SOCIAL SECURITY

[Iceman]

> Subject: FW: SOCIAL SECURITY
>
>
> Interesting!
>
> Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a
> Social Security check every month --and then finding that we are getting
> taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the federal government to "put
> away," you may be interested in the following:
> Q: Which party took Social
> Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that
> Congress could spend it?
> A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic-controlled House and Senate.
> Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
> A: The Democratic party.
> Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
> A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.
> Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?
> A: That''s right, immigrants moved into this country and at 65 got SSI Social
> Security.
> The Democratic Party gave that to them although they never paid a dime into
> it.
> Then, after doing all this, the Democrats turn around and tell you the
> Republicans want to take your Social Security.
> And the worst part about it is, people believe it!

 

[derekinla]

Interesting post.... What really gets me is that

1) 30% of my income goes to Uncle Sam
2) 10% of my income goes to the State
3) I'm paying 8.25% sales tax on practically everything

Effectively, I'm being taxed close to 50%!!!!!!!!!! In spite of this.... financial advisors say that Social Security may not be there for me when I retire (I'm 2. What the hell are the politicians doing?!@#$?#$?#?

 

[winyan]

Well Ice I do have this to say about your hypothesis...

Everytime a Republican ends up in the White House, by fair means or foul, I get downsized. Every time a Democrat enters the White House I get rehired.

Personally I'd rather be able to pay taxes than not.

win

 

[Mikesgirl]

Yeah, and how about those of us who have paid into Social Security but will never receive any because we didn't work long enough, or continuously enough to qualify. G-d forbid we should raise our own children (instead of hiring day care workers, who pay taxes, so we can go to work, to pay more taxes).

 

[derekinla]

Republican or Democrat, I'm going to vote for whoever is going to relieve me of my 50% tax burden...........

 

[winyan]

Well, since I've been working more or less continuously since age 14, I've paid my share of taxes, SS and anything else anyone cares to bring up.

All I want is to retire in *peace*.

win

 

[AGBF]

----------------
On 10/3/2003 12:10:03 AM derekinla wrote:

Republican or Democrat, I'm going to vote for whoever is going to relieve me of my 50% tax burden...........----------------

Did you hear what winyan said? There are ways and ways of being "relieved" of that burden! One way is to become rich enough for Bush and his cronies to exempt you from taxes with his new tax plan. Another way is to let Bush cause you to lose your job...in which case you will be relieved of both the income tax (although not the sales tax) *AND* your income.

You asked what the politicians are doing with our money. Read the papers!

Right now our taxes are going to Iraq so that they can be paid to Halliburton to reconstruct what we just destroyed there. So they are going to Dick Cheney's (rich) friends. (You all know Halliburton didn't have to *BID* on that contract, right?)

Republican bankers (like my husband) are shocked at how things work when they become unemployed. Unemployment doesn't pay what they are used to receiving and it doesn't last forever. Particularly shocking to them is that when UI runs out one cannot just get a job for a week and then receive endless Unemployment Compensation for another x number of months! They thought the "welfare cheats" did things like that. It turns out life isn't so great for people who have to accept what the government is handing out via Unemployment Insurance.

Watch what you wish for and hang onto your job!!!

 

[Arlington]

What an odd coinidence...I got this junk mail in my mail box today:


--------------
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month --and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid
government to "put away," you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which party took Social Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Richard Nixon and the Republican-controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
A: The Republican Party

Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
A: The Republican Party with Dick Cheney casting the deciding vote.

Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?
A: That's right, immigrants moved into this country and at 65 got SSI Social Security. The Republican party gave that to them although they never paid a dime into it. Then, after doing all this, the Republicans turn around and tell you the Democrats want to take your Social Security. And the worst part about it is, people believe it!

Pass it on please!

2004 Election Issue This must be an issue in "04".

---------------

Personally, I don't recall Dick Cheney having to cast any "deciding vote" since Bush was placed in office.

The lesson here should probably be: don't rely on a chain e-mail for your public policy history education. Educate yourself.

