Apply For Social Security Benefits Online

Published on January 8th, 2009

Posted by Uncle Dave in Politics, economy

Odd how conservatives who rant about America becoming socialistic have no problem signing up for government run SS. What, you didn’t plan for your retirement properly and have to depend on others? Why should I, a hard working, self sufficient person, pay for you?

The Social Security Administration, bracing for the coming eligibility of 80 million baby boomers, is introducing an online application that will allow people to apply for retirement benefits in as little as 15 minutes.

Social Security Commissioner Michael J. Astrue said in an interview the agency was completely overhauling its electronic services in recognition of the greater computer skills of future Social Security recipients and the need to more efficiently process the coming flood of applications.

“We just don’t have the infrastructure to handle that workload in the traditional fashion,” he said.

Astrue said a person who now goes to a Social Security office to apply spends about 45 minutes consulting with a field officer.

The agency says that over the next 20 years some 10,000 people a day will become eligible for retirement.
[...]
Those wanting to use the new program can go to http://socialsecurity.gov and click on “Filing Online for Retirement Benefits.”

[Suggestion: Unlike some commenters, before making an embarrassing rant that I am wrong and your lifetime of payments into SS pay for your benefits, please do some research. -- UD]

109 users responded in " Apply For Social Security Benefits Online "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:42 am

“Odd how conservatives who rant about America becoming socialistic have no problem signing up for government run SS.”

Trying to get your own money back from the government is an ‘odd’ thing for a conservative to attempt?

I find that conclusion, well, very strange… Maybe, it’s just early are the person who wrote that isn’t awake yet…

# 2 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:44 am

Excuse me??? You would not be paying for me to get ss. I have been paying into that system all of my adult life so far. So don’t rant about HOW DARE YOU EXPECT ME TO PAY YOUR WAY BECAUSE YOU DIDN’T PLAN FOR RETIREMENT. That’s the most asinine statement I’ve ever heard.

# 3 bhavekost said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:51 am

This day is still young, but I doubt that anyone will be able to top Uncle Dave in saying anything more stupid….

# 4 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:53 am

# 2 nolimit662 said, “Excuse me??? You would not be paying for me to get ss. I have been paying into that system all of my adult life so far. So don’t rant”

I don’t think the author has a clue what SS is or where the money came from for the system… Must be a liberal.

# 5 geart said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:54 am

nolimit662,
How about this? “How dare you expect me to pay your way through grade school?”

SS like public school is a system where one person pays for someone else’ benefit.

When you went to school someone else paid for it, when you collect SS someone else will be paying for it. The money you put into SS or the taxes you pay for public schools go to to others.

# 6 moondawg said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:55 am

#2. Do you seriously not know how SS works? You are paying for current SS benefit receivers. SS is not currently solvent in the long term. SS REQUIRES an expanding, working population in order to be solvent. If the population starts to shrink…. or even stagnate, THE MONEY YOU PAID INTO SS WILL NOT BE THERE.

I would happily, HAPPILY stop paying into the SS system in exchange for never being able to draw from it. The reason they don’t let you do that is because the system would collapse in short order when everyone stopped paying in.

SS is a government-sponsored Ponzi scheme…. Nothing more.

# 7 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:00 am

#5 If schools were not publicly funded if would be bad for society. Next thing you know everyone would complain about how stupid kids are and why there’s so much more crime and such. Not that people don’t complain now. And, sorry, If you pay in you should get out something. There’s nothing wrong with expecting that. Don’t tell me someone else is paying for me when I retire. The only reason that may be is because of the gov’t mismanagement and stealing of funds.

# 8 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:04 am

#6 exactly. It’s because if the gov’t screwing it all up. But still, you put in you shall get it out in the end or there will be massive riots everywhere.

# 9 RTaylor said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:11 am

The only reason to have a society is for the common good of the individuals. Many people prepared for retirement, but part of it was the Social Security. Not everyone is fortunate enough to afford to pack six figures in an IRA or 401K. It is unfortunate that many children of elderly parents aren’t more proactive in caring for them in America. In most cultures it’s assumed. This country switched to socialism in the 1930’s, and even more in the 1960’s with Johnson. We don’t call it that because we’re uncomfortable with the name. Health reform and mandatory coverage is the key to Medicare/Medicaid survival. The future is more taxes, like Europe, you might as well get ready for it and avoid being a self centered ass.

# 10 moondawg said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:16 am

no, no, no. People started receiving SS when the program started. Therefore, they were being paid for by people paying into the system. This structure continues today. You pay for current retirees. Future workers pay for your “retirement.”

And let’s discuss another misunderstanding: SS isn’t about providing you with a retirement. It’s supposed to be a protection against poverty once you’ve moved past a viable working age. With life expectancies continuing to rise, look for the SS “retirement age” to follow suit.

For my part, I’ll continue to kiss that money good-bye and plan for SS to be gone by the time I retire.

# 11 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:26 am

#10 – Moondawg

>>no, no, no. People started receiving SS when
>>the program started.

Just like with any insurance program.

You might sign up for health insurance, and get cancer after your first premium. In that case, others would be paying for you. Or you might pay in your whole life, and die without ever receiving any benefits (if you’re health).

With SS, the first few enrollees received with out paying. Some people pay their whole lives, but never receive, if they die at 66. Most pay their whole lives, then receive when they’re old.

# 12 MikeN said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:27 am

Obama is acknowledging that SS and Medicare have serious problems. Maybe if Congress hadn’t blocked reforms when they were proposed the last 8 years.

# 13 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:29 am

# 12 MikeN said, “Maybe if Congress hadn’t blocked reforms when they were proposed the last 8 years.”

Maybe if congress hadn’t been stealing the $ for the last 40 years…

# 14 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:47 am

#12 – Lyin’ Mike

>>Maybe if Congress hadn’t blocked reforms when
>>they were proposed the last 8 years.

Those weren’t “reforms”, Lyin’ Mike. Those were attempts to gut the SS system, turning our money over to Wall Street charlatans whose vested interests were in thrashing our accounts to garner obscene profits for themselves.

As others have pointed out, SS was never intended to be the full retirement plan for Warren Buffet and Bill Gates. It was protection against abject poverty for people of financially modest means, after they had worked their whole lives.

Turning it over to Wall Street predators chosen by the government would destroy that.

Everyone ALREADY has the option of a “privatized” account. Everyone with the means and the desire may avail themselves of that option. Nothing to be gained (and much to be lost) by taking the safety net for the less fortunate and turning it into part of the $100,000,000.00 bonus for some already-overpaid government proxy, accountable to no one.

# 15 chuck said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:50 am

Actually, as a conservative and a hard-working, self-sufficient person, I have no problem with the idea of providing a modest income for current retirees, whether those individuals saved for their own retirement or did not.

But, like most government programs, social security has now expanded far beyond it’s original purpose.

And since it was built like a ponzi scheme, no amount of additional funding will ever support it.

# 16 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:55 am

Hmmm… Maybe the government should enforce a policy of 100% smokers. Cut down some life expectancy!

Bismark introducted SS. He set the date of retirement 1 year after the average life expectancy.

# 17 GigG said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:56 am

Where in the hell does JCD find these Bozos?

If someone who so misunderstands the SS system this badly can be an editor here we might as well have Boboo as an editor.

# 18 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:05 am

#17 Amen!!

This while complaint that someone doesn’t deserve something from which they paid in is obscene!!

A lot of bitter people with nothing better to do than complain about retired people getting the money they deserve (in most cases) for working their whole lives and paying in. Give me a break.

