When will our generation(s?) wake up and get rid of SS already?

kinggovernor · 08-21-2006, 06:25 PM

I know there are some old farts and on here that are almost SS collecting age, but the rest of us should work to get rid of the system. It is going to drain us finicailly our entire working lives and probably won't be there when we retire. Most people agree that SS won't be there when they retire, yet they still believe it is the job of the government to ensure old people have a good life

6SpeedTA95 · 08-21-2006, 06:33 PM

Probably never because our generation carries NO political weight. The SS dilemma could be solved fairly easily but no one has the desire to do it.

ballz2wallz · 08-21-2006, 06:35 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

Probably never because our generation carries NO political weight. The SS dilemma could be solved fairly easily but no one has the desire to do it.

the republicans do...or did

6SpeedTA95 · 08-21-2006, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

the republicans do...or did

No they dont or it would have been fixed.

DosEquis · 08-21-2006, 06:47 PM

I don't believe it is there to ensure anyone a good life. It is there to be a pillar of retirement. It is there to help protect responsible people from the irresponsible who do not save for retirement. Is SS enough to live on alone? Usually no, but it is more than enough to buy food and maintain basic health needs. Everyone pays and everyone gets back in the end based on your income. Is the ROI great? No. But the ROI is significantly better than the return you get when you pay taxes to cover their food stamps and welfare.

Right now the average american saves less than a nickel for every $100 they bring in. The average family has nearly $10,000 in credit card debt alone, not including mortgages, car loans, student loans, or anything else. Wages have been stagnent while inflation has not been. It has been increasingly more difficult to do something as basic as save money. Then you have companies who bail on their pensions and companies who do not even offer 401k plans.

I plan on using SS as my fun money. I have my 401k, stocks, and other stuff that I am slowly building up for retirement and using that to live on. Social Security would not be up for debate if the presidents who have held office from 1980 to present would have just left it alone. How do you think we can finance all the deficit spending? They rob social security. SS would never break if they never spent any of it. We would have nearly 4 trillion dollars earning 300+ billion a year in interest AND we still have a 3:1 pay in ratio, but those dumb fuckers spent half of it. By the time its 1:1 we would have probabaly had 6 or 8 trillion earning interest. It would have been waaaay more than enough money to skim through the baby boomer generation.

Cliffs: if ronald reagan, george bush, clinton, and george bush would have left the damn thing alone we would be just fine and there would be no debate.

motivez · 08-21-2006, 06:49 PM

Maybe because as a society we're judged by how we treat our most vulnerable and weakest members?

The elderly don't deserve to be ignored or left out in the cold when they're unable to take care of themselves. I don't think we need to provide EVERYTHING for them, but we shouldn't simply let them rot on the street and die of hunger..

The same is true for children who are unable to provide for themselves.

It's a completely different in my mind than any kind of welfare/support system we have in place for young healthy folks who are capable of taking care of themselves, even if it means doing shitty jobs like working in a field all day

kinggovernor · 08-21-2006, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Maybe because as a society we're judged by how we treat our most vulnerable and weakest members?

The elderly don't deserve to be ignored or left out in the cold when they're unable to take care of themselves. I don't think we need to provide EVERYTHING for them, but we shouldn't simply let them rot on the street and die of hunger..

The same is true for children who are unable to provide for themselves.

It's a completely different in my mind than any kind of welfare/support system we have in place for young healthy folks who are capable of taking care of themselves, even if it means doing shitty jobs like working in a field all day

then why don't we have a complete socialist utopia, then we would be "judged" as good people

motivez · 08-21-2006, 07:07 PM

Because like Communism and Libertarianism, a utopian world doesn't exist. Any "pure" system like that relies on a world that isn't there to take advantage of, and so the system is doomed to fail unless supplemented with other things.

