Comments on: Perry’s monstrous lies about Social Security http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/ Fri, 05 Dec 2014 11:27:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: TruThor13 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-9023 Mon, 06 Feb 2012 22:59:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-9023 SSA has too many ALJ’s & lawyers on the dole. DEBRA BICE, Chief ALJ, ODAR, needs to re-open my case & correct the Clear & Unmistakable errors. I applied in 1991. Their medical examiner determined disability, but ALJ Donald Holloway (crook) failed to follow established law & on remand, repeated the fraud. He also refused to follow the directive of US Dist Ct “Judge” Ron Longstaff (Iowa) to “remove the mechanical grid.” Instead, Holloway attempted to REINFORCE it! What a fraud. And NO oversight! Ron Longstaff flipped on his position too! Another fraud under color of law! The Dept of VA rates me as a 100% “Service-Connected” Disabled American veteran, yet they delay awarding an Earlier Effective date consistent with my service dates (1987-1989 when the DoD injected me with harmful experimental vaccines WITHOUT Disclosure & WITHOUT my Informed Consent!) Where is the Iowa Delegation ? I’ve asked Senators Grassley & Harkin for a problem resolution. I’ve asked Bruce Braley’s office too. It seems they work hard to keep disability program money in the hands of lawyers & judges who deny US disabled American veterans. Please share this. K. Tennant, Iowa

]]>
By: ARJTurgot2 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8257 Sat, 01 Oct 2011 19:46:40 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8257 Perry is a small frog who has stepped into a large pond, and he’s not adjusting very well. A couple of months back and it was Bachmann, before that it was Trump, and they’ve dwindled to irrelevance even before the counter-media attack that will come in a full campaign. In the end, those 46 million Americans living in poverty get to vote just like rich bombastic Texans, and whether SS is a ponzi scheme or not, they will vote to continue it. 2010 was a reaction against the arrogance and obvious incompetence of the Dems on the health care bill, it was not an endorsement of the Tea Party. The electorate looks roughly like 30-30-30 Dem-Indie-Rep. The Tea’ers are a minority of a minority. Perry winning them is a step towards losing in 2012.

]]>
By: GSH10 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8115 Thu, 22 Sep 2011 01:15:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8115 Thanks CarlOmunificent

American’s citizens traded their freedom and abdicated their rights for empty promises of robbing the rich to give to the poor. This has been a bipartisan effort disguised behind a well played good-cop-bad-cop performance.

Act II is the scary part.

]]>
By: zotdoc http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8103 Wed, 21 Sep 2011 13:50:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8103 Ask any old person about his social security benefits. They will all tell you that when they were working, the benefits they would receive from SS sounded pretty good, but in retirement, the fixed income they recieve buys far less than when they were working. The government has tripled the money supply over the past few years, meaning this will be true for all of those working now. In 1969, a year at Tulane Universioty was 1640.00. If you were making $800.00/mo on SS you could help your grandkids. Now the same university is $40,000.00 and all other expenses have more or less kept pace. So if your SS benefits are $3000.00/mo now you will not be able to do much for your grandkids. SS is a government run PONZI scheme in every sense of the definition, except it isn’t illegal since it is government sponsored.
The benefits have deteriorated due to govt policies and there is no money there, just a bunch of IOU’s. Soon it will be means tested, meaning all the money people paid into it will just be another wealth transfer to the entitled “poor”.

]]>
By: Carly_EngAmer http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8097 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 15:31:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8097 Whether or not Social Security is a “Ponzi scheme” doesn’t change the fact that the program is projected to go bankrupt in 2037. The the way in which the program functions now is simply unsustainable. Currently Social Security and Medicare use 8.5% of nonentitlement revenuees (federal revenues dedicated to all other programs besides the two). By 2020, the deficits will grow to almost 25%. This means that within 9 years, in order to pay projected benefits to retirees and the disabled, the federal government will have to stop doing about one out of every five things it does today (http://eng.am/poetWU).