# 19 WmDE said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:06 am

“Odd how conservatives who rant about America becoming socialistic have no problem signing up for government run SS.”

The author should frame the above statement. I did not voluntarily sign up for Social Security. I was drafted. It was explained to me at a young age that if I wanted a job, I had to have a Social Security Number. This card allowed me to pay 7% of my pay to the government. It also allowed my employer to pay the government for the pleasure of hiring me. The government explained that they were just keeping the the funds for me and would let me have it back when I was almost dead. They didn’t say it was going to the people then on Social Security.

Of course I got to live a few years without a Social Security Number. To claim a child as a dependent that child must have a SSN. The child today may as well have his Social Security Number tattooed on his butt at birth.

As a conservative I must say that I found the online site well thought out and a pleasure to use. I look forward to finally getting my money back. I also intend to live long enough to get more than I paid in.

# 20 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:09 am

Jeez, #19 more bitterness.

# 21 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:13 am

Also #16, you say “as a conservative” just like all those other nutjobs who think saying that makes you holier than thou!! Oh I’m a “conservative” look at me. Oh, you “liberals”, you’re all scum……ho hum….That’s the downfall of “conservatives” they are all about the bashing of everyone not like them. Tells you a lot about their character. Why do the “conservatives” always feel they need to play name calling games? The “conservatives” are the whole reason this country is in this mess now. So you can take your name calling and hatred and shove it up your you know what.

# 22 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:22 am

21…

Wrong #16. I’m a big proponent of the Canada Pension Plan. I also love my universal health care! I can play in traffic all day and not worry about going bankrupt paying for repairs!

# 23 Uncle Dave said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:28 am

Do I have to add an idiot’s guide to each item I post?

The money you paid in went to the retirees at that time. You are getting money from current workers.

As I’ve now added to the post itself, please do your research before attacking me on how the system works. And I am in favor of SS, btw. I simply find it funny how conservatives who rant about self-sufficiency and encroaching socialism are happy to take the money of others when they retire.

# 24 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:31 am

# 23 Uncle Dave said, “Do I have to add an idiot’s guide to each item I post? ”

Well, when you say it is unlike conservatives to want to get money back from the gov’t that was taken from them, an idiot something is needed…

# 25 Uncle Dave said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:34 am

#24: Still don’t get it, eh? You are not getting “money back.” The money you put in went to others. You are taking money from current workers.

# 26 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:35 am

# 25 Uncle Dave said, “#24: Still don’t get it, eh?”

You still don’t get accounting, do you?

# 27 Ranger007 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:45 am

#16 Named said

“Bismark introduced SS.”

He did, as a tax. Pure and simple. Quick way to raise money.

Made sense to Roosevelt.

Who would think the world would change so much that the government should provide an ‘entitlement’ to damn near everyone who could stumble their way into this country, let alone be born here.

It was, and is, a tax.

#19 WmDE said

“It was explained to me at a young age that if I wanted a job, I had to have a Social Security Number. This card allowed me to pay 7% of my pay to the government. It also allowed my employer to pay the government for the pleasure of hiring me. The government explained that they were just keeping the the funds for me and would let me have it back when I was almost dead.”

It was explained to me (some 50 years ago – of course I’m just a poor old country kid who attended public schools) that it was a way to help keep the old, poor people from dying in abject poverty.

But……….

# 28 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:46 am

correction I meant #19

# 29 nolimit662 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:50 am

UNCLE DAVE……sure the money they are using to pay you back now is from current workers…..but that’s only because they stole and mismanaged the funds all along. It still doesn’t negate the fact that you’re getting SOMETHING back for WHAT YOU PUT IN!!!! Do you get it now?

# 30 gmknobl said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:53 am

I’m at the end of the baby boom. When I retire many other people will be withdrawing. Unfortunately, when I retire it will likely be the original retirement age, not he raise retirement age that needn’t have been raised. I hear all the time that SS is in trouble but the fact is that it’s never actually gotten to the point of being in trouble. It’s always the future. Of course, this doesn’t mean it won’t be if we don’t continue working on it.

Fact of the matter is, it only seems to get into trouble when the far right talks about it (or libertarians). Too bad for them and unfortunately, me, if they continue to hold any power. I might see some of the money “back” when I retire but I’ll be relying mostly on other plans because the far right still has too much power to take that money away.

And remember, if Bush’s plan had gone into affect, SSN would really be in trouble currently because of the financial meltdown we’re under due to reversal of regulations by him, his buddies and other far rightists before.

You want things to work better and markets to do better, get liberals into office.

# 31 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:56 am

# 30 gmknobl said, “And remember, if Bush’s plan had gone into affect, SSN would really be in trouble”

Irrelevant. There is currently, ZERO money in the SS Trust fund. You can’t get “more in trouble” than that…

# 32 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:57 am

#25 – Unk

>>Still don’t get it, eh?
>>You are not getting “money back.” The money
>>you put in went to others. You are taking
>>money from current workers.

I don’t get it either. Is that a problem? If I put $1000 in the bank last week and take it out today, I’m not getting “money back”; they gave my money to someone else, and I’m getting yet another person’s money “back”.

# 33 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:00 am

#32 Well said.

# 34 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:01 am

31,

Not true. The SS fund is stuffed with IOU’s and T-bills.

# 35 OvenMaster said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:02 am

15 minutes online? 45 minutes in person? WTF is the delay? When my dad applied on the phone ten years ago it took less than ten!

# 36 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:03 am

# 34 Named said, “Not true. The SS fund is stuffed with IOU’s and T-bills.”

LOL!

Like I said, no money in there.

# 37 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:08 am

35,

Simple. They don’t want you to apply. In fact, it would be great if you died WHILE waiting.

# 38 moondawg said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:39 am

#29 nolimit…..

So, if, by the time you’ve worked your 40 years and Uncle Sam has a full 15% (7.5 from you, 7.5 from your employer) of the money you made in that 40 years, if you get a dollar back, will that be enough? I mean, you’re getting SOMETHING for the stuff you put in.

$2? $4?

Sorry, this all goes back to my belief that the government should’t be in the business of propping up individuals (or businesses, for that matter.) If individuals want to prop up other individuals, fine. GREAT, even.

Someone said above that the purpose of “having a society” is for the benefit of its members. Fine, but it should be handled directly by its members, and not wholesaled, raped, etc by the government.

# 39 Mr Diesel said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:45 am

Uncle Dave – How’s this? I won’t say a word if they will just return every dime to me today that I and my employers have put into the system.

You don’t have a choice now and we didn’t have one when we started working except maybe to not work (and draw from the government) or move to someplace where you do have a real choice.

# 40 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:54 am

38,

The government IS the people. You’ve let that get away from you. Now, the government is for itself. You can take it back though. But it requires a lot of work on the part of the American people. And the couch is so very comfy…

# 41 bill said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:01 am

RIPOFF! PONZI SCHEME!

# 42 Ron Larson said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:06 am

Despite all the problems we have with SS in the US, it is a lot better than the pension systems in place in most of the first world.

The coolest feature of our SS system is that it has (a) capped contributions and (b) distributions are not means tested, unlike most other systems.

On the contribution side: Earned income after $85k (It might be higher now) a year is not subjected to SS tax. So you are not penalized for being successful. Other countries have a progressive SS tax, meaning the more you make, the larger amount they take of your earnings.

On the distribution side, once you reach full retirement age, distributions are not means tested. If get your money no matter how much you have or earn. In most countries distributions are means tested. If you are successful in saving for your own retirement, then you don’t get squat from the pension system. It is a double insult because you also paid more in to it too.

A third point is that most first world countries are facing serious shortfalls with their pension systems. The US system is far healthier than the systems of European nations and Japan. It still has excess funding and the US has a large enough younger population to maintain the system. The other systems have to pay all distributions from current tax revenue, and they face declining populations of workers making contributions. So the burden on each worker there is much higher than the burden on US workers.

Mr. Mustard is right on about the fact that there is already a highly functional private retirement system in place. It is called IRA’s. You can open one today. You can invest in all sorts of places, even in real estate. There was no need for Wall Street to invent a whole new system for privatized SS investments. The idea was nothing but a naked money grab of greed from bankers hoping to rake in huge management fees.

Chile did the privatized SS system. Citizens there starting loosing their shirts as the banks convinced them to move their funds here, there, and everywhere, each time taking a nice commission. It hasn’t worked out so well since too many people are conned into unwise investment strategies.

The last point that many people forget is that SS is not just about retirement. A large chunk of the distributions go to people on disability. That tax you pay is also an insurance premium that will help support you if you become disabled. That is why is it called “Social Security” and not “The Public Pension” as it is often called in other nations.

# 43 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:22 am

#38 – Moonie

>>Sorry, this all goes back to my belief that
>>the government should’t be in the business of
>>propping up individuals

What, then. Let them die, frozen and starved, on the streets of our cities and towns? Put them on welfare? Hope that they all have wealthy children with the means and willingness to support them?

There’s no “propping up” going on here. People pay into SS all their lives, and to the extent that they have paid in, they “get back” (with apologies to Uncle Dave). If you never work, you get nothing. If you (and your employer) contribute to the max every year, you get the max back (skimpy as that may be).

>>Fine, but it should be handled directly by
>>its members, and not wholesaled, raped, etc
>>by the government.

Agreed. And maybe SS is not the most perfect system that could ever have been designed with the benefits of 20:20 hindsight. It’s a fuck of a lot better than handing over folks’ retirement futures to Wall Street predators, though. If you want to talk about wholesaling, raping, etc., just imagine THAT scenario.

# 44 sargasso said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:36 am

Actually, if you’re a French nurse in a Paris state run hospital, you can retire with a generous pension, free lifetime medical care, free public transport and subsidized accommodation for life, when you reach 38 years old.

# 45 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:39 am

Just make participation voluntary. Problem solved.

# 46 Ranger007 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:03 am

#45 Paddy-O said

“Just make participation voluntary. Problem solved.”

It’s a tax. Cuss and discuss all you want, it’s still a tax.

# 47 MikeN said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:09 am

>Maybe if congress hadn’t been stealing the $ for the last 40 years…

It would have made no difference, except the national debt would be lower now. The government would still be facing funding shortfalls in a decade, and the surplus has already started shrinking, meaning the regular budget deficit gets worse every year. On the other hand, if you are saying they would actually take this money and put it in a lockbox…

# 48 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:16 am

45,

I’ll take a bet that you’ll find something else to make you unhappy…

# 49 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:17 am

# 46 Ranger007 said, “It’s a tax. Cuss and discuss all you want, it’s still a tax.”

And, thus it will always be screwed up. Hence, my solution.

# 50 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:24 am

I was looking forward to reading this thread, but even with a caution, Paddy-Zero’s buffoonery takes away all the joy.

I think I’ll close one eye and see if there are any links worth visiting.

Paddy-Zero=a fail of the Touring Test.

# 51 Ranger007 said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:27 am

# 49 Paddy-O said,

“And, thus it will always be screwed up.”

Can’t disagree with that.

# 52 Cap'nKangaroo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:39 am

I believe I have a better chance of hitting a big lottery payout than I do of receiving full Social Security benefits when I retire in 20-25 years.

# 53 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:39 am

Nope. Not a single link to fill-out the original post.

SS is a social program partially funded by participants amounting to a huge ponzi scheme. Its mismanaged just like every other freaking thing our Congress does.

VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE.

# 54 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:40 am

#44 – Sargasso

>>Actually, if you’re a French nurse ..you can
>>retire… when reach 38 years old.

Bunk.

The minimum age for retirement is 60, and the minimum years of contribution to the fund is 40 years. Some workers (not nurses) may be beneficiaries of the régimes spéciaux de retraite, with guidelines that are a little more liberal, but it’s still 40 years of contributing, and retirement age of 55 – 60.

On the other hand, France is rated #1 in providing the best overall health care; the UK is #18, and the USA is #37.

# 55 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:52 am

54,
VIVE LA FRANCE!

In fact, Americans love France so much they are becoming more like them every day… One day you might have health care too!

http://time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1843168,00.html

# 56 TheMadTurtle said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:03 pm

Unless you’re getting ready to retire soon (say, next 5 years or so), you would be a fool to be planning on having a Social Security check when you retire. Even if you are retiring soon, I wouldn’t count on continuing to receive a check indefinitely, if I were you.

You can be as pissed off about it as you want. In the end, it won’t make any difference. The money won’t be there. Go ahead and get pissed off about it now. Maybe you’ll give yourself a coronary and your spouse will get a nice fat check for all the Social Security you’ve ‘paid into the system’…yeah, right.

# 57 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:11 pm

#55 – named

>>One day you might have health care too!

We can only help. Even though we’ve become more french than the French in many regards, it’s usually to benefit the trust fund babies at the expense of the rest of us.

Permitting universal health care is too plebian to be of any interest to the TFBs. They already have adequate health care. They can NEVER have too much money, though.

That’s why the French are happy with France, and we’re miserable.

Let’s hope we can reverse that over the next 8 years.

# 58 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:16 pm

57,

What I find so uniquely American is the PRIDE in not having health care. The sheer joy of knowing that you basically need a lawyer to get a claim filled, and as soon as you make a claim you’ll likely be dropped as “high risk”. And, top it off, if you’re employer likes to touch you inappropriately, you weigh harassment against health insurance value. Because, you know, any other type of system is communism!

So very strange…

# 59 moondawg said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:36 pm

MisterMustard:

“What, then. Let them die, frozen and starved, on the streets of our cities and towns?”

If that’s what the citizens of those cities and towns deem appropriate, then yes.

“Put them on welfare?”

No, that would be people propped up by the government.

“Hope that they all have wealthy children with the means and willingness to support them?”

It’s better than hoping the government will support them.

# 60 Named said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:49 pm

59,

Ah yes… Society as a savage jungle. Very post-modern. You must hate having all those public services and civil, judicial and, dare I say, human rights…

# 61 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 12:51 pm

#59 – Moonie

>>If that’s what the citizens of those cities
>>and towns deem appropriate, then yes.

Nice. I guess you’re not elderly, disabled, or one of the folks whose job has been outsourced to Moom-bai.

>>It’s better than hoping the government will support them.

I guess we should be building our own roads and schools, and burying rifles and canned tuna in the back yard for when the furriners invade us, eh?

>>It’s better than hoping the government will
>>support them.

Why’s that? It’s the government’s job to do that. It’s not the job of children, who often have trouble making ends meet themselves, to care for aging parents who live 2000 miles away.

# 62 gadgetenvy said, on January 8th, 2009 at 1:00 pm

My husband and I arn’t planning for SS to be there for us. Even if it survives until we retire we are considering not drawing on it. We are savers and both have retirement funds. The economy has dented them currently but there is time for them to grow back.
Our parents all drew or are drawing on SS now and we feel that is our benefit from paying in.
-Carrie

# 63 ECA said, on January 8th, 2009 at 1:19 pm

Im going to ask a strange question here…
HOW in the world are 1/4 to 1/3 of this nation going to retire, over a 10 year period??
http://kclibrary.lonestar.edu/decade40.html
Population in 1940 was 133million.
population in 1950 was 155million.

