Is Social Security really a entitlement?

I notice every news media and TV group panel shows talking about the need to cut entitlements to bring the U.S. spending down and a must to balance or cut the deficit. Social Security is always the first program mentioned to cut or do away with. Nothing is ever said about the U.S. Government borrowing over two trillion dollars from the Social Security Fund. By the way there is no real Social Security Fund as that money is put into the general funds and spent and wasted as all the other money. Americans pay into this fund their whole working lives. Many die before they ever get to draw one penney and others dies just a very short time after they begin to draw their S.S. pension. I realize that Americans are living longer now but what is really happening to the Social Security Funds? The point is that Americans are and have been paying into this huge cash cow for years and it is not free. Free Medical care, housing, food stamps, free cell phones,and the list goes on are entitlements! I look at Social Security as I would a Insurance policy that I have paid on for 40 years. When I die I expect that money to be there and paid to my benificiaries. It is not an entitlement, It was not free as I PAYED FOR IT! Politicians need to be aware that we know that Social Security is not an entitlement. We paid and are paying for it.

Once you receive more than you put into it that's when it becomes an entitlement. No doubt trillions have been stolen but that's the way it is.

mmm15937 wrote:

Once you receive more than you put into it that's when it becomes an entitlement. No doubt trillions have been stolen but that's the way it is.

Most people that have pension funds and that collect on Life Insurance policies receive more money than they put into it. That is the idea of these plans. Also take a look at the public workers union pension funds that are under funded and the taxpayer will have to cover. I don't see anyone calling them entitlements. Its not our fault that the government takes our money for S.S. and promises that we will have a certain amount of money each month if we pay into it all our working life. Then they act as if it is a gift that they give us and is then called an entitlement.

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> Most people that have pension funds and that collect on Life Insurance policies receive more money than they put into it. That is the idea of these plans. Also take a look at the public workers union pension funds that are under funded and the taxpayer will have to cover. I don't see anyone calling them entitlements. Its not our fault that the government takes our money for S.S. and promises that we will have a certain amount of money each month if we pay into it all our working life. Then they act as if it is a gift that they give us and is then called an entitlement.

"Most people that have pension funds and that collect on Life Insurance policies receive more money than they put into it."

Apples and oranges in several ways. The most obvious way is the two you mention are voluntary, social security TAXES (FICA and Medicare) and not voluntary.

"That is the idea of these plans."

No, it's not.

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> Most people that have pension funds and that collect on Life Insurance policies receive more money than they put into it. That is the idea of these plans. Also take a look at the public workers union pension funds that are under funded and the taxpayer will have to cover. I don't see anyone calling them entitlements. Its not our fault that the government takes our money for S.S. and promises that we will have a certain amount of money each month if we pay into it all our working life. Then they act as if it is a gift that they give us and is then called an entitlement.

Retirement is a fairly new concept that started after World War 2. Before then most people worked till they dropped. Your points about public workers pensions just prove my point. Its not sustainable. The only reason it worked for the World War 2 generation is they had lots and lots ob babies to pay into these programs for them. Now that their babies are retiring there's not alot of extra money going into the retirement ponzi schemes.
Its like when I get old and do a reverse mortgage on my house worth $100,000 the bank is not going to give my $800,000 for it. All this does not even include medicare. This is why we have 15 trillion in debt and thats what on the books they show us whats on the real books is even more.

mmm15937 wrote:

Once you receive more than you put into it that's when it becomes an entitlement. No doubt trillions have been stolen but that's the way it is.

Shouldn't you get more than what you put in? That is kind of the point of an investment. The government is borrowing money from us (via taking money out of our checks for SS and Med) and paying it back with interest. Is that really an entitlement? I think of it as more of a loan. I do think SS need some type of reform because it can’t sustain itself but that is the fault of the government poor management of the program.

NYC718 wrote:

<quoted text>
Shouldn't you get more than what you put in? That is kind of the point of an investment. The government is borrowing money from us (via taking money out of our checks for SS and Med) and paying it back with interest. Is that really an entitlement? I think of it as more of a loan. I do think SS need some type of reform because it can’t sustain itself but that is the fault of the government poor management of the program.

S.S. isn't an investment at all. Its more like you giving money to your buddy in Vegas and saying " Whatever I do, don't give me this money back until we get home." Its not meant to make interest, its a forced saving plan that turned into a Ponzi scheme. I'd forfeit all the S.S. taxes I've paid(like I'm going to see any of it anyway) if I could stop paying S.S. and use it to invest in a real retirement fund.

Every time an American citizen earns a paycheck,a portion of pay is deducted for your future S.S.payments.Some people do not live long enough to recieve a dime of what they have paid into S.S.If they have minor Children,the Children might be able to recieve a portion each month of the dead persons S.S.untill the Children are eighteen years old.Because some of us live longer and some of us do not.I think the S.S.that we pay in during our working years is more or less balanced out.Our government should never use this S.S.fund for other uses.S.S. is not welfare it is not charity,everyone pays into this program who is employed.

