Your Social Security

Discussion in 'Politics' started by wilburbear, Feb 12, 2010.

  1. Your Social Security


    Just in case some of you younger folks (& some older ones) didn't know this. It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it..
    Be sure and show it to your kids. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter whether you are Democrat or Republican.. Facts are Facts!!!



    Our Social Security

    Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
    Security (FICA) Program. He promised:

    1..) That participation in the Program would be
    Completely voluntary,


    No longer Voluntary



    2.) That the participants would only have to pay
    1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
    Incomes into the Program,


    Now 7.65%



    3.) That the money the participants elected to put
    Into the Program would be deductible from
    Their income for tax purposes each year,


    No longer tax deductible



    4.) That the money the participants put into the
    Independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
    General operating fund, and therefore, would
    Only be used to fund the Social Security
    Retirement Program, and no other
    Government program, and,


    Under Johnson the money was moved to


    The General Fund and spent by Congress



    5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees
    Would never be taxed as income.


    Under Clinton & Gore


    Up to 85% of your Social Security payments can be Taxed



    Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
    Now receiving a Social Security check every month --
    And then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
    The money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
    Away -- you may be interested in the following:

    ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- ----

    Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
    Independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
    General fund so that Congress could spend it?

    A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
    Controlled House and Senate.

    ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --

    Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
    Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

    A: The Democratic Party.

    ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

    Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
    Security annuities?

    A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
    'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
    Senate, while he was Vice President of the US

    ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -

    Q: Which Political Party decided to start
    Giving
    Annuity payments to immigrants?

    AND MY FAVORITE:

    A: That's right!


    Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
    Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
    Began to receive Social Security payments! The
    Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
    Even though they never paid a dime into it!

    Then, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

    And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
     
  2. Actually social security tax rate is 12.4%.

    It's just that 1/2 of it is hidden from the worker because it's paid by the employer directly to the govt on the employees behalf.

    It's truly astonishing how many workers don't know this.
     
  3. I was intrigued by your post and so spent 30 seconds Googling this information -- nearly the entire post is factually wrong:

    "Did FDR promise that Social Security would be voluntary? Did Democrats end tax deductions for Social Security withholding?

    "A: Social Security has never been voluntary and taxes paid to support it have never been deductible from federal income taxes. A widely e-mailed "history lesson" gets nearly all its facts wrong.

    <http://www.factcheck.org/2009/03/fdrs-voluntary-social-security/>
     
  4. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    I've seen this before, I believe bigdave is correct on this one.
     
  5. Well lets do some fact checking on the fact checking there Mr nanny state.

    1936 social security pamphlet http://www.ssa.gov/history/ssn/ssb36.html

    1) nope not true. Govt can change the rules whenever they find it convenient. Supreme Court: Fleming v. Nestor.
    http://www.socialsecurity.org/daily/06-22-99.html


    2) really, I will get benefits regardless of my property or income.
    If by benefits you mean not reduced that's a big fat lie.

    2b) Social security not tax deductible going in, but they sure as hell consider it taxable coming out.


    3) Really all my employer and myself have to pay in is 6% up to $3,000/year.
    I'll anxiously be awaiting my refund with 6%/month interest applied (rate of irs penalty for under payment).


    4) Really! That might have meant something when we were still on the gold standard for international relations.

    http://www.the-privateer.com/1933-gold-confiscation.html
    once bretton woods was concluded the value of our money is only what others are willing to pay.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_system

    Tell me which footlocker at the treasury holds my portion of social security.
    Please tell me how this "promise" to gain interest really isn't just a promise to levy taxes later or just print new money devaluing that already in circulation.


    5) Really, everybody gets more than they paid in and they say "the tooth fairy " doesn't exist!

    Can anyone say ponzi scheme


    6) Usually more than I can get elsewhere! Are you bat shit crazy?
     
  6. Alright, you disagree with a pamphlet (which, at the time it was printed, appears to have been factually correct.)

    However you did not successfully argue that the original post was correct.

    Discussing whether or not something is factually correct or not is not deserving of your "Mr. Nanny State" schoolyard insult.
     
  7. Yeah guess I was a bit unfair in debunking an official US publication on the subject vs a net generated slam on that douche-bag fdr.

    My only regret is not having all of his speeches available for real scrutiny.

    I think it's pretty well established on this board you support nanny state policies . I stand firm.
     
  8. Arnie

    Arnie

    Why does someone from Canada feel it necessary to "debunk" an internet rumor about SS in the US?. Why is that Barry? :D