This number is saying that OVER 1/2 those BORN SURVIVED..

# 64 Sea Lawyer said, on January 8th, 2009 at 1:55 pm

“It’s the government’s job to do that.”

The government’s “job” is to provide the means to prevent your rights from being infringed upon by ol’ moondawg over there. Not to grant you artificial ones at the expense of his.

You know, “if men were angels…” or something like that.

# 65 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:05 pm

#64 – LiLo

>>The government’s “job” is to provide the
>>means to prevent your rights from being
>>infringed upon by ol’ moondawg over there.

What, for pussies who can’t protect themselves? I’da thunk a guy with so many rifles and cans of tuna buried in the yard would be capable of protecting himself against an army of moodawgs!

And no schools, no highways, no military, no police, private elections? Sheesh.

What’s your perfect society? You playing Mad Max Rockatansky somewhere out beyond Thunderome?

I’ll take my chances with moondawg; I want the government to do things for me and my fellow citizens that we can’t reasonably be expected to do for ourselves.

Just like they’re supposed to.

# 66 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:11 pm

# 65 Mister Mustard said, “I want the government to do things for me and my fellow citizens that we can’t reasonably be expected to do for ourselves. ”

Translation:

I want the gov’t to steal money from my neighbors wallet and give it to me because I don’t want to get shot doing it myself.

Fixed

# 67 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:17 pm

#66 – Paddy-RAMBO

Do your comments EVER make any sense, Paddy-RAMBO? I haven’t seen a sensible thing come out of your keyboard in a dog’s age.

Nobody’s “stealing money from my neighbor’s wallet” with SS. It’s coming out of my own wallet, and when I retire, going back into my own wallet.

Splash some cold water on your face, will you?

Or if you’re suggesting that the government should not be involved in military and police protection, building key infrastructure like highways, providing public education, etc., well. WTF. You might consider moving to Somalia or somewhere, and make that dream come true.

# 68 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:21 pm

# 67 Mister Mustard said, “Nobody’s “stealing money from my neighbor’s wallet””

Sure they are.

1: It isn’t a voluntary program. If you don’t pay you WILL go to jail.

2: If you draw more than you put in you, are using others money.

Pretty simple, even for you.

# 69 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:25 pm

#62 – Gadgetenvy

>>Our parents all drew or are drawing on SS
>>now and we feel that is our benefit from
>>paying in.

That makes no sense. The parents payed in, the parent drew out. You pay in, but you’re not going to draw out?

I’d be as likely to give away my 401(k) or investment accounts as pass up money that I have put in.

I’m a saver too, and I have a retirement fund, but wtf? If I never avail myself of the retirement funds (including SS) after retiring, what’s the point of having them in the first place?

# 70 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:27 pm

Paddy-Zero and other repuglican f&cktards–does society “owe” anything to its citizenry as a result of a majority vote in congress to provide certain services, or is it the minority wealthiest few who have rigged all the regulations to make and keep them wealthy that deserve all the benefits of a free society?

# 71 Paddy-O said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

# 70 bobbo said, “society “owe” anything to its citizenry as a result of a majority vote in congress to provide certain services”

Do you mean should the majority be able to, via the legislature, order the forcible theft of private property and money from an opposed minority without recompense?

No.

# 72 LibertyLover said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:32 pm

#61,

>>It’s better than hoping the government will
>>support them.

Why’s that? It’s the government’s job to do that.

Show me in the Constitution where it says that.

I want the government to do things for me and my fellow citizens that we can’t reasonably be expected to do for ourselves.

What a whiner. Instead of assuming people can’t do for themselves, why not make them do for themselves? Bill Clinton did in the 90s and the average wage went up. He cut the welfare roles by 50%!

Here is where we are headed with all of this government help

To All My Valued Employees,

There have been some rumblings around the office about the future of this company, and more specifically, your job. As you know, the economy has changed for the worse and presents many challenges. However, the good news is this:

The economy doesn’t pose a threat to your job. What does threaten your job however, is the changing political landscape in this country. However, let me tell you some little tidbits of fact which might help you decide what is in your best interests.

First, while it is easy to spew rhetoric that casts employers against employees, you have to understand that for every business owner there is a back story. This back story is often neglected and overshadowed by what you see and hear. Sure, you see me park my Mercedes outside. You’ve seen my big home at last year’s Christmas party. I’m sure all these flashy icons of luxury conjure up some idealized thoughts about my life. However, what you don’t see is the back story.
I started this company 28 years ago. At that time, I lived in a 300 square foot studio apartment for 3 years. My entire living apartment was converted into an office so I could put forth 100% effort into building a company, which by the way, would eventually employ you.

My diet consisted of Ramen Pride noodles because every dollar I spent went back into this company. I drove a rusty Toyota Corolla with a defective transmission. I didn’t have time to date. Often times, I stayed home on weekends, while my friends went out drinking and partying. In fact, I was married to my business — hard work, discipline, and sacrifice.

Meanwhile, my friends got jobs. They worked 40 hours a week and made a modest $50K a year and spent every dime they earned. They drove flashy cars and lived in expensive homes and wore fancy designer clothes. Instead of hitting the Nordstrom’s for the latest hot fashion item, I was trolling through the discount store extracting any clothing item that didn’t look like it was birthed in the 70’s. My friends refinanced their mortgages and lived a life of luxury. I, however, did not. I put my time, my money, and my life into a business with a vision that eventually, some day, I too, would be able to afford these luxuries my friends supposedly had.
So, while you physically arrive at the office at 9am, mentally check in at about noon, and then leave at 5pm, I don’t. There is no “off” button for me. When you leave the office, you are done and you have a weekend all to yourself. I unfortunately do not have the freedom. I live, eat and breathe this company every minute of the day. There is no rest. There is no weekend. There is no happy hour. Every day this business is attached to my hip like a 1 year old special-needs child. You, of course, only see the fruits of those efforts—the nice house, the Mercedes, the vacations… you never realize the back story and the sacrifices I’ve made.

Now, the economy is falling apart and I, the guy that made all the right decisions and saved his money, have to bail-out all the people who didn’t. The people that overspent their paychecks suddenly feel entitled to the same luxuries that I earned and sacrificed a decade of my life for.

Yes, business ownership has its benefits, but the price I’ve paid is steep and not without wounds. Unfortunately, the cost of running this business, and employing you, is starting to eclipse the threshold of marginal benefit and let me tell you why:

I am being taxed to death and the government thinks I don’t pay enough. I have state taxes. Federal taxes. Property taxes. Sales and use taxes. Payroll taxes. Workers compensation taxes. Unemployment taxes. Taxes on taxes. I have to hire a tax man to manage all these taxes and then guess what? I have to pay taxes for employing him. Government mandates and regulations and all the accounting that goes with it, now occupy most of my time. On Oct 15th, I wrote a check to the US Treasury for $288,000 for quarterly taxes. You know what my “stimulus” check was? Zero. Nada. Zilch.

The question I have is this: Who is stimulating the economy? Me, the guy who has provided 14 people good paying jobs and serves over 2,200,000 people per year with a flourishing business? Or, the single mother sitting at home pregnant with her fourth child waiting for her next welfare check? Obviously, government feels the latter is the economic stimulus of this country.

