The Homer Simpson approach. As Paul notes, the program is both fiscally and morally bankrupt.
22 thoughts on “Social Insecurity”
Comments are closed.
The Homer Simpson approach. As Paul notes, the program is both fiscally and morally bankrupt.
Comments are closed.
Cowabunga dude!
I remember that episode. All we have to do, is recreate Homer’s the toaster trick Treehouse of Horror V and create a way to travel through time and space. Then we just need to find the Universe where it rains GOLD, instead of DONUTS. Then drag the gold back here to Ft Knox, then go BACK to the ‘Gold Standard’ at today’s price.
Problem solved.
Solved hell, we’d be THE big dog on the block again. And anyone who doesn’t believe it can be done, can eat my shorts.
How about using Prof Farnsworth’s Forward time machine to send old people into the future where they can be someone else’s problem?
While it is true that I don’t have the moral right to tax the next generation to fund my Social Security, SOMEBODY owes me for all the money the government took. It’s one thing to get fleeced by Bernie Madoff, those people chose to give up their money, but the government put a gun to my head and took my money by force.
If they want to eliminate COLAs or extend the retirement age, OK. If they want to exempt boomers from federal income tax in lieu of SS payments, OK. But they owes us boomers SOMETHING. I will not give it all up without a fight.
That’s the thing — everyone is ready to condemn those of us who just want our money back. I don’t want to “steal from future generations” — I want what was stolen from me! When I say that, I get lectured. At least be honest — say “all that money we took from you we spent on other shit. You can’t have it back because it’s gone.” Don’t try to turn it around and make me the bad guy for daring to complain about it.
Jim – give up what exactly?
The SS fund isn’t going to become insolvent because its cash was invested in assets. It is insolvent because it doesn’t have enough assets to cover its liabilities.
You certainly can’t legitimately claim ownership of the productivity of other people, which is what SS currently is a lien on.
I think the only legitimate claim you have is for reparations from those who defrauded/stole from you. That would be the estates of all the congresspersons and presidents that have served since SS became law. Of course if you ever voted for a winning candidate that supported SS, you’ll probably have a hard time convincing a jury you weren’t an accomplice to your own victimhood.
I can pity a person who has made bad life choices that return to haunt them… just up until the point they demand I pay for their self-inflicted consequences.
So own SS, try to destroy it, and don’t try to saddle anyone else with the losses. Future generations have no obligation to wear the shackles their ancestors fashioned for them.
Ryan
That’s the point. I didn’t have a choice to get into SS. And I do have a moral claim on the US government, as do all the boomers, regardless of what the you OR the courts say. They OWE us and they will be made to pay one way or another. Sell off government land, whatever.
I will accept some cutbacks in SS, that’s inevitable, but I won’t accept NOTHING. I do own SS, I do not own the losses. The US government does. And I will get some of it back…and I am not too concerned about doing it legally if they choose to stiff my generation. Their corruption engendered some contempt for the law in me a long time ago and it’s only getting worse.
Titus,
please define ‘old’.
.
.
.
.
Jim B,
the SS COULD be paid, IMHO anyway.
But NOT at the current rates. Which sucks, given that I’m already drawing SSD. BUT I understand that I’ll be better off at 3/4 or 2/3 of my current payment amount, rather than nothing.
The ‘entitlements’ programs have got to be cut back. Healthy, able bodied adults should WORK or STARVE!! Anyone caught cheating the ‘entitlements’ system should be locked up for YEARS!!!
AND we’ve GOT to stop spending money for stuff like research on cow farts or why sunlight causes the pecker on the Purple Peckered Mud Newt, to turn bright yellow!
We’ve got to quit giving subsidies to Bruce Springsteen and John Bon Jovi because he grows organic tomatoes. And all such crap ola.
But what we REALLY need is a new tax plan that taxes EVERYONE, including those companies, as that have free speech rights during electioneering.
If we collected all the money out there that should be taxed, (like appropriate taxes on GE’s $14 B) then we quit spending money on crap like cow farts and newt peckers, AND (unfortunately for all us boomers) we cut down the payments to those due some type funds. we could make the system work.
.
.
.
