Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

What is the truth?

January 17, 2013

Dear fellow citizen's, What is the truth about "Entitlements" A.K.A....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(20)

Bufftrev1

Jan-18-13 7:26 PM

Hi ritty.. mitt the twit also endorsed ryans proposal to limit his personal tax liability to less than 1%. So I guess alls well there, yes?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Ritty77

Jan-18-13 7:22 PM

Good question, nobud. I do know that the Romney/Ryan plan addressed that limit and means-tested recipients. Ryan's budget proposes modest adjustments toward SS solvency. The other side has offered nothing on SS, so apparently they think all is well.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

nobud74

Jan-18-13 6:47 PM

Why do we only tax the first 110k for SS?

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-18-13 6:08 AM

I guess when I get to 72 all I have to look forward to is to sit in a rocker and do nothing!

So if we don't change the retirement age, then there should be no complaining as people live longer and their COLA doesn't keep up with inflation.

You either need to

1. tax everyone higher to put into SS

2. Have everyone contribute into SS for more years

3. Have lower payments to SS recipients, ie lower COLA

4. Have people draw out of SS for less years

5. Or my favorite, tell everyone to have their own personal retirement savings account and eliminate or totally remake SS program to not be a retirement plan.

6. Kick the responsibility to the younger generation. Then they might say put all the old folks in a big warehouse to cut costs and confiscate their property to offset costs.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Bufftrev1

Jan-17-13 5:18 PM

Hi enigma, perhaps miracles do happen.. I agree with a considerable amount of what you wrote today. That said, I would like to add that the segment that you wrote about supporting those who don't work did stand out. I assume you mean those that abuse the welfare system via fraud. That is a good reason to voice disapproval but a much, much greater portion of our tax dollars goes to support corporate welfare, in the form of deductions, loopholes, exemptions ect. If you framed your comment with corporate charity identified thusly, one would have a hard time challenging the premise as the data would clearly support such a claim. Have a nice evening, we're going out to celebrate, my girl just got accepted to Penn State, main campus!

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-17-13 4:32 PM

Johnny Boy,"And right now I don't believe SS has to die. It can be saved."

Not in it's present form. I could save it and even lower the taxes, but not many people I tell my plan like it, because it gives them too much responsibility for their own lives. My plan is to make SS strictly a disability plan. Work while you can, collect when you are no longer physically able to work. If you want to retire and travel the world or just sit in your chair and watch TV, do it on your own dime. When you can no longer work, we'll take care of you, and not with "a pill" as ObamaCare will do.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

philunderwood

Jan-17-13 3:48 PM

I laugh when I see the comments about raising the SS eligibility age. Several others and I were “offered” early retirement when our company needed to cut back. I was sixty-one at the time. The offer came with a year’s severance pay, so I returned to Wmsp. and used the time to look for another job; I couldn’t even get anyone to interview me. A headhunter explained that no one wants to take a chance on getting sued for age discrimination as the equal opportunity laws make them vulnerable. I ended up taking SS at sixty-two. Raising the eligibility age sounds good but there would no doubt be unintended consequences that would hurt older folks.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

idiottwo

Jan-17-13 3:39 PM

Scott, we continue to put the same people who OKed robbing those funds in office. There is ZERO accountability and the public gives politicians a pass on honesty.

4 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Jan-17-13 2:41 PM

enigma - I didn't see your second email. How do you know I haven't been helping you? I write our legislators regularly on a host of issues including social security. And right now I don't believe SS has to die. It can be saved.

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Jan-17-13 2:02 PM

I never said I knew what you paid in. I took the cap and multiplied it by 6.2%. If you want to get hundreds of thousands put in, that's what you need to do.

Do you really believe that if Social Security was not in place your employer would pay you that money?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-17-13 1:48 PM

Johnny Boy, As far as making tons of money. I have made an average salary since I got out of college. While in the Army and college I made less than average. One thing I have done is work constantly since I graduated from high school. You'd be surprised how those taxed add up. Because of the taxes I've paid (and some bad decisions) I do not have enough saving to retire and do not expect to do so until I am physically unable to work. That is my plan because I do not want my grandchildren or yours to have to pay for me to relax. I have nothing against retirement and believe that anyone who can provide for themselves should have that right, but I do not think that it is a right to retire at government expense. Face it, the government has taken your money and spent it on themselves. I have fought this for years, but have had little help from people like you. If you had been helping me, social security would have been saved, but you didn't and it is dying. I am not the selfish one here.