The fact is, if I deducted (or stole) 50% of your paycheck you’d quit and you wouldn’t work here. I mean, why should you? That’s nuts. Who wants to get rewarded only 50% of their hard work? Well, I agree which is why your job is in jeopardy.

Here is what many of you don’t understand … to stimulate the economy you need to stimulate what runs the economy. Had suddenly government mandated to me that I didn’t need to pay taxes, guess what? Instead of depositing that $288,000 into the Washington black-hole, I would have spent it, hired more employees, and generated substantial economic growth. My employees would have enjoyed the wealth of that tax cut in the form of promotions and better salaries.

When you have a comatose man on the verge of death, you don’t defibrillate and shock his thumb thinking that will bring him back to life, do you? Or, do you defibrillate his heart? Business is at the heart of America and always has been. To restart it, you must stimulate it, not kill it. Suddenly, the power brokers in Washington believe the poor of America are the essential drivers of the American economic engine. Nothing could be further from the truth and this is the type of change you can keep.

So where am I going with all this? It’s quite simple. If any new taxes are levied on me, or my company, my reaction will be swift and simple.

I fire you. I fire your co-workers. You can then plead with the government to pay for your mortgage, your SUV, and your child’s future. Frankly, it isn’t my problem anymore. Then, I will close this company down, move to another country, and retire. You see, I’m done. I’m done with a country that penalizes the productive and gives to the unproductive. My motivation to work and to provide jobs will be destroyed, and with it, will be my citizenship.

So, if you lose your job, it won’t be at the hands of the economy; it will be at the hands of a political hurricane that swept through this country, steamrolled the constitution, and will have changed its landscape forever. If that happens, you can find me sitting on a beach, retired, and with no employees to worry about.

Signed,
Your boss

# 73 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:47 pm

#72 – LiLo

>>What a whiner. Instead of assuming people
>>can’t do for themselves, why not make them
>>do for themselves?

You mean like build interstate highways or create school programs? Are you daft?

If you’re talking about SS, they’re doing exactly what you want … DOING IT FOR THEMSELVES. They pay money in, they get money out.

People who try and portray SS as some kind of welfare-like entitlement program have their heads so far up their asses they won’t come out by the time they’re ready to retire.

EVERYONE agrees that saving for retirement is a good thing. Most people save money in 401(k) accounts or IRAs or stock investments. Shit happens, though. And money that was there yesterday might not be there today.

The only real issue at hand with the SS problem is should we allow the government (which may be bungling, but doesn’t have a vested interest in fucking the retiree) handle the safety net, or should we turn it over to somebody like Bernie Madoff, whose income goes UP in direct proportion to the amount of money he can skim off the top of your account? Or maybe create a paper scam like the real Bernie Madoff, and *poof*, all your money is gone?

It’s cold comfort if Bernie spends the rest of his life in jail, while you’re eating day-old bread and dumpster diving for clothes.

These chest-puffing blowhards with their “let ‘em dangle” solutions are so blind, it would be funny if they didn’t take themselves seriously.

The idea of having tens of millions of elderly and disabled sleeping on steam grates and rummaging through restaurant trash cans for dinner seems to appeal to them.

Pffft.

# 74 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 2:57 pm

#71–Paddy-Zero==typical rethug thinking. I got mine because I deserve it==the rest of you are on your own. Very short sighted and hard hearted to your own detriment. Premise for all kinds of “Twilight Zone” come-uppenances. You are even proud of it aren’t you? You and your whole party of robber barons.

#73–Mustard==SS is a welfare program. Any program that by design pays out more than it takes in is welfare. Simple truths should always be honored, otherwise you turn repuglican in your advocacy.

# 75 LibertyLover said, on January 8th, 2009 at 3:14 pm

#73, Poison,

You mean like build interstate highways

You mean like Big Dig, Highway to Nowhere, and the other four dozen federal government sponsored bribe bills?

No thanks, don’t need my money paying for those.

or create school programs?

Like these?

The assistant principal who had students and teachers build a king-size bed for him in shop class. And the football coach who secretly had students sell donated T-shirts. And the cafeteria boss who investigators say stole hundreds of dollars worth of dessert cobblers from her school.

Or these?
http://tinyurl.com/76ea92

The problem with publicly funded education is that they are a monopoly. They have no competition. Doesn’t the federal government break up monopolies? Why aren’t they breaking these up and putting some competition into them?

The Department of Education was established in 1979 by President Jimmy Carter to improve education in our country. The department’s budget then was $14.5 billion. Today, its budget has grown sixfold. Yet over the same period of time there has been virtually zero change, on average, in test scores.

# 76 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 3:15 pm

#70 – Bobo

>>SS is a welfare program. Any program that by
>>design pays out more than it takes in is
>>welfare.

You’re living up to your name, Bobo.

First of all, SS takes in more than it pays out. There are currently 3.3 workers paying into SS for every SS beneficiary. SS takes in more money every year than it pays out.

So, even by your home-made “definition”, SS is not welfare. At some point in the future, SS will begin paying out more than it takes in. Timing dependent upon whome you listen to. Unless the government raises taxes (not welfare then), lowers benefits (not welfare then), or comes up with some other strategy to increase the SS Trust Fund resources (still not welfare).

The second point is that your “definition” of “welfare” is absurd. According to that, virtually everything the government is “welfare”. The military, the police, highway construction, almost everything. Even by that definition, SS is less of a welfare program than just about anything else the government does; it currently takes in more than it pays out, and even when the tide shifts, it will be taking in SOMETHING. How much money do soldiers or policemen or teachers pay in to support their activities?

Sheesh. I know “everything is definitional”, but try to use some common sense, would you?

# 77 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 3:24 pm

#75 – LiLo

Ah, you’re wasting my time.

Sure there are criminals and scam artists involved in ANY endeavor where money changes hands. Would you like a list of non-goverment rascals who have scammed people out of their money. Bernie Madoff didn’t work for the government. The predatory bankers who wrapped their shady dealings in a shroud of mysterious collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps didn’t work for the government. The savings & loan guys who were supposed to cause the collaps of the US economy didn’t work for the government (although Sliverado Savings & Loan, one of the major culprits, WAS run by Dumbya’s brother)

As to competition of public schools, there’s plenty of that. Anyone who can afford $25,000/yr to send their kid to kindergarten can avail themselves of that competitor. Or, if they don’t want their kids to learn about natural selection, they can always home school.

What are you lobbying for, anyway? Anarchy? Each and every one of us on our own? Try Somalia. You’ll like it!

# 78 ECA said, on January 8th, 2009 at 3:25 pm

I still can not figure that over 1/2 those born in the 40’s-50’s, SURVIVED..
from the pollution, contaminations, 2 wars, accidents, killings, murders, accidents, floods, earthquakes, Jim Jones, Helter skelter, fast cars….
And to think that MOST of them are in congress and representatives, TRYING TO RUN OUR LIVES

# 79 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 3:33 pm

Musty–cash accounting is for street beggars and ponzi scheme operators. Real business uses the accrual basis of accounting==matching revenue with obligations.

We all know the story of the first recipient of SS. Lady made one payment into SS, retired, and collected for umpty-ump years.

The system is designed for the great majority of people to pay into SS and draw out much more than they put in.

On an accrual basis, the fund is Bankrupt today. On the Ponzi Scheme Basis of cash or current receipts vs current liabilities SS is making its own way while the accrual hole beneath the whole house of cards gets bigger, deeper, and closer to the surface.

Welfare: 2 a: aid in the form of money or necessities for those in need. /// The fact that some/most recipients pay into it doesn’t make it an investment vehicle now does it?