Providing, of course, Titus doesn’t jack up the age when we can receive our SS checks!
(wink, wink)
“I do own SS, I do not own the losses. The US government does. “
I wish my stocks worked like that: “I’ll keep the gains thanks, you can absorb the losses.” I guess that statement makes it obvious you don’t consider SS to be anything like an investment. Just an inexplicably immortal store of value? What a neat trick that would be.
Like Paul mentioned, what you own is an empty donut box.
That you (by your elected representatives) put an IOU to yourself in it doesn’t give you a right to steal from others.
And if you actually considered all your SS witholds theft (“I didn’t have a choice…”) as you claim, you wouldn’t be arguing for more theft to pay back what was stolen from you. That some jerk in D.C. steals from you doesn’t give you any legitimate claim to the property and production of your neighbors.
No, if you actually considered it theft, you would demand its immediate destruction, so that it could no longer eat yours or anyone else’s sustenance again. You would also accept that because all that’s left is the empty donut box and the perpetrators are effectively vaporous, there is no restitution to be had.
And while I don’t agree with the the government holding any property in public trust, that you and your government stiffed yourself still does not give you any more claim to those properties (or the proceeds that could be gathered by auctioning them) than any other American.
That said, if doing so would kill SS and privatize all those properties, I could live with that. I think you’d probably have to be willing to accept 1/10ths of pennies on the dollar though, I doubt the entirety of those federal lands would sell for much more than an inconsequential sum when compared to the SS burden.
It turns out the government does own a lot of real estate. Turn every ten years of FICA payments into an annuity and we could eliminate 99% of all govt. social programs. No more 99 weeks of U.I. Once you’ve worked your first ten years you have a small monthly income that belongs to you and can’t be taken from you. Work ten more years and you have another. Work from 20 to 60 and you have four monthly checks.
So start selling real estate and give us back what they stole.
It can be phased in. We get the first 10 yrs. now, with political pressure for the subsequent decades of liability to follow. Somewhere around 20% of land is owned by the govt. Getting that into productive private hands would be another jump start to the overall economy.
Start by selling off some of the 80% of AK so they don’t need permits to drill for oil.
It’s more like 12% govt. owned. The point is an annuity could start before age 30. You wouldn’t have to wait until 67. You would be able to see and plan for your old age in steps while your still young enough to do something about it.
old = age.der.schtumpy – 1;
Ryan,
While I understand your argument, and don’t completely disagree (I like this part: if you actually considered it theft, you would demand its immediate destruction, so that it could no longer eat yours or anyone else’s sustenance again.); I’d like to point out this counterpoint. You are not exactly entitled to the current infrastructure put in place by those before you. That is, you are utilizing things that were provided for you by those you claim don’t deserve any recompensation on your part.
I make this point because I too am paying a good deal of FICA tax. I don’t plan to get any of it back and have advised every family member to do the same. I elected a representative that feels the same way, but my Senate representation can be taken out with the other politicians to be tar and feathered. I may not have a moral claim to burden my children or other generations, but I have done everything short of violent coup-d’etat to convince someone to fix this, while also paying a great deal of money I never expect to see again.
So I just looked at some numbers. My wife and I aren’t paying enough FICA taxes to cover the payments that just one of her grandparents are receiving. Not one set of grandparents… one grandparent. Considering her father already qualifies for SS, and so those my mother; then obviously we aren’t making the difference to cover for our family members.
Now, all our family members paid into SS over their lifetime, so if it were truly an investment and not a ponzi scheme, they’d have something. But as a ponzi scheme; it’s easy for me to identify how it is broke.
To make the math even worse, those prior generations paid far less into SS than current taxpayers. I’ve read that in 1970, SS taxes were on the order of 10% combined and the maximum taxable income was quite low compared to today’s limits. As a result, they paid in far less (even when adjusted to inflation).
My mother turns 83 next month. She retired 21 years ago. Since my father died young and had higher earnings, she retired on his benefits. She gets far more out of SS then she and my father paid in combined, even if you factored in a good ROI.
