Published: Thursday, Feb. 6 2014 12:00 a.m. MST
The only criteria that is important is whether we were forced to pay into the
Social Security and Medicare Ponzi schemes by the government with their promise
that at age 65 we would be paid a retirement/healthcare benefit, based on our
forced contribution, not on our "wealth". The government did not ask us
if we wanted to opt out of those programs. The government did not reduce the
percentage of our income taken during our working years. The government has one
simple rule - you work; therefore, you pay.Now only one rule applies
- we paid you Uncle Sam; therefore, you owe us 100% of what was promised.
Mike Richards,Agreed.If the govt. tells us to plan on X
for decades, then we should not be given X-2 late in the game.
Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, UtahWe are 15 trillion dollars in debt.
Do those retired persons on social security; have any responsibility to pay
their share of the debt? If you go into a restaurant, and order $200
worth of food, then pay $20. And then say my neighbor’s grandchildren will
pay the rest. That does not mean that you paid for your dinner.And it
certainly does not mean that your neighbors grandchildren, owe you dinner for
the rest of your life.The fact is that the retired; were not taxed enough
while working, they should have paid 4-5 times more in tax.I do not see
how those on social security are owed anything.I do support helping
people, who are unable to help themselves.What we have with social
security, in 3/5 the cases according to this story, is we are taking money
working people, many of them poor, and giving the money to wealthy seniors.
@ VSTok, that is fine. all I ask is that those who receive social
security, pay their portion of the national debt first, and not just pass it
onto their grandchildren.a person retiring today's portion would be
$91,811Just pay the prime interest rate until this amount is paid off.Soon as this is paid off, they can then apply for benefits.As far as our
interest/dividends owed to those retiring, that has already been paid in kind,
for the privilege of living in this country.
How about we get out of the weeds and look at reality.There are 2
primary reasons that medicare is the deficit driver that it is.1-
people are living much longer than originally accounted for2- health care
costs are skyrocketingNow, again, lets look at reality.Many are unwilling or unable to stash away enough money to provide themselves
healthcare in their old age. What do you propose to do with these people if
medicare was not there.I understand about personal responsibility.
But I also understand about reality.So, do you tell that 74 year
old, "Too bad. You should have saved more"Or do we help them out
with healthcare?What, Mr Richards, do you propose we do with those
folks? Serious question
@ VeaIDAR. Your response to VIDAR was spot on except for the last sentence
which was nonsense. The only thing that should be "owed" to
seniors is that they get back their contributions plus a reasonable interest.
Anything beyond that should be means tested.
Keep in mind that private pensions funds have been looted by a variety of
corporate schemes. Retirees were promised these benefits. Corporate America
welched on the deal. For this reason among others the social security compact
must be honored.
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments