How many here would "opt out" of social security if they could?

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

Now that's a Good Christian Attitude. It's no different than saying "Why should my tax dollars go to pay for Hurricane victims in Florida, they made the decision to live there"

Of course it's different... one is a natural disaster, the other is not. 40 million people should not be receiving SS benefits.

As to the question in the OP, where do I sign up (or off)?

EDIT: Oh, and a good Christian attitude is not a forced government program.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

Now that's a Good Christian Attitude. It's no different than saying "Why should my tax dollars go to pay for Hurricane victims in Florida, they made the decision to live there"

People paid into the system their whole lives, should they just be told "Tough sh!t?"

No, they should not be told that. They should have had more children and used condoms less. That's what the Baby-Boomers get for not following in their parent's footsteps.

Honestly they shouldn't be told tough sh!t. We will continue to pay FICA and make sure your benefits are there, but you should damn well let us tinker with Private Accounts. If we fsck it up you and dead and in the ground and don't have to worry about it. I think that's fair. We pay you what you paid in + the ROR for SS, and then we can mess with our Private Accounts.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

And if they can't I guess you believe it's ok to just live in utter destitude and despair although they had paid their whole lives into SS.

 

[daniel1113]

DP

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

EDIT: Oh, and a good Christian attitude is not a forced government program.

Yeah but we cannot count of todays Good Christians to have a good Christian Attitude as you and Rip demonstrate.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: daniel1113

EDIT: Oh, and a good Christian attitude is not a forced government program.

Yeah but we cannot count of todays Good Christians to have a good Christian Attitude as you and Rip demonstrate.

You make too many assumptions, my friend. Plus, I wouldn't want to instill anything Christian into our government.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

And if they can't I guess you believe it's ok to just live in utter destitude and despair although they had paid their whole lives into SS.

I'm not sure what you mean by "utter destitude and despair". The poorest of the poor in this country have it better than most in other countries in the world.

Specifically, what standard of living do you think the government gurantee?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

Wasn't really arguing that it was. More or less, making a slippery slope arguement on the statement "Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will". Many of us, including you, don't want to pay taxes (SS, payroll, state, etc) for things that WE don't see fit or want, but the money machine in DC buys enough votes with them and will continue to do so until something fundamentally changes.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

And if they can't I guess you believe it's ok to just live in utter destitude and despair although they had paid their whole lives into SS.

I'm not sure what you mean by "utter destitude and despair". The poorest of the poor in this country have it better than most in other countries in the world.

Specifically, what standard of living do you think the government gurantee?

Without any income their standard of living would be third world. As for standard of living, the SS they get now doesn't enable them to live large, just get by. That's why many have also saved for retirement. Hell when I retire my SS would probably just cover my prescriptions the way the cost of drugs is skyrocketing.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Of course I'd opt out.

Why do I need to have money confiscated from my paycheck that I'm capable of saving myself for my retirement?

And your AREN'T capable of saving for your retirement NOW? I love how some of you use SS as an excuse for not being able to save for your futures. Like any of you complainers don't already have retirement money put aside. I know, you just want MORE because it makes you sick that money that is taken out of your paychecks sometimes, actually, go to help people less fortunate than yourself. How sick that must make you feel. :roll:

Less fortunate or poor?

Take your pick? A child whose working mom and dad can't afford health care for him can be called poor or less fortunate as far as I am concerned. Our SS taxes go to fund programs that do in fact allow these children to get basic free health care. I don't see how allowing anyone to take any portion of these taxes and invest them elsewhere is going to help this problem. I think the bottom line is that many people just don't give a sh!t.

 

[Riprorin]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't?

The same goes for almost every program in the government. Why should I have money comfiscated in the form of taxes to pay for something that I don't want? The goverment is a money eating machine (printing too) and uses much of the pork to "buy" the vote to continue to stay (increase) in power. While I agree that I want my money to invest the way I see fit, I also understand that there are many who won't have (some by choice) the money or attitude to save for their own retirement.

