, people are living longer and for the most part healthier. Retirement at 65 is not really always working, as people live longer and have the energy and desire to work more. They need more money if they are going to be alive longer, simple math supports that. Even the government knew this, and has at times explored options to make the money paid in accessible to those who paid in all those years...since, if you pay into it, you should be able to get it when you need it. Privatizing comes up from time to time but is not without its issues as well. I clearly stated that as a nation, we have certain responsibilities towards our citizens, if they find themselves in dire straights we need to step in, but I am entitled to feel less charitable to someone who planned poorly and was a spendthrift and then expects government assistance, versus someone who fell on hard times and had something unforeseen happen to them.

 

[strmrdr]

Date: 5/23/2008 1:10:55 AM
Author: miraclesrule
All I know it that I became disabled today, I would get to collect a lot more than if I retired. No wonder so many people take that route. It's reprehensible.

it is very hard to get on ssi disability.
It often takes a lawyer and 3-4 doctors one on a list approved by ssi to get it.
If someone is collecting ssi these days I can say they are really disabled.
Where you see the fraud is in disability pensions which is totally different.
You can get one and not qualify for ssi.
They often hire private investigators to track down fraud in disability pensions because of all the fraud going on.