I turn 54 this weekend. For my wife and I, we’re not counting on getting a cent from SS in retirement. If we get something, it’ll be gravy but we’re expecting the worst and preparing accordingly. In all likelihood, they won’t actually end SS because of the political uproar. My guess is they’ll employ a combination of increased retirement ages, means testing (“What, you actually saved for your retirement? You obviously don’t need SS!”), and higher taxes to give someone an SS check with one hand and tax it away with the other.
We need to do something. Between the SS Ponzi Scheme, Medicare, Medicaid, and the soaring debt levels, our children and grandchildren are going to be royally screwed unless we make some hard choices including grabbing the “third rail” programs with both hands. Anything less and future generation will curse all our names for destroying their country and futures.
Well, since we’re piling it on, let’s consider that SS retirement age is about the average lifespan of a black man. He pays into the system all his working life and receives nothing. Where are the usual race-hustlers on this one?
Titus – probably mooching off a SS scam.
Leland – I’m in the same boat (hell, we all are). I’d like all my disappeared SS money back as well. I do take issue with your counterpoint though 😉
That is, you are utilizing things that were provided for you by those you claim don’t deserve any recompensation on your part.
Those things were not provided *for me*, they were created for the ‘benefit’ of those that asked for them (prior to my existence and ability to condone). If I use them, directly or indirectly, forced or willfully, it is because they exist. Such infrastructure I use similarly to how I use the earth under my feet, or the air to breathe. In any case, regardless of the intent of their creators I am not obligated to compensate them for investments I have no choice about using.
For example, consider the annoying growth of “squeegee guys” in major cities of the US. Some dirty bum comes up to your car and rubs their greasy squeegee on your windshield, expecting to be paid for their unsolicited “service”. I think you’d agree you are not obligated to pay them for it.
I most certainly don’t feel entitled to anything other than my rights and the property I have created for myself. If anyone wants a value, they can trade for it or create it.
If it isn’t a consensual honest trade, one isn’t obligated to pay. Anything else is fraud, theft, or sacrifice.
And trust me, if I could opt out of paying for the DOE, TSA, FDA, EPA, ATF… etc, I would be perfectly happy to not use their ‘services’ 😉 (actually, I’ll give good money to any decent statesman that will make them disappear).
Thomas Jefferson screwed us from the very beginning when he replaced our right to property with the pursuit of happiness. Pursuit of happiness is not only just flowery language it’s included in liberty, but then life is included in property. So for the sake of a good line we lose our inalienable rights.
We should pay for services. Freeloading should be discouraged. The problem is it’s hard to provide services for some and not for others. Remember the guy whose house burned down because he hadn’t paid the insurance to the fire department. The fire department did the right thing. It was unwise for the homeowner not to pay the insurance. But people get angry at such ‘injustice’ and when enough of them demand freeloading rights you get Obama justice and it’s ilk.
This is another argument for smaller government. It forces fewer people to pay for what they are forced by government to pay for even if they don’t want it.
What should happen to people that are unable to provide for their own retirement? Society becomes obligated because otherwise you have a dangerous situation. Responsibility must be taken up by those capable of it. Which is to say, a system that puts the burden on the individual to provide for themselves and take care of the extremely small percentage that can’t as well.
It makes me wonder if parents shouldn’t provide a bond for every child they produce for a minimum safety net.
Life is an individual responsibility but taking away property obligates those doing the taking.
Ken, the real problem is that even Madison-flava’d collective government produces a slope which is not merely slippery, it is an equilateral triangle made of lard.
Ryan,
I think your rebuttal is appropriate, and that you got the jist of my comment. My point was that Jim did have some argument for retribution on the basis of their exists some value in the infrastructure, and I think he is right to fight for it. Blaming him rather then supporting him potentially adds to the number of people that continue to support SS rather than move on to something realistic for the future.
Finally, I realized a major flaw in my argument in using infrastructure. I won’t point out that flaw and leave it to others to see what it is. However, Ryan, I think you know and glad you didn’t pull at that string too hard…
an equilateral triangle made of lard
Great imagery. That’s the problem with all algorithmic solutions. That’s why the foundation has to be on principles and more and more I see property to be the number one issue… more than life or liberty even.
The main problem with government is it’s meddlesome. If property rights were stronger, government would be weaker in our lives.