However, that being said, part of the problem is that it's too easy to get disability retirement (SSI), especially in certain regions of the country (Eastern Kentucky and Western West Virginia). People on disablity SSI who are in their 20's and go four wheeling 3 times a week is a joke!!! (But that's another argument altogether).

Add the fact that there would always be people WHO absolutely will not save for retirement on their own no matter how much money they have. To the ones who are capable and just don't do it, I feel no pity in letting them fend for themselves in old age (again, not talking about people who aren't capable to save because of low income, etc).

Since when is retirement a birthright?

If you have a low income, I guess I you just have to keep on working.

And if they can't I guess you believe it's ok to just live in utter destitude and despair although they had paid their whole lives into SS.

I'm not sure what you mean by "utter destitude and despair". The poorest of the poor in this country have it better than most in other countries in the world.

Specifically, what standard of living do you think the government gurantee?

Without any income their standard of living would be third world. As for standard of living, the SS they get now doesn't enable them to live large, just get by. That's why many have also saved for retirement. Hell when I retire my SS would probably just cover my prescriptions the way the cost of drugs is skyrocketing.

SS was never intended to be the only source of income during retirement.

You didn't answer my question. What standard of living do you think the government should gurantee for retirees?

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Of course I'd opt out.

Why do I need to have money confiscated from my paycheck that I'm capable of saving myself for my retirement?

And your AREN'T capable of saving for your retirement NOW? I love how some of you use SS as an excuse for not being able to save for your futures. Like any of you complainers don't already have retirement money put aside. I know, you just want MORE because it makes you sick that money that is taken out of your paychecks sometimes, actually, go to help people less fortunate than yourself. How sick that must make you feel. :roll:

Huh?

I don't need the government to take care of my retirement. I'm capable of planning and saving on my own.

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't or won't?

Wow, do you NOT see how you bounce around in your ethics and your morals depending on the subject matter? Why should ANY money be "confiscated" for any taxes you pay? Some of your Fed and State taxes do IN FACT go to pay for those people that "can't or won't" as you put it.

Using your argument and just to show you how f'ing deluted you are...

Why should we send 1000's to die and spend any of American tax payer dollars to pay for those Iraqis that "can't or won't" stand up for themselves.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Of course I'd opt out.

Why do I need to have money confiscated from my paycheck that I'm capable of saving myself for my retirement?

And your AREN'T capable of saving for your retirement NOW? I love how some of you use SS as an excuse for not being able to save for your futures. Like any of you complainers don't already have retirement money put aside. I know, you just want MORE because it makes you sick that money that is taken out of your paychecks sometimes, actually, go to help people less fortunate than yourself. How sick that must make you feel. :roll:

Less fortunate or poor?

Take your pick? A child whose working mom and dad can't afford health care for him can be called poor or less fortunate as far as I am concerned. Our SS taxes go to fund programs that do in fact allow these children to get basic free health care. I don't see how allowing anyone to take any portion of these taxes and invest them elsewhere is going to help this problem. I think the bottom line is that many people just don't give a sh!t.

I think the correct answer would be old, disabled, or a survior. Neither group nessicarly is poor or unfornate and not all poor and unfornate people fit into any of the catagories.

 

[Engineer]

No use to arguing, I would still opt out of the damn thing.

The government can keep the 90,000 that I and my employers have paid in and I'll go on from here. Hell, they can continue to get the 6.2% employer match if they wish (although I would like to have that too, hehe). That's fair isn't it? I get my half and they get my employer half.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Of course I'd opt out.

Why do I need to have money confiscated from my paycheck that I'm capable of saving myself for my retirement?

And your AREN'T capable of saving for your retirement NOW? I love how some of you use SS as an excuse for not being able to save for your futures. Like any of you complainers don't already have retirement money put aside. I know, you just want MORE because it makes you sick that money that is taken out of your paychecks sometimes, actually, go to help people less fortunate than yourself. How sick that must make you feel. :roll:

Huh?

I don't need the government to take care of my retirement. I'm capable of planning and saving on my own.

Why should money be confiscated from my paycheck against my will to support people that can't or won't?