If we are earning a pay check,and we become disabled and become unable to work,there is an opportunity to get your S.S.at this point.You do have to prove your disability in most cases,and this can take years to do.Just because the system might act like this is welfare or charity,it is not and only people who have worked and earned paychecks are eligible to recieve S.S.

Stick with the whole segment....two Liberals discussing why the Democrats are losing ground with folks regarding entitlements

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Interesting....

Regarding my own opinion regarding Social Security...it's not an investment, my contribution is not my choice, and I'll never see every dime I ever put in. It just won't happen.

TGVR wrote:

<quoted text>
S.S. isn't an investment at all. Its more like you giving money to your buddy in Vegas and saying " Whatever I do, don't give me this money back until we get home." Its not meant to make interest, its a forced saving plan that turned into a Ponzi scheme. I'd forfeit all the S.S. taxes I've paid(like I'm going to see any of it anyway) if I could stop paying S.S. and use it to invest in a real retirement fund.

I know it's different than an investment because you don't have a choice. I was just trying to explain the reason we get more or should get more than what we put in.

NYC718 wrote:

<quoted text>
I know it's different than an investment because you don't have a choice. I was just trying to explain the reason we get more or should get more than what we put in.

There's no valid argument supporting why someone should receive more in benefits than they paid. They should get exactly the amount they put in, no more, no less. Of course, it should be optional, but that's never going to happen, the Left went apeshi*t when the proposal was made to privatize 2% of S.S.

TGVR wrote:

<quoted text>
There's no valid argument supporting why someone should receive more in benefits than they paid. They should get exactly the amount they put in, no more, no less. Of course, it should be optional, but that's never going to happen, the Left went apeshi*t when the proposal was made to privatize 2% of S.S.

I agree with the option to privatize SS. Something needs to be done. The current system is not working.

The part that there is no valid argument to support someone receiving more in benefits than they put in I don't know about that. The SS money we are paying now is not going into a savings account for us for later. Even if that was the case you still earn interest on your money when it is in a savings account therefore you should receive more when you take it out.

The government is using the SS money we are paying now to pay for current SS payments and other things who the hell know. That sounds like a loan to me. When the last time you borrowed (I know borrowed is lose term considering there is no choice) money from any bank and pay back the exact same amount? Why should taxpayers expect anything different? What about our opportunity cost of that SS money? Shouldn’t we be compensated for that?

NYC718 wrote:

<quoted text>
I agree with the option to privatize SS. Something needs to be done. The current system is not working.
The part that there is no valid argument to support someone receiving more in benefits than they put in I don't know about that. The SS money we are paying now is not going into a savings account for us for later. Even if that was the case you still earn interest on your money when it is in a savings account therefore you should receive more when you take it out.
The government is using the SS money we are paying now to pay for current SS payments and other things who the hell know. That sounds like a loan to me. When the last time you borrowed (I know borrowed is lose term considering there is no choice) money from any bank and pay back the exact same amount? Why should taxpayers expect anything different? What about our opportunity cost of that SS money? Shouldn’t we be compensated for that?

I would like to expand and clairify my first points. S.S is taken from the employer and employee basically by the point of a gun. We did not volunter to join S.S and the government set up the rules and promises for it. Think about this. Fifty years of interest paid on our S.S. money. It is not our fault our S.S. money is spent on other programs as part of the General Fund. Not our fault that the government makes no interest on this money. Odd thing that the people that think no one should get more from the fund then they put in, expect more in return from their private retirement fund, banking accounts,401's, and stock investments. Why should S.S. be different? Another thing is if we die before we draw any or part of our S.S. investment, the money can not be inherited. So that money remains in the S.S. fund. Not the same as those private funds that can be passed on to your family at your death. It is not our fault that the government does not draw interest on this money. Perhaps we could use a portion of it to loan to other countries or private enterprise and draw interest off that money. I know that you are now going to mention our latest batch of government loans to companies that went bust. This operation would have to be run like a real business such as a professional loan institution without any political bias. Employees and employers pay for this program for about 50 years. This is why it is not an Entitlement Program . It is not a welfare or giveaway program. We are pauing for it!