I see nothing wrong with having a social net set up to help get people on their feet and becoming productive members of society, or taking care of basic needs for people who are unable to take care of themselves.. but I don't want state run companies, I don't want much of the stuff that comes with "complete socialism"

Capitalism and the free market are great tools for dealing with many of the issues we face, but they're not the only good systems that exist.. and when you have a pure free market, too many people get "caught in the spokes".. it can't ALL be about profit and nothing else, there has to be some compassion for the people.

thomez · 08-21-2006, 07:16 PM

Sad state of affairs

kinggovernor · 08-21-2006, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Because like Communism and Libertarianism, a utopian world doesn't exist. Any "pure" system like that relies on a world that isn't there to take advantage of, and so the system is doomed to fail unless supplemented with other things.

I see nothing wrong with having a social net set up to help get people on their feet and becoming productive members of society, or taking care of basic needs for people who are unable to take care of themselves.. but I don't want state run companies, I don't want much of the stuff that comes with "complete socialism"

Capitalism and the free market are great tools for dealing with many of the issues we face, but they're not the only good systems that exist.. and when you have a pure free market, too many people get "caught in the spokes".. it can't ALL be about profit and nothing else, there has to be some compassion for the people.

so would france with its more socialist laws be viewed better than us?

motivez · 08-21-2006, 07:29 PM

Depends in what way I suppose you're asking

However, I think the way you treat the weakest members of society says a lot about what type of people you are, what type of nation you are.. and what your values are

For a nation that is so dominated by Christians, where their philosophy is the basis for many of our laws, and their values dominate the political landscape on many "controversial" issues, you'd think they'd care more about following the teachings of Jesus (since you know, he's GOD) when it comes to how you treat poor people, sick people, weak people, etc.. but apparently not.

kinggovernor · 08-21-2006, 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Depends in what way I suppose you're asking

However, I think the way you treat the weakest members of society says a lot about what type of people you are, what type of nation you are.. and what your values are

For a nation that is so dominated by Christians, where their philosophy is the basis for many of our laws, and their values dominate the political landscape on many "controversial" issues, you'd think they'd care more about following the teachings of Jesus (since you know, he's GOD) when it comes to how you treat poor people, sick people, weak people, etc.. but apparently not.

it used to be that the church took care of poor people but now government has stepped in, would you like it the other way around?

Ardentfrost · 08-21-2006, 07:48 PM

Rating our society in how we treat our worst off is fine... but I still don't think the gov't should be doing it. Forcing us to do something doesn't say much about our society.

If people are going to be compasionate, then they should be allowed to do it as much or as little as they want... only THEN can we really rate society.

ballz2wallz · 08-21-2006, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

No they dont or it would have been fixed.

hardly that easy

thomez · 08-21-2006, 08:11 PM

ATTN TKG - answer your PM

IminWonderland · 08-21-2006, 08:18 PM

I paid into SS. I want my money. If it's now, as a refund. Or if it's when I retire. I want what I paid into.

Do I think everyone should be forced to pay into this? No.

Do I think society needs to take care of the elderly? I did until I found out they get cheaper housing.

Ardentfrost · 08-21-2006, 08:21 PM

Originally Posted by IminWonderland

I paid into SS. I want my money. If it's now, as a refund. Or if it's when I retire. I want what I paid into.

Do I think everyone should be forced to pay into this? No.

Do I think society needs to take care of the elderly? I did until I found out they get cheaper housing.

You won't get it back, sorry to say. Unless our generation has a LOT of kids (which it's not), SS will be killed by the baby boomers

motivez · 08-21-2006, 09:22 PM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

it used to be that the church took care of poor people but now government has stepped in, would you like it the other way around?

Considering the government is run by people with claim to share those same values, I'm suprised there hasn't been a bigger push for some of the more universally accepted concepts that Jesus taught, but instead they seem to focus on things that will net them political gain through exploitation of strong feelings on divisive issues.

Ardentfrost · 08-21-2006, 09:23 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Considering the government is run by people with claim to share those same values, I'm suprised there hasn't been a bigger push for some of the more universally accepted concepts that Jesus taught, but instead they seem to focus on things that will net them political gain through exploitation of strong feelings on divisive issues.

and you think calling on the teachings of Jesus when it suits them isn't a political move?

motivez · 08-21-2006, 09:24 PM

I just said it was...?