Comments on: A Socially Responsible Reply to Avoiding Social Security http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/ Money Tips for a Better Life Sat, 21 Nov 2009 15:08:40 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-159881 Anonymous Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:25:27 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-159881 Social Security is a state sponsored pyramid scheme that will have to end at some point. Social Security is a state sponsored pyramid scheme that will have to end at some point.

]]> By: Ben http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-85789 Ben Fri, 20 Jun 2008 20:18:05 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-85789 Good point Mark, does seem like a double standard. I imagine/hope Social Security is going to become a bigger and bigger issue during the election. The longer they put off dealing with it, the harder it will be to fix. Good point Mark, does seem like a double standard. I imagine/hope Social Security is going to become a bigger and bigger issue during the election. The longer they put off dealing with it, the harder it will be to fix.

]]> By: Mark Russell http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-85774 Mark Russell Fri, 20 Jun 2008 13:13:48 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-85774 Question: If the government thinks we need social security, then please explain to me why government employee's and officials have their own separate program. Are they more responsible than me, one must wonder when you see how certain government agencies are run. And why is it a members only club, should I get a part time job as a government employee in order to have control of my retirement? Question:
If the government thinks we need social security, then please explain to me why government employee’s and officials have their own separate program. Are they more responsible than me, one must wonder when you see how certain government agencies are run. And why is it a members only club, should I get a part time job as a government employee in order to have control of my retirement?

]]> By: Anon http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-79723 Anon Thu, 10 Apr 2008 19:05:29 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-79723 If you don't think raising the cap is aggressive, think again. People assume that everyone earning above 100k is filthy rich and deserves to be taxed dry. That viewpoint overlooks the large number of careers that have one boom year and many, many bust years. That also overlooks the large number of people who take high paying jobs to pay off student loans and will then switch to a lower paying job that helps others. Or the large number of parents who are paying for rising tuition costs. Finally, I know this is controversial to say, but for those of us who studied on Friday and Saturday nights instead of partying all through high school and college and got good jobs, and those of us who now work 80 hour weeks, why should we bear the responsibility for those who didn't/don't? If you don’t think raising the cap is aggressive, think again. People assume that everyone earning above 100k is filthy rich and deserves to be taxed dry. That viewpoint overlooks the large number of careers that have one boom year and many, many bust years. That also overlooks the large number of people who take high paying jobs to pay off student loans and will then switch to a lower paying job that helps others. Or the large number of parents who are paying for rising tuition costs. Finally, I know this is controversial to say, but for those of us who studied on Friday and Saturday nights instead of partying all through high school and college and got good jobs, and those of us who now work 80 hour weeks, why should we bear the responsibility for those who didn’t/don’t?

]]> By: Paul http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30899 Paul Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:16:39 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-30899 Since we're asking moral questions, who says the Federal Gummint has the moral right to take away my money with the threat of putting me in jail? Sure maybe the program does good for people who have no where else to turn, but why should I be forced to give to it? I already give voluntarily to charities that I believe in, and your reader is free to give voluntarily to charities that he or she believes in, but don't throw me in jail just because I don't believe Social Security is a good use of my money. Since we’re asking moral questions, who says the Federal Gummint has the moral right to take away my money with the threat of putting me in jail?

Sure maybe the program does good for people who have no where else to turn, but why should I be forced to give to it? I already give voluntarily to charities that I believe in, and your reader is free to give voluntarily to charities that he or she believes in, but don’t throw me in jail just because I don’t believe Social Security is a good use of my money.

]]> By: Robert http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30362 Robert Sun, 18 Nov 2007 15:30:27 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-30362 Social Security is a crutch as currently implemented. We should have people saving for their own needs. That safety net should be for people who couldn't do that, not those who didn't. Social Security is a crutch as currently implemented. We should have people saving for their own needs. That safety net should be for people who couldn’t do that, not those who didn’t.

]]> By: Fiscal Musings http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30024 Fiscal Musings Sat, 17 Nov 2007 17:49:56 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-30024 Social Security is one of those futile subjects. You have no control over the program and are at the mercy of easily influenced lawmakers who will say what they think the masses want to hear. The best advice is to exclude Social Security in your planning and treat it as "gravy" if you ever see a payment. Social Security is one of those futile subjects. You have no control over the program and are at the mercy of easily influenced lawmakers who will say what they think the masses want to hear. The best advice is to exclude Social Security in your planning and treat it as “gravy” if you ever see a payment.

]]> By: Dangerman http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30010 Dangerman Sat, 17 Nov 2007 13:16:11 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-30010 See, the Reader's Response implicitly assumes that Social Security is just another form of welfare. It was never, never, intended to be that - it was (and is) supposed to be a forced savings program. But since the purpose of the federal government these days is pretty much just to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor, why not let Social Security do that too. I'm sure the livelihood of "my wife’s grandmother" is much more important that the utility lost to hundreds of billions in 0% interest savings. See, the Reader’s Response implicitly assumes that Social Security is just another form of welfare. It was never, never, intended to be that – it was (and is) supposed to be a forced savings program.

But since the purpose of the federal government these days is pretty much just to transfer wealth from the rich to the poor, why not let Social Security do that too. I’m sure the livelihood of “my wife’s grandmother” is much more important that the utility lost to hundreds of billions in 0% interest savings.

]]> By: bill http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-30007 bill Sat, 17 Nov 2007 12:53:55 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-30007 First of all, there is no social security trust fund. The annual federal budget is estimated based on next years tax receipts and divided like a pie for each government program. I think people should look at SS as a supplement, not as one's sole source of income. If SS is all you have for retirement, you made bad choices early in you life. First of all, there is no social security trust fund. The annual federal budget is estimated based on next years tax receipts and divided like a pie for each government program.

I think people should look at SS as a supplement, not as one’s sole source of income. If SS is all you have for retirement, you made bad choices early in you life.

]]> By: Minimum Wage http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/comment-page-1/#comment-29949 Minimum Wage Sat, 17 Nov 2007 04:22:09 +0000 http://moneysmartlife.com/a-socially-responsible-reply-to-avoiding-social-security/#comment-29949 Other than taxing income not currently taxed (e.g. raising the cap or taxing investment income) and privatization, all the "reform" options currently on the table are highly regressive. Since the working poor and near-poor tend to die earlier than the rest of us, increasing the age for full retirement benefits would rip off millions of low earners. Similarly, raising taxes or cutting benefits would also be regressive. Other than taxing income not currently taxed (e.g. raising the cap or taxing investment income) and privatization, all the “reform” options currently on the table are highly regressive.

Since the working poor and near-poor tend to die earlier than the rest of us, increasing the age for full retirement benefits would rip off millions of low earners. Similarly, raising taxes or cutting benefits would also be regressive.

]]>