All of the following solutions will substantially eliminate these problems: Reducing benefit payments by 5% AND increase the retirement age to 70 over time; increasing both the employee and employer contribution immediately by 1.1% for income up to $106,800 (its current limit); reducing benefit payments by 5% AND increase both the employee and employer contribution immediately by 0.05% each year for the next 20 years for income up to $106,800 (its current limit); removing the $106,800 limit and count all income towards the SS tax; decreasing the cost of living adjustment by 1% per year AND raise the retirement age to 67; or taxing income over $106,800 at 3%, index the retirement age to longevity AND decrease cost of living adjustment by 0.5% (http://eng.am/oTlck2).

]]>
By: 007XXX http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8094 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 07:57:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8094 Wow after investigating SS in USA and reading all these comments I feel the savings system in India is much better. In India we call it “Provident Fund”. There are two types of it: PPF and EPF. EPF is compulsory and it is both employer’s and employee’s responsibility to contribute to it which eventually means that if employee is paying ‘x’ towards his EPF then employer also has to pay ‘x’ which in turn means that to an employer the PF cost of employee is ‘2x’ (x is not very large). Second is PPF which is optional and responsibility of individual. The difference is that EPF can be withdrawn anytime an employee wants during his employment while PPF is locked for first 8 years and then one can withdraw at will. Second, investment in EPF is a fixed % of income while in PPF it is upto individual. ROI in both is around 9% (currently 1% after adjusting for inflation; f****g food inflation). And all the investment and return from PF is TOTALLY tax free. And mostly employees in India have a PPF along with EPF.

Seems it is this habit of Indians of saving and cautious spending that has saved us by and large in this recession.

]]>
By: AlanMoore http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8076 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:42:57 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8076 ” You’d have to buy an inflation-protected annuity, disability and life policy separately — and they are no bargains.”

Take a stab on how much life insurance is provided by Social Security? $255. Guess how much the market place would charge for that policy?

]]>
By: beofaction http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8059 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 02:48:26 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8059 Ok. The author admits that Congress has “borrowed” the money that was in the trust fund, the pay-as-you-go system is not going to continue to work unless it is “adjusted”, and then makes an apples and oranges conparison between the wealth transfer (socialist) system of Social Security and a private annuity, and this is a rebuttal to Perry? Social Security IS a Ponzi scheme. Let me remind you what a Ponzi scheme is. It’s a scheme where there is no real pool of money, and so it exists only as long as new money is contributed to pay to those expecting a return. Social Security has no money, only IOUs from Congress. And, oh btw, the bonds in the trust fund are NOT negotiable treasury securities like the auther implies (ignorance or omission?), but “special” bonds that can only be redeemed by the treasury – which of course doesn’t have any money to buy them unless they print some or sell REAL treasury bonds on the market thereby increasing our national debt. So Mr. Wasik, the Social Security system is definitely a Ponzi Scheme. Wealth transfer programs DO NOT WORK! If they work why do they always have to be “adjusted” to keep from collapsing? Furthermore, if each American were to have the ability to conribute 6.2% of wages, up to the social security threshhold, into a private annuity matched by their employers their whole workng life the payoff would be much greater than social security could ever be, and guess what? It would be real money in a real account!

]]>
By: GSH10 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8057 Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:33:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8057 CarlOmunificent

Why don’t we phase out “pay-as-you-go” and replace it with a mandatory , payroll deducted IRA invested in long-term T-bills that have a guaranteed minimum return of 5%.

No cap on income, but a cap on payout to retirees earning above a specified income. This would be allocated for disability and a reasonable payout for the lowest wage earners as well as healthcare.

The upfront cost will be painful, but the system would become sustainable and reduce SSA expenses by 90% or more.

]]>
By: GSH10 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-wealth/2011/09/16/perrys-monstrous-lies-about-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-8052 Sun, 18 Sep 2011 14:05:36 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/reuters-money/?p=19755#comment-8052 CarlOmunificent

Are you under the impression that FICA is placed in an income producing investment account that beneficiaries are paid from? Because this is a general misconception.

Beneficiaries are paid with the taxes collected. There is/was a reserve for to help cover shortfalls during periods of imbalance currently faced; boomer retirees outnumbering the currently employed. Hence a Ponzi or pyramid scheme/model.

Regarding Kate Smith and rehearsals. In the dance world it’s the opposite, bad rehearsal great performance. Perspectives are like opinions, everyone has one and they’re not all the same.

]]>