# 80 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:07 pm

#79 – Bobo

>>cash accounting is for street beggars and
>>ponzi scheme operators. Real business uses
>>the accrual basis of accounting

Well gosh, Bobo. Maybe I’m just a poor old country boy, but when my lemonade stand is bringing in more than I’m spending, that’s a good thing. Kinda hard to Ponzify that accounting.

Your accrual basis of accounting seems promising, but gosh, aren’t there a lot of smoke and mirrors involved? Aren’t assumptionss made, that may or may not be accurate? Doesn’t it allow for the kind of indigestible financial hocus pocus that lead to CDOs, credit default swaps, and other stuff nobody can understand, and which are leading to the collapse of the US financial market?

I think I’ll stick with the lemonade stand for now. And even folks who do your fancy-dan accrual accounting agree that the SS Trust Fund is going to be heading further into the black for at least another decade.

>>The system is designed for the great
>>majority of people to pay into SS and draw
>>out much more than they put in.

It was designed that way? Well gawrsh! Doesn’t sound like Bismarck and Roosevelt were very smart fellas! And I’d like to see your evidence that people have been taking out far more than they paid in.

You’re not going to pull a ‘tempt on me now, are ya?

>>Welfare: 2 ///

Could you have someone who speaks English as a native language re-phrase that, please? Between your punctuation and your twisted syntax (in the second part), I’m afraid I have no idea wtf you’re trying to say.

# 81 Zirbert said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:13 pm

This is in response to Unlce Dave’s silly notes before and after the article

Most people undertand that they aren’t getting “their own” money back from SS. However, this insinuation that they’re selfishly taking money from other people is more than a little disingenuous.

First of all, your contributions are non-voluntary.

Second, here’s the best analogy I can think of for your implication that conservatives should refuse to accept SS payments:

You’re in a bar for a while. You’ve purchased several rounds for the group. Then, someone else announces they’ll pick up the next round. Should you refuse to partake on the grounds that you’re not paying for that round, even though you’ve already paid for several rounds for everyone else?

-Zirbert
http://zirbert.blogspot.com

# 82 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:20 pm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_debate_(United_States)

# 83 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:26 pm

#81–Zirbert==you say: “However, this insinuation that they’re selfishly taking money from other people is more than a little disingenuous.” //// If you pay in X dollars and take out X+Y dollars, its a matter of characterization and bigoted class warfare politics to call in “selfish” just as it is equally self centered to call it “earned.” I think using the term disingenuous doesn’t fit either sides valid position.

# 84 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:34 pm

#82 – Bobbo

WordPress fucked up your link again. I think dvorak dot org slash blog should go back to the previous version, just as many discrimintating computer users choose to go back to XP after having sampled Vista.

From the link, however, I note that

*Payroll taxes will only cover 78% of the scheduled payout amounts after 2041. This declines to 75% by 2081.”

Yep, in 72 years, that’s going to be a welfare program alrighty. We better start a discussion of reforming Social Security. Oh, wait. We already ARE having that discussion, and have been doing so for years. Now that Dumbya’s stupid “privatization” plan has been tossed in the dump, maybe we can have an intelligent discussion about what to do.

# 85 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Mustard–the link works for me. Looks like we need multiple browsers to get all the benefits from DU.

Simple Math: Why does the SS Trust Fund go bankrupt even by your definition in 72 years? Because people are drawing out more money than they put in.==ie, welfare.

In accrual accounting–if you matchup your assets to your liabilities and see that you will be dead flat broke in 72 years, by definition, you are bankrupt. Note: “an act of Bankruptcy” has not been committed which is what many people actually think of.

Still, it was fun to read some of the SS sites out there. Confusing to me how they continuously shift between treating the SS Trust Fund as an asset or a liability. Peoples’ eyes glaze over at that sort of thing==all as designed by congress.

VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE.

# 86 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 5:08 pm

#85 – Bobbo

>>The link works fine for me

I don’t see how that can be. The “(United_States)” part of the link is not highlighted in Firefox, Chrome, or IE. If you cut and paste it, it works, but that kind of defeats the whole purpose of hyperlinking, doesn’t it?

>>Because people are drawing out more money
>>than they put in.==ie, welfare.

No no, Bobbo. For simple math, you seem to be having great difficulty with it. People right now (and since its inception) pay more IN than they take out. As to what will happen in 72 years, I readily grant that will become a “welfare” situation. That damned Roosevelt didn’t predict WWII and the ensuing heteroerotic love fest that followed, so he could not no that the number of people retiring and living long, combined with the later availability of birth control and absence of heteroerotic love fests, would swamp the system.

That’s why the country needs to have an intelligent discussion about what to do.

>>In accrual accounting

Yes, even though I much prefer my lemonade-style accounting practices, I’m well aware of what is done in accrual accounting. And it involves predictions, prognistications, and the ability to tell the future. That didn’t work out too well for Roosevelt now, did it? It seems a little pointless to say something is “bankrupt” right now, when there’s actually over $2,000,000,000.00 in it. And how about if we do the reverse, and I predict that I’m filthy rich right now, based on imagined raises, good budgeting, no catastrophic health issues, etc. Are you going to give me a loan based on me being “wealthy” right now, even though my checking account is overdrawn? Hmmm?

>>VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT OF OFFICE.

And replace them with whom? Have you anyone in mind? Anyone got a great solution to the SS crisis that is being ignored by the liberal-biased drive-by media?

Or is your solution to throw the baby out with the bathwater, hoping against hope that some straggler orphans you pick up on the street corner will be better than the babies you just threw out?

# 87 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 5:23 pm

Mustard–re the 2Billion–theres no there there. The lock box was raided and the contributions/assets were spent by Congress and replaced by IOU’s. In my accounting, these IOU’s are worth only the full faith and credit of the USA–ie, under Dumbya and the Trillions to Be misspent to avoid a worse depression: not much.

I looked at my own lifetime contributions to SS a few years ago, and caluculated my estimated pay out based on mere charted life expectancy and found I would be getting back 3 times what I paid in. My retirement is based on that comfortable bit of welfare. I don’t think my benefits will get cut except by the operation of inflation that I fully expect to experience.

Lets look at it this way Mustard: Why would a big pile of money called the SSTrust Fund not be stolen and mismanaged by Congress?

You are right that most “newbies” to Congress would do a very bad job. STill would be head and shoulders above the experienced con job we face everyday now.

# 88 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 5:49 pm

#87 – Bobbo

>>In my accounting, these IOU’s are worth only
>>the full faith and credit of the USA.

Well gosh. If you really think the USA is going to default on its debt obligations, I don’t know what to say. I imagine that will come as quite a nasty shock to holders of treasuries, savings bonds, people who work for the government, not to mention China. They’re going to be pissed!!

And according to your calculations, my bank is bankrupt. If every account holder lined up at the teller window today and demanded cash money for their entire deposit, I’m afraid the bank would be SOL. All they’ve got a IOUs and ephemeral promissory notes, and probably enough cash on hand to get them through a normal day with a little stashed in the vault as a safety measure.

>>I looked at my own lifetime contributions to
>>SS a few years ago .. and found I would be
>>getting back 3 times what I paid in.

Hm. Interesting. I came up with somewhat different results. I have been maxing out the SS deduction for over 20 years, and (given the puny $SS maximum monthly payout) I’m going to live to a ripe old age to do that. And if you include the matching funds my employers have contributed, fageddaboudit.

>>STill would be head and shoulders above the
>>experienced con job we face everyday now.