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> I would like to expand and clairify my first points. S.S is taken from the employer and employee basically by the point of a gun. We did not volunter to join S.S and the government set up the rules and promises for it. Think about this. Fifty years of interest paid on our S.S. money. It is not our fault our S.S. money is spent on other programs as part of the General Fund. Not our fault that the government makes no interest on this money. Odd thing that the people that think no one should get more from the fund then they put in, expect more in return from their private retirement fund, banking accounts,401's, and stock investments. Why should S.S. be different? Another thing is if we die before we draw any or part of our S.S. investment, the money can not be inherited. So that money remains in the S.S. fund. Not the same as those private funds that can be passed on to your family at your death. It is not our fault that the government does not draw interest on this money. Perhaps we could use a portion of it to loan to other countries or private enterprise and draw interest off that money. I know that you are now going to mention our latest batch of government loans to companies that went bust. This operation would have to be run like a real business such as a professional loan institution without any political bias. Employees and employers pay for this program for about 50 years. This is why it is not an Entitlement Program . It is not a welfare or giveaway program. We are pauing for it!

My point exactly. Why should SS be any different we should expect a return or money. Just like you said if it was in a 401K or IRA we would expect a return. I'm guessing me and you are the only 2 on this thread that feels this way.

NYC718 wrote:

<quoted text>
My point exactly. Why should SS be any different we should expect a return or money. Just like you said if it was in a 401K or IRA we would expect a return. I'm guessing me and you are the only 2 on this thread that feels this way.

Scary as it seems we might be the only two that have not been brain washed into calling something we pay for all our lives an entitlement. Most of these people just want to kill it as most say they will never see a penny of it. They are afraid of it,
resent it and that is why they don't see it any other way. The politicians see this as an easy way to cut or do away with S.S and give the money away to some other program that we probably won't like or do Americans any good. Most Americans have been taught it is an entitlement. Just as most Americans think oil is a fossil fuel and comes from dead dinasours. That is another story for another time but being a little more open minded on this subject wouldn't hurt.

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> Scary as it seems we might be the only two that have not been brain washed into calling something we pay for all our lives an entitlement. Most of these people just want to kill it as most say they will never see a penny of it. They are afraid of it,
resent it and that is why they don't see it any other way. The politicians see this as an easy way to cut or do away with S.S and give the money away to some other program that we probably won't like or do Americans any good. Most Americans have been taught it is an entitlement. Just as most Americans think oil is a fossil fuel and comes from dead dinasours. That is another story for another time but being a little more open minded on this subject wouldn't hurt.

I have never believed oil or coal were fossil fuels. We agree on something.

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> Scary as it seems we might be the only two that have not been brain washed into calling something we pay for all our lives an entitlement. Most of these people just want to kill it as most say they will never see a penny of it. They are afraid of it,
resent it and that is why they don't see it any other way. The politicians see this as an easy way to cut or do away with S.S and give the money away to some other program that we probably won't like or do Americans any good. Most Americans have been taught it is an entitlement. Just as most Americans think oil is a fossil fuel and comes from dead dinasours. That is another story for another time but being a little more open minded on this subject wouldn't hurt.

Wait wait wait, are you saying that oil is NOT a fossil fuel? Also, the people who want to stop S.S are the people who want to be in charge of their own money and don't want to be forced into a government sanctioned Ponzi scheme.

Bigdave wrote:

<quoted text> Scary as it seems we might be the only two that have not been brain washed into calling something we pay for all our lives an entitlement. Most of these people just want to kill it as most say they will never see a penny of it. They are afraid of it,
resent it and that is why they don't see it any other way. The politicians see this as an easy way to cut or do away with S.S and give the money away to some other program that we probably won't like or do Americans any good. Most Americans have been taught it is an entitlement. Just as most Americans think oil is a fossil fuel and comes from dead dinasours. That is another story for another time but being a little more open minded on this subject wouldn't hurt.

I think you've had a stroke or something. I TRULY want to hear your other story for another time as to your explanation in regard to oil NOT being a fossil fuel.

Synergy wrote:

<quoted text>
I think you've had a stroke or something. I TRULY want to hear your other story for another time as to your explanation in regard to oil NOT being a fossil fuel.

I suggest that you do some research on oil and then tell me how the dinasaurs got 5 miles under the earth. Also just tell me how many dinasaurs does it take to make one barrel of oil? Quit trying to change the subject. I swear Americans are more interested in just plain crap then in things that really matter in their lives. They are more interested in who is going to win American Idol or the Falcons game than how this country is being run or what happens to their own money. People need to become more aware of what is happening to our money and the seriousness of our financial situation in this country. What is going to happen to you when you retire, that is if you can ever afford to retire. The only thing keeping many older Americans from starving is their Social Security. I know that most of you are going to get old and hopefully live long enough to draw at least some of your hard earned social security. Take an interest in the plan and try to get the program revamped. Stop the government from writting over two Trillion dollarrs of IOUs to the S.S. fund. You might then get an option to enroll or not enroll. It may have part of it invested so the funds really draw interest.Without changes you are probably correct that it will go bankrupt. It is not free now and it will not be free then, even with legislative changes. We have been given no choice in how we pay for this program or how much or any other aspect of the benifits that will be paid to us. This is surely more important than the free cell phones that are now being given out to the poor paid for by the government. Now that is an entitlement.