'Nuff Said

-Arlington

 

[magna2]

Politics!!!

Arlington,

So are you saying that you agree with the content of the chain e-mail that you had posted or were you trying to bring everyone back to being clearheaded?

If the former, then you should note that your chain e-mail is totally inaccurate. No action had ever been taken on Social Security while George W. has been in office and it was LBJ that started the downward spiral with his "Great Society" BS mantra.

If the latter, I commend you. We don't need this forum to degenerate into a political forum.

 

[Arlington]

----------------
On 10/3/2003 11:23:23 AM magna2 wrote:

Politics!!!

Arlington,

So are you saying that you agree with the content of the chain e-mail that you had posted or were you trying to bring everyone back to being clearheaded?

If the former, then you should note that your chain e-mail is totally inaccurate. No action had ever been taken on Social Security while George W. has been in office and it was LBJ that started the downward spiral with his 'Great Society' BS mantra.

If the latter, I commend you. We don't need this forum to degenerate into a political forum.

----------------

The latter, actually. My intent was to point out that just because you get something in your e-mail box doesn't mean it's correct. As far as I'm concerned, both emails are way too generalized for any semi-intelligent person to consider them factual.

However, I should point out that for someone who doesn't want this forum to degenerate into a political forum, you offer some pretty strong opinions regarding LBJ, Magna!

 

[magna2]

Arlington,

Touche on your last point. Mea Culpa.

 

[Wacky]

All I know is I'm checking the box on my tax return this year that says.... Donate $20.00 to bomb some more damn terrorist supporting middle eastern counties!

Thank God we don't have a pantywaist liberal democrat in the Whitehouse.

wacky

 

[choope]

> Q: Which party took Social
> Security from an independent fund and put it in the general fund so that
> Congress could spend it?
> A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic-controlled House and Senate.

This is not true. Surpluses into the funds have been used by both parties to finance the deficit spending. There are 4 funds: (1) the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, (2) the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, (3) the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, and (4) the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund. President Clinton signed the Contract with America that helped to protect the funds. It is in Public Law 104-121.

This article should help to clear up the misconception:
From the Cato Institute www.socialsecurity.org SSP Report No. 24 p. 6

"All of those proposals reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the trust fund. Social Security payroll taxes are currently bringing in more revenue than the program pays out in benefits, a surplus that is projected to continue until approximately 2016. Thereafter, the situation will reverse, with Social Security paying out more in benefits than it brings in through taxes. The surplus is used to purchase special issue Treasury bonds. The Social Security surplus used to purchase the bonds becomes general revenue and is spent on the government’s annual general operating expenses. What remains behind in the trust fund is the bonds, plus an interest payment attributed to the bonds (also paid in bonds, rather than cash). Government bonds are, in essence, a form of IOU. They are a promise against future tax revenue. When the bonds become due, the government will have to repay them out of general revenue."

> Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
> A: The Democratic party.

Actually, it was Ronald Reagan, a Republican, who signed the legislation taxing Social Security benefits. You can read President Reagan's statement here:
www.ssa.gov/history/reaganstmts.html#1983

www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html
"The 1983 Amendments

In the early 1980s the Social Security program faced a serious short-term financing crisis. President Reagan appointed a blue-ribbon panel, known as the Greenspan Commission, to study the financing issues and make recommendations for legislative changes. The final bill, signed into law in 1983, made numerous changes in the Social Security and Medicare programs, including the taxation of Social Security benefits, the first coverage of Federal employees under Social Security and an increase in the retirement age in the next century."

> Q: Which party increased the tax on Social Security?
> A: The Democratic Party with Al Gore casting the deciding vote.

This one is true. The tax increases were part of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993, the VP did cast a vote in the Senate to break a tie. This Act was a huge bill that covered everything from agricultural commodities, licensing of radio spectrum, luxury automobile taxes, fuels, banking, medicare, etc., etc. The bill passed in the House by a vote of 218-216 and in the Senate by 51-50. This was the budget for the 1994 year.
H.R. 2264 Latest Major Action: 8/10/1993 Became Public Law No: 103-66.

