On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, "Bill McKee" wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
As long as you consider SS a welfare system, then there's little point
in a
discussion.

For many folks, SS *is* a large chunk of retirement income, if not all
of it.
Perhaps that wasn't the intent, but it's a fact.


*******************

Social Security isn't a welfare program as much as it is an insurance
program.
Using my 4-year-old nephew as an example- if his father had not paid
into social securit for 35 years he wouldn't be eligible for benefits.
Like any other insurance, you pay your preminums and then if X, Y, or Z
happens you collect benefits.

If you get too old or sick for productive employment, social security
will provide you with a subsistence lifestyle. There are certain
medical standards to meet before you can claim you are "too sick" to
work, as well as age requirements to meet before you can claim you are
"too old".. Those who want to retire in luxury, or even relative
comfort, have always needed to make financial arrangements far beyond
the scope of social security.

Pardon me if I don't trust Bush's motives in this matter. Throughout
his presidency, he has sought to dismantle the social safety net in the
US. Step one, of course, is to make a lot of noise about "faith based"
social services and propose taking the money currently funding the
social safety net and giving it to churches. If he can accomplish that,
it's a short and easy little hop to "The government shouldn't be
funding churches!" Voila- with the elimination of all welfare and
social support systems he will have freed up a walloping 12 percent of
the national budget (that can instead be diverted to defense
contractors or turned into tax cuts for the top 2-3% of wage earners).

While Bush and his cronies make a lot of noise about taking the
responsibility for social services away from the government and giving
it to a group of (approved, naturally) churches they are failing to
recognize a short sighted aspect of their plan. The poor, the disabled,
the mentally ill are in less need of "welfare" that curches and
families may be able to better provide than they are social justice-
and that *is* the business of government in a democracy.



You can buy a lot better long term / life insurance policy for a lot less
money than SS takes out. One that would pay your children / widow more
money and would even give you a nice retirement annuity after 45 years of
working. SS is now just an extra tax. Has kept the government going for
at least 40 years. Was why the last administration could declare an almost
balanced budget. LBJ and his cronies figured out they could get a lot more
federal income with out a tax raise by raising the SS payouts in some future
years while raising the pay in then. If you are going to have SS then
nobody should be exempt from paying. State employees, Federal legislators,
etc. as it is now, a state employee is exempt from paying and then retires
from the state, and works for private industry for about 10 quarters. Then
is fully vested. The time may be longer or shorter, but is in the ballpark.
And the stock market over it's history has returned about 9% average. Is
why most insurance companies and annuity providers keep money in the market.
Where is the money we paid last year in excess to
SS benefits, taxes invested?

Off topic to rec.boats. This isn't wrecked.boats. Post complaints or
comments to the appropriate newsgroup. Not here.

Remember, this is a boating newsgroup. OT posting is not welcome and is
unappreciated.

If you still feel compelled to post OT, seek professional help.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This message was posted via one or more anonymous remailing services.
The original sender is unknown. Any address shown in the From header
is unverified. You need a valid hashcash token to post to groups other
than alt.test and alt.anonymous.messages. Visit www.panta-rhei.dyndns.org
for abuse and hashcash info.