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-17-13 1:37 PM

Johnny Boy, So you know how much money I've put into Social Security? Maybe my statement from the SS administration is wrong. I do count the matching tax that my employers have paid because that is money that they would have paid me if the government hadn't taken it. Using that same statement, that you claim is false, I calculated what I would be paid if I lived to my life expectancy and it was considerably less than I will have paid in by the time I retire. The rest of my money will be going to people who earned less than I did for whatever reason, kind of like the taxes I pay now go to those who don't work. My point is that even the apparently "fair" FICA taxes are really progressive. But since you know more about my earnings and taxes than the ones who actually have the records, I will ask you this; How much have I paid in Social Security taxes?

6 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

johnnyad3

Jan-17-13 1:07 PM

Remove the cap.

Tex - People with physically demanding jobs will not be able to work till 72. But how about if someone can work that long, Social Security makes it worth their while. Have a small incentive.

Wow, SteelerFan, a first, I agree with you.

Enigma - You're full of it. It's hard to believe you've put "hundreds of thousands of dollars into the program" unless you've capped out your whole life. And if you have, you should be ashamed of yourself. Many, many people could not survive without it.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

enigma

Jan-17-13 10:08 AM

We need to face the facts. The money that you put into Social Security is gone. It was stolen by politicians to pay for programs that many of you demanded. I would be fine with putting every politician who ever voted to spend that money in jail, but I am not willing to demand that future generations pay for it. I am mad as H3LL that after putting hundreds of thousands of dollars into the program that I will get about half of it back, but the money is gone, embezzled by politicians to buy votes, some of them from you. Having said that, I will not force my grandchildren to pay for crimes committed before they were born. Social security needs to be reformed and eventually phased out. I will be one of the first affected by this, but that is a sacrifice I am willing to make for the future of this country. Anyone who took part in this theft by their votes and is not willing to help make it right is just plain selfish.

6 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

SteelerFan

Jan-17-13 8:56 AM

Social Security is not an entitlement since we pay as we go. It's our money. The government chooses to loot the locked box and then cries that the fund is shrinking. Where is the sanity?

10 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-17-13 8:10 AM

"I think you should look at both ends of the problem. Executives, professionals in offices, etc. may be able to work longer. Performing manual labor for an additional 7 years is ridiculous." - spike2

*

Ah, yes...those "manual laborers"; more-commonly-referred-to as "useless parasites", per Rand/Ryan.

See:

War on the Weak - Newsweek and The Daily Beast

2 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Jan-17-13 8:05 AM

"Social Security does need reform. The place to start is to change the retirement age, to something like 72, since people are living longer as compared to when the system was started." - ToTEXASfromPA

*

Yeah...primarily those folks who "work" on Wall $treet.

People...who (actually) WORK, for a living...not so much.

3 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

spike2

Jan-17-13 7:22 AM

72 is ridiculous. Real jobs, which the majority of folks hold, age out before 72. A 72 year old worker costs a company in the end game. The wage is significantly higher than a 23 year old employee. Medicare age would increase. Health care costs are more expensive for older workers and possibly a dependent spouse. I think you should look at both ends of the problem. Executives, professionals in offices, etc. may be able to work longer. performing manual labor for an additional 7 years is ridiculous. Additionally, there is not sufficient employment for young people. How do you keep people employed for 7 more years and employ younger people?

7 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-17-13 6:24 AM

Concerning COLA and different rates......

Similarly many corporations will have two different human resource people/groups that are responsible for compensation in a corporation.

Those in the executive compensation HR group benchmark to justify big salary increases and bonuses by selecting the higher compensated companies to benchmark against.

Those in the employee compensation HR group benchmark to the lesser compensated companies to keep salary increases minimized.

Corbett's is probably administered by the executive compensation group.

Just saying....

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

ToTEXASfromPA

Jan-17-13 6:17 AM

Social Security does need reform. The place to start is to change the retirement age, to something like 72, since people are living longer as compared to when the system was started.

Politicians are afraid of getting voted out of office because they would make so many people mad.

You can either have a bunch of really poor retirees struggling to make ends meet that are moderately happy with the elected officials or you can have fewer retirees with more money that can comfortably make ends meet while others are mad at the politicians because they have to work longer.

The later is the right choice.

++++

You the tax payer could have your taxes increased to pay for the interest on the money borrowed from Social Security. Would you prefer that or tell the federal govt to spend less money?

4 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 20 of 20 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web