Or so you’d like to think. There you go again, with that accrual-based accounting. People who are inclined to be dishonest are usually well experienced in that art. What they will NOT know how to do is perform the tasks that are expected of them.

# 89 Uncle Dave said, on January 8th, 2009 at 5:51 pm

#81: They are silly because based on some of the comments, there are a number of people who don’t know.

# 90 amodedoma said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:47 pm

Very amusing. I imagine when Social Security began they planned it out as carefully as they could. Of course once established politicians have abused it over and over again. First by expanding social services to gain votes and second by not securing it’s funding properly also to gain votes by not raising taxes. I imagine alot of people would agree with some of you. If you’re hard working and successful, why should you pay to help the less fortunate members of society. Lot’s of people that were successful and had excellent retirement plans last year are destitute this year through no fault of their own. If you’re lucky you can be smug and think it’s all thanks to you, or you can remember how lucky you are to be part of something bigger. If you can’t trust financial institutions for your retirement who can you trust?

# 91 amodedoma said, on January 8th, 2009 at 6:49 pm

I plan on living off my children.

# 92 LibertyLover said, on January 8th, 2009 at 7:51 pm

#75,
Poison,
Sure there are criminals and scam artists involved in ANY endeavor where money changes hands.

There sure are but they don’t have a military to come in and put a gun to your head when you fail to pay.

If a company stops paying their social security taxes to the gov, guess what happens? They get raided by paramilitary police and everybody goes to jail.

As to competition of public schools, there’s plenty of that. Anyone who can afford $25,000/yr to send their kid to kindergarten can avail themselves of that competitor.

Ah, but you miss the point. If people had MORE MONEY in the pockets, they wouldn’t need to pay for private AND public education. By taking their money, you are effectively condemning them to using the public school system — unless they are rich.

Asking someone to pay for a public education system and saying, “if you don’t like it, pay for a private school” is like shooting someone and saying, “if you don’t like it, stop bleeding.”

re: anarchy

I have a question for you — How is it that Americans who lived hard scrabble lives 150 years ago could read, write, do math problems and quote at length from Shakespeare and the Bible, while today, in spite of “Sesame Street,” pre-school, Operation Head Start, computers and mind-numbing hours of homework, millions of youngsters entering college can do none of those things? It seems obvious to me that our education system, which costs us billions and billions of dollars, is a wreck.

Why is that?

I have no problem with locally controlled school districts. I have a problem with the federal government putting their noses in my local district because they seem to think they know better. What the hell does some bureaucrat in Washington D.C. know about how my school is run? They don’t.

Do you know how much money is spent on administrative costs to pass money from DC to the local level? 25%. Is that efficient? And do you think it is the “poor” districts getting the money? Hell, no. It is the rich ones because they can afford to pay their congressmen/senators more money to pork the money over.

# 93 bobbo said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:09 pm

Literacy Rate 1870 = 88%

1979 = 99%

http://social.jrank.org/pages/1024/How-Educated-are-We-Data-Presentation.html

I’m sure other websites will give different numbers all with the same result.

Looks like the only literacy you should concern yourself with is your own.

# 94 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 8:13 pm

#92 – LiLo

>>They get raided by paramilitary police and
>>everybody goes to jail.

Oh poo. If you really think that way, no wonder you’re so scared of the government. Your statement is similar to saying “if you don’t put a quarter in the parking meeter, a paramilitary force takes you to jail”. Pffft.

According to 26 U.S.C. § 7202, those who knowingly fail to pay FICA or excise taxes are subject to a maximum $10,000 fine and/or no more than 5 years in jail. More likely, they’re subject to public embarassment, like Bernie Kerik, who withdrew from consideration as Dumbya’s head of Homeland Security when he was busted for not paying his illegal immigrant nanny’s Social Security taxes. Maybe if he had made an armed stand, the paramilitary forces might have been called in.

>>Ah, but you miss the point. If people had MORE
>>MONEY in the pockets, they wouldn’t need to pay
>>for private AND public education.

I doubt if there are many middle-class people for whom the taxes they pay make the difference between $25,000/yr private schools or kindegarten in el barrio. To assert that reducing taxes would allow people to pay out of their own pocket for government-provided services is absurd.

>>I have a problem with the federal government
>>putting their noses in my local district because
>>they seem to think they know better.

Me too. They should ensure that basic elements of education are included in the requirements for graduation (like learning in science class that Adam and Eve didn’t ride around on dinosaurs, and the earth is not 6000 years old), and then butt out.

>>I have a question for you —

I don’t have the answer to that question. I agree that our educational system seems to be going to heck in a handbasket. I don’t see any difference between private and public schools in that regard, and I’m not sure that financially starving public schools is going to fix that problem.

And of course the rich districts get all the money. Them that’s got shall get, them that’s not shall lose, so the Bible says, but it still is news…

So. How much would YOU like to pay in taxes? 0? Half of what you do now? Thirty-three and a third percent?

# 95 ECA said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:21 pm

LETS DO SOME NUMBERS..
1/3 of the USA does not ADD to the SS funds.
They have PRIVATE securities as retirement.
Those private securities, are worth NOTHING NOW, with all the buy outs..
GUESS WHO gets to pay?

80million due for retirement?? PROVE IT. SHOW me that 1/2 the population from 1950 are still alive.

Population from 1950-2008 HASNT doubled??
Strange.

congress OWES SS 60-80 trillion dollars in BORROWING money for the general fund.

Those in our congress and reps have GREAT WAGES..so to MANY of the BIG MUCKS, such as the head of Veterans affairs.. TIMe for a WAGE CUT from the TOP..

Wage from Reps and congress in the 50’s was about 10 times the MIN WAGE.. MAYBE we should go BACK abit.

Cutting OFF workers from Mexico and S. america?? WHY? BRINg them in..TAX them. Without citizien ship they DONT GET ANYTHING…

# 96 BigBoyBC said, on January 8th, 2009 at 9:49 pm

I’m using Vista with IE and Bobbo’s link works just fine.

Perhaps the problem that some of you are having with the link, Vista or IE, is a very common problem that resides between the keyboard and the chair.

# 97 Mister Mustard said, on January 8th, 2009 at 10:45 pm

#96 – Little One

>>I’m using Vista with IE and Bobbo’s
>>link works just fine.

The URL works just fine. The LINK does not work fine (you know, what happens when you click on the little words?)

It does not work using Vista Firefox/ IE/ Chrome, it does not work with XP Firefox/ IE/ Chrome, and it does not work with OS X Firefox/ Safari.

I’d say that means it doesn’t work.

Schmuck.

# 98 Someone said, on January 8th, 2009 at 11:05 pm

“Bismark introducted SS”. No, actually Herr Hitler introduced the SS.

# 99 BigBoyBC said, on January 9th, 2009 at 5:51 am

Mustard, the “LINK” in post #82 does work, I click on the “little words”, and I go right to the correct site.

Bobbo says it works for him, I’ve said it works for me. Just checked it again by clicking on the “little words”.

The proper conclusion is that problem has to be something at your end.

You sanctimonious putz!

# 100 LibertyLover said, on January 9th, 2009 at 5:56 am

94, Poison

>>They get raided by paramilitary police and
>>everybody goes to jail.

That’s BS and you know it.

According to 26 U.S.C. § 7202, those who knowingly fail to pay FICA or excise taxes are subject to a maximum $10,000 fine and/or no more than 5 years in jail.

What if you decide not to show up at court? What if you decide not to pay the fine?

This system you refer to assumes voluntary compliance and that you walk peacefully into their courtroom. If you don’t cooperate, they will send in the troops.