Wow, do you NOT see how you bounce around in your ethics and your morals depending on the subject matter? Why should ANY money be "confiscated" for any taxes you pay? Some of your Fed and State taxes do IN FACT go to pay for those people that "can't or won't" as you put it.

Using your argument and just to show you how f'ing deluted you are...

Why should we send 1000's to die and spend any of American tax payer dollars to pay for those Iraqis that "can't or won't" stand up for themselves.

That's exactly the "slippery slope" argument that I was making above.

 

[TallBill]

22, and I'd opt out in a heartbeat..

 

[Engineer]

58 out of 79 (so far) would opt or allow those who wanted to opt out. Of course, once outside of P&N, results may vary.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Engineer
58 out of 79 (so far) would opt or allow those who wanted to opt out. Of course, once outside of P&N, results may vary.

actually for once, I think this poll may mirror the world outside of p&n. Real polls have young people wanting private accounts for SS>

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: Riprorin
Of course I'd opt out.

Why do I need to have money confiscated from my paycheck that I'm capable of saving myself for my retirement?

And your AREN'T capable of saving for your retirement NOW? I love how some of you use SS as an excuse for not being able to save for your futures. Like any of you complainers don't already have retirement money put aside. I know, you just want MORE because it makes you sick that money that is taken out of your paychecks sometimes, actually, go to help people less fortunate than yourself. How sick that must make you feel. :roll:

Less fortunate or poor?

Take your pick? A child whose working mom and dad can't afford health care for him can be called poor or less fortunate as far as I am concerned. Our SS taxes go to fund programs that do in fact allow these children to get basic free health care. I don't see how allowing anyone to take any portion of these taxes and invest them elsewhere is going to help this problem. I think the bottom line is that many people just don't give a sh!t.

Someone who makes 50k a year and didn't plan for their retirement is unforunate and STUPID. A child born into a family without healthcare is poor, and had no say in his "fortune." A lot of people make "mistakes" and are labeled as unforunate, but some would say they dug their own grave.

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: Mill
Someone who makes 50k a year and didn't plan for their retirement is unforunate and STUPID. A child born into a family without healthcare is poor, and had no say in his "fortune." A lot of people make "mistakes" and are labeled as unforunate, but some would say they dug their own grave.

I'd say that is a very large number of SS recipients.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Engineer
58 out of 79 (so far) would opt or allow those who wanted to opt out. Of course, once outside of P&N, results may vary.

actually for once, I think this poll may mirror the world outside of p&n. Real polls have young people wanting Real private accounts for SS and not one with the government skimming profits above a certain level>

Slightly corrected.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Engineer
58 out of 79 (so far) would opt or allow those who wanted to opt out. Of course, once outside of P&N, results may vary.

actually for once, I think this poll may mirror the world outside of p&n. Real polls have young people wanting Real private accounts for SS and not one with the government skimming profits above a certain level>

Slightly corrected.

That would be one viable way of paying transition costs. As long as the amount was not excessive I could live with a little skimming off the top.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mill
Someone who makes 50k a year and didn't plan for their retirement is unforunate and STUPID. A child born into a family without healthcare is poor, and had no say in his "fortune." A lot of people make "mistakes" and are labeled as unforunate, but some would say they dug their own grave.

Of course there are some who come into a nice little windfall due to an unfortunate event and have trustees looking over their financial future.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: daniel1113

Originally posted by: Mill
Someone who makes 50k a year and didn't plan for their retirement is unforunate and STUPID. A child born into a family without healthcare is poor, and had no say in his "fortune." A lot of people make "mistakes" and are labeled as unforunate, but some would say they dug their own grave.

I'd say that is a very large number of SS recipients.

The last figure I heard on this is the it is a 25-75 split. 75% of medicaid recipients have NO income whatsoever. Only 25% are working Americans who don't make enough or aren't offered health care where they work. Who in your opinions should we look out more for? My answer might surprise you.

Edit: Oh, I think you were replying to the didn't plan people, not the healthcare part of his post. Nvm.