> Q: Which party decided to give money to immigrants?
> A: That's right, immigrants moved into this country and at 65 got SSI Social Security.
> The Democratic Party gave that to them although they never paid a dime into it.
> Then, after doing all this, the Democrats turn around and tell you the
> Republicans want to take your Social Security.

NOT TRUE

www.ssa.gov/history/pdf/ssi.pdf
1972 Public Law 92-603, enacted October 30

"Other Eligibility Provisions Citizenship and Residence

The individual must reside within one of the 50 states or the District of Columbia and be a citizen or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence or permanently residing in the United States under color of law. Persons living outside the United States for an entire calendar month lose their eligibility for such a month."
- - - - - - - - -
The SSI (Supplemental Security Income) and the automatic annual COLA (Cost of Living Adjustments) based on the Consumer Price Index were proposed, signed, and implemented during the Nixon administration. So immigrants first received SSI under the Republican administration of President Richard M. Nixon.

It was actually Bill Clinton that signed legislation barring immigrants from receiving SSI as part of The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996. This changed the following year with the signing of the Balanced Budget Act of 1997.

www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html
"SSI

In the 1970s, SSA became responsible for a new program, Supplemental Security Income (SSI). In the original 1935 Social Security Act, programs were introduced for needy aged and blind individuals and, in 1950, needy disabled individuals were added. These three programs were known as the "adult categories" and were administered by State and local governments with partial Federal funding. Over the years, the State programs became more complex and inconsistent, with as many as 1,350 administrative agencies involved and payments varying more than 300% from State to State.

In 1969, President Nixon identified a need to reform these and related welfare programs to "bring reason, order, and purpose into a tangle of overlapping programs." In 1971, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Elliot Richardson, proposed that SSA assume responsibility for the "adult categories." In the Social Security Amendments of 1972, Congress federalized the "adult categories" by creating the SSI program and assigned responsibility for it to SSA.

SSA was chosen to administer the new program because of its reputation for successful administration of the existing social insurance programs. SSA's nationwide network of field offices and large-scale data processing and record-keeping operations also made it the logical choice to perform the major task of converting over 3 million people from State welfare programs to SSI."

 

[Blue824]

Believe me, the Republicans are not angels either.

However, on SS...I will not rely on the government to provide for me. I''ve had an IRA for a while, substantial savings, I''m 22, ahead of the game. I don''t trust either side to take care of me when I''m older, that is my responsibility and I''m gladly planning ahead for it...even though the money I contributed last year could''ve bought me an awesome vacation or a really nice pieces of jewelry, its worth the sacrifices while I''m young. If I get anything from them, cool, if not, I know I should be fine.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Date: 8/18/2005 12:07:30 AM
Author: Blue824
Believe me, the Republicans are not angels either.

However, on SS...I will not rely on the government to provide for me. I''ve had an IRA for a while, substantial savings, I''m 22, ahead of the game. I don''t trust either side to take care of me when I''m older, that is my responsibility and I''m gladly planning ahead for it...even though the money I contributed last year could''ve bought me an awesome vacation or a really nice pieces of jewelry, its worth the sacrifices while I''m young. If I get anything from them, cool, if not, I know I should be fine.

Blue
i agree,at 22,by the time you retire SS will be history" BK" or you will need to live to 100 yrs old for your first check.

 

[movie zombie]

give it a read:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20050816/bs_usatoday/millionsofamericansgetbyonsocialsecurityalone

don''t know if this forum is turning into a political discussion group or if it is merely that certain threads lend themselves to the political arena. where should the poster who started this thread have placed the original post?

peace, movie zombie

ps anyone here have a grandparent or parent that lived through the depression prior to any social security insurance being available? or anyone here have a spouse die and try to raise their children on minimum wages? just food for thought.