I doubt if there are many middle-class people for whom the taxes they pay make the difference between $25,000/yr private schools or kindegarten in el barrio.

I doubt it, too. However, there are plenty of private schools that charge much less. And if there was an incentive for parents to do it (like there NOT being a monopolistic state-run school), then cheaper private schools would pop up.

>>I have a problem with the federal government
>>putting their noses in my local district because
>>they seem to think they know better.

Me too. They should ensure that basic elements of education are included in the requirements for graduation.

That’s not the fed gov’s job.That’s not the fed gov’s job.That’s not the fed gov’s job.That’s not the fed gov’s job.That’s not the fed gov’s job.That’s not the fed gov’s job.

>>I have a question for you —

And of course the rich districts get all the money. Them that’s got shall get, them that’s not shall lose, so the Bible says, but it still is news…

Then why feed the beast?!?!?!?

Continuing a program because the free market version MIGHT not work is asinine. The free market version MIGHT work and probably will as they are thriving now in spite of the looting. Why not make that system available to everyone instead of just the “rich”?

So. How much would YOU like to pay in taxes? 0? Half of what you do now? Thirty-three and a third percent?

I will assume you are referring to income taxes:
I would like to pay $0. The federal gov has no business taxing CA to fund schools in upstate ME. As a business owner, I would also like to see the tax rate drop substantially — like to 0%.

A sales tax on everything – a consumption tax – is the only fair way to raise money. Everything else is a sound bite on the evening news.

# 101 Paddy-O said, on January 9th, 2009 at 6:07 am

# 89 Uncle Dave said, “#81: They are silly because based on some of the comments, there are a number of people who don’t know.”

No, they are silly because they only “make sense” to the drug addled.

# 102 Mister Mustard said, on January 9th, 2009 at 6:40 am

#100 – LiLo

>>This system you refer to assumes voluntary
>>compliance and that you walk peacefully into
>>their courtroom. If you don’t cooperate,
>>they will send in the troops.

The same goes for any law, not just taxes. I don’t see your point – is it that the armed paramilitary forces (police) should not exist?

>>And if there was an incentive for parents to
>>do it (like there NOT being a monopolistic
>>state-run school), then cheaper private
>>schools would pop up.

So you think all schools should be private schools? No community infrastructure at all?

>>The free market version MIGHT work and
>>probably will as they are thriving now in
>>spite of the looting.

Yep, the “free market” has worked out pretty well on Wall St., in the banking industry, and in Detroit, eh? We should try it with the schools to. If we’re lucky, we’d get a nation full of FLDS “individualists”.

>>A sales tax on everything – a consumption
>>tax – is the only fair way to raise money.

Well, I wouldn’t argue against that. But who’s going to collect it and spend it?

# 103 Named said, on January 9th, 2009 at 6:47 am

98.

Really?

http://ssa.gov/history/ottob.html

Germany became the first nation in the world to adopt an old-age social insurance program in 1889, designed by Germany’s Chancellor, Otto von Bismarck. The idea was first put forward, at Bismarck’s behest, in 1881 by Germany’s Emperor, William the First, in a ground-breaking letter to the German Parliament. William wrote: “. . .those who are disabled from work by age and invalidity have a well-grounded claim to care from the state.”

I hope the facts didn’t get in the way of your belief though…

# 104 Mr. Fusion said, on January 9th, 2009 at 8:34 am

#92, Loser,

How is it that Americans who lived hard scrabble lives 150 years ago could read, write, do math problems and quote at length from Shakespeare and the Bible, while today, in spite of “Sesame Street,” pre-school, Operation Head Start, computers and mind-numbing hours of homework, millions of youngsters entering college can do none of those things?

To ask that question is akin to asking why if they could move people across the continent in 1850 using only oxen and wagons, they can’t do that today.

Sesame Street and Head Start is geared to very young children. 150 years ago it would have been rare to find 6 yr/o to quote Shakespeare and the bible as well as do math problems. Many more are capable of writing though.

As for college entrance, schools are teaching much more relevant information. A student graduating high school today know much more than a similar student 150 years ago. Most of the technical subjects taught today in basic gr. 9 were engineering courses then. What has been dropped, at the insistence of business, are the “liberal arts”, which include Shakespeare and the bible.

Because very few children attended advanced schooling 150 years ago, most of them could not quote Shakespeare or the bible at length. Farmers did not need to know their Latin and laborers did not need to know their Greek.

But then facts never seem to impress those so hell bent on their agenda they confuse the trees with the maples, ash, and elms.

# 105 Mr. Fusion said, on January 9th, 2009 at 8:43 am

To all the idiots out there.

WE are the government. This saying they don’t do what we, the people want, is bullshit. We just recently had an election and those who had not listened to WE, the people, were voted out.

WE, the people, want Social Security. No, it is not a scam. No, your money is not being stolen. No, the money has not bee stolen by Congress. No, we are not some anarchist society where those with the biggest and most guns rules. No the government is not a business, is not run like a business, or is owned like a business.

If the simple rules of a democratic society don’t appeal to you, you could always move to some other anarchist society such as Somalia.

# 106 LibertyLover said, on January 9th, 2009 at 11:21 am

#102,

Poison,

>>This system you refer to assumes voluntary
>>compliance and that you walk peacefully into
>>their courtroom. If you don’t cooperate,
>>they will send in the troops.

The same goes for any law, not just taxes. I don’t see your point – is it that the armed paramilitary forces (police) should not exist?

The point is, is that if the government says, “give me money” and you don’t, not a fine, not for violating someone else’s rights, but simply because they want it to spread it around, they will get physical if you refuse to play by their rules. What is the difference between a “protection racket” and the government social services?

>>And if there was an incentive for parents to
>>do it (like there NOT being a monopolistic
>>state-run school), then cheaper private
>>schools would pop up.

So you think all schools should be private schools? No community infrastructure at all?

Not necessarily. However, if a parent wants to send their child to private school, they should not have to pay the portion of taxes demanded by the government to support the public system. And the federal gov should not be involved at all.

That is not the free market. That is government sponsored capitalism.

Capitalism is defined as an economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development is proportionate to the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market. (i.e., using a Free Market to make free money via interest).

Also: Capitalism is a social system based on the principle of individual rights.

Note the individual rights? When you take money from people you are violating their rights.

>>A sales tax on everything – a consumption
>>tax – is the only fair way to raise money.

Well, I wouldn’t argue against that. But who’s going to collect it and spend it?

Collect: A substantially reduced IRS.
Spend: Who spends it now? At least with the corruption, everybody is corrupted equally.

# 107 LibertyLover said, on January 9th, 2009 at 11:23 am

#105, See the letter in #72.

# 108 Mister Mustard said, on January 10th, 2009 at 1:16 pm

#107 – LibLos

>>105, See the letter in #72.

Yeah man, I saw that letter on gunbroker.com too!

http://forums.gunbroker.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=345195

I hope your all stocked up with rifles and canned tuna. Those are going to come in darned handy when The Government attacks!!

# 109 bobbo said, on January 10th, 2009 at 1:37 pm

#103–named==If you assume other people are as intelligent as yourself, why would someone post an obvious error? Surely, every obviously wrong post is either made by a party hack with blinders on, a religious nutbag with blinders on, or they are making a funny. Run this approach by Post #98 and you’ll see he made a funny about the Schutzstaffel or the Protective Service for Adolf Hitler.

#105–Fusion. The USA has a Republican Representative form of government. We the people are at least one step removed from the Direct Democracy form of government you reference. I assume you just weren’t thinking for a moment.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!