Like I said in another article, I did attend a recent townhall meeting with US Senator Mike Pompeo and the biggest concern people had was their Social Security Check. Let me recap on what happened.
Republicans came out with a plan to address the nation's debt crisis, the Path to Prosperity; more like a path to destruction imo. It was a plan to pay down the national debt, balance the budget within five years, and yet keep entitlement benefits and more. They were going to keep Social Security and Medicare programs in place whereas if things were to keep going in the direction they were going, the two programs would eventually have become broke and no longer provide their services. (Gee, what a loss.) The Democrats and the President, however, accused the Republicans of otherwise. They created an ad where this elderly woman stood in front of the camera and accused the Republicans of taking her Social Security check away and they were encouraging people to call their Republican leaders not to take their checks and benefits away. So, not only are the Democrats playing a dirty game, vilifying the Republican's plan but they're using the elderly as a front to try and discriminate and discount any efforts the Republican's may have to try and save this nation from certain failure. Democrats in turn lose more credibility for simply ignoring the facts. AS IF they had any credibility at all in the first place.
It was no surprise then that at townhall meetings across the nation that the number one discussion was not the debt crisis, as it should be, but the number one discussion was Social Security and are we going to keep getting our checks. As I walked into the building where the meeting was taking place, low and behold there were people standing just outside the door, representing Peace and Social Justice Center from Topeka, Kansas, handing out pamphlets about this very thing. They accused the Republicans of being so cold hearted and turning their backs on the elderly, disabled and, oh my gosh, the poor! Let me just share with you a paragraph ;
Paul Ryan's proposal will eliminate traditional Medicare in 10 years by forcing seniors and beneficiaries onto the private market to purchase insurance. Imagine seniors, in their 80's and 90's, having to negotiate individually with private health insurance vultures. Ryan's proposal would have Medicare eligible people receive a predetermined amount to purchase private coverage- about $8,000 in 2022. When health costs increase, recipients will be responsible for the difference between the rise in premiums and the $8,000 contribution, making coverage unaffordable, since the voucher will not keep up with health care spending.
Wow! These people are geniuses. (please note the sarcasm)
Not only were these people morally degenerate but they were also entirely misinformed and in complete denial about the situation we are in with Social Security.
According to the Cato Institute in 2009, our nation's GDP was 14.3 trillion dollars and the Social Security required 107 trillion dollars in that year alone. Every cent that is "contributed" to Social Security goes directly towards paying the benefit of those who are collecting on it now. There is a growing problem of the ratio of workers to retirees. In 1940 the ratio was about 49 workers to one retiree which worked out fine. Today, however, you have 3 workers to one retiree well on it's way to below 2 per retiree especially now that the baby boomers are entering retirement age, and the tax rate for Social Security has risen dramatically over the years. Many people of modest means will find that they pay more into Social Security than they do in income taxes. Younger workers pay into a failing system more money then ever before assuming that they will ever see any of that money when they retire.
Let's get something straight about Social Security. First off, it was never meant that it would last this long but it did and it's because of the entitlement mentality it created amongst the citizens. The people were the ones that refused to allow their political leaders to do anything about it but instead demanded that these "benefits" should stay put. Social Security became the "third rail" so to speak because it was believed by all politicians that if they messed with it, then it would end their careers. Sure enough, before a politician can even finish saying the word Social Security, out they went. So, it wasn't so much that there aren't any politicians that didn't want to do anything about the growing crisis with Social Security, they were afraid to do so because of the people who elected him into office.
Second of all, it is foolish to believe that our country could not run without Social Security. Australia and Chili are countries that have private industries that take care of their "social security". Guess what! They're doing fantastic and have loads of money for their recipients. When you have government run social security and everyone is forced to pay into it regardless of if they're going to take advantage of it or not, then you have problems with government embezzling the funds and not making the right investment strategies to create more money. Government also tends to carry themselves above the law lots of time and excuse itself from any wrong doing such as this. Meanwhile, should you have social security in private companies then you have the laws of the land that protects you and your funds. Also, another thing is that in a free market, you're allowed to choose which company you trust your money with. If you don't like one, then you go to another. If you feel that a company has broken the law and robbed you in anyway, then that's when you get the law on them and you go do business with another company. So, not only would you most likely be better protected trusting your social security with private companies and you get variety of services to better suit your needs, but you would also get competition from the companies who are vying for your business. You would get to choose who treats you better, who would protect your money better, who would make better investment returns on the money you put in. Going into the free market system would do away with the ponzi scheme we got going now and create better wealth for people's retirement.
Third of all, like I said before; Tell me how it is justified that I should keep paying into Social Security, that I have never asked for but was forced upon it, keep paying into it to never see one dime of that money I put in when I retire??? Face it folks! Social Security is a failed system from the get go and everyone knew that eventually, someone was going to have to pay the price of this system and the game is up! We've dug ourselves a bottomless pit. Social Security will run out of it's assets in about 30 years and will no longer be able to pay out. Could be sooner, who knows but it is nonetheless a failing system that will place us, our children, grandchildren in bondage and the quality of life is miserable.
If you want to solve the problem of Social Security, my suggestion would be to start off with allowing insurance companies that already offer life insurance to offer social security as a product. People who buy their own private social security could then be given a tax break. People already on social security and currently collecting can be given an annuity with the company of their choice, the government could then purchase for them the annuity which will immediately give the recipient a monthly payment as they are normally use to.
This works out great because those who are on annuities can control the amount of money they get each month. If they want less money, they can call the company and tell them they want to lower the payment to save part of their money for a trip or a wedding coming up or whatever. They can also increase their monthly payment if they wish by adding more money from say a sale of a house, working, or what ever they decide to do. What's great about it is they no longer have to feel like they have to play by the government's rules of how much they can make. They can create and produce as little or as much as they'd like. After all, why would a private company tell you that you can't make more money? It would be bad for business. Meanwhile, people, such as myself, can buy a social security product from an insurance company knowing that it will be well protected by the law. On top of that, the company will be better at investing the money to create more wealth with my money, so that I know that it won't be a ponzi scheme and all the money I put into it, will come back to me whereas with the government, I'll be lucky if I get half of it back. In my case, I'll be lucky to see a penny.
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10688
http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/26/ten-years-left-for-social-security/
No comments:
Post a Comment