quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
Can any of you adamant about receiving Social Security acknowledge that it may possibly be a deeply flawed program that likely should not exist?

That’s a possible start. I understand that you paid in well in excess of what you stand to receive, in many cases.

You have two related but not identical questions here:
can you acknowledge it's deeply flawed? It's a .gov program, of course it's deeply flawed.

Should it exist? That question got answered in 1935 when the question was asked.

Should we tear it down? A favorite philosopher of mine said "Foe what ever you undertake, consider what comes next."

When that 'q' applies to this, the answer would likely be, who knows, so let's not. Or you can FAFO with an economy of 200,000,000 people, but who's counting?

P.S. It's a contract.

And dont forget the fact that during retirement if you are still working SS and Medicare taxes are still being deducted from your pay.

Certainly a case for the Medicare tax can be made but SS anything you earn most likely will make no difference in your monthly benefit. So in essence you are paying yourself part of your monthly benefit.

Simplistic view but the essence of it.

quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
Can any of you adamant about receiving Social Security acknowledge that it may possibly be a deeply flawed program that likely should not exist?

That’s a possible start. I understand that you paid in well in excess of what you stand to receive, in many cases.

Absolutely! I've been saying that for at least the last 40 years. Had my money, to include the employer match, gone into my paycheck to be invested in a regular taxable brokerage account, I would have been far ahead of what my SS check is.

But that's a separate issue over whether people in or near retirement have a moral claim to SS. It is also separate from how to fix the system.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

I've benefitted from unemployment insurance, but how much is paid in and how much is paid out is minuscule compared to SS.

Please stop saying "trust fund". Unemployment insurance and SS are not in any way anythign approaching a "trust fund". Unemployment is simply a current account at the state level paid into by employers and paid out to the unemployed. Hopefully they do something with it to earn interest or some return. It is insurance, not something you will get, no matter what, when you reach a certain age.

The difference in scale between SS and unemployment is huge, but the concepts are analogous.

Both SS and unemployment are indeed trust funds in that the monies are segregated from the general fund. Ostensibly to protect it from being raided by politicians. Neither one is a true investment fund designed to reserve and grow money paid in by a particular person for their potential future benefit. They aren't managed the way a private trust fund would be (hopefully) to grow via investment. Both are cash in by workers today to pay cash out to non-workers today.

Either both or neither are pure socialism. People who have paid into the system in the past are either fully entitled to a check from both or neither. I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously.

True, unemployment is an insurance-ish benefit, though SS has always been touted as an insurance against poverty in retirement. Not everybody qualifies for regular SS, only those who've earned and paid into it a minimum number of quarters. Note that if you don't live to claim SS, you get nothing from it. Conceptually they are the same.

Disability and Medicaid are true government administered charity, which could be considered socialist as it is taxpayer funded.

It is my understanding that the people who first received SS made out very well. They were paid much more than they put in. That changed a long time ago. As I noted earlier a huge chunk goes to SS disability. I might add that there is minimal auditing of benefits by the government.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
Can any of you adamant about receiving Social Security acknowledge that it may possibly be a deeply flawed program that likely should not exist?

That’s a possible start. I understand that you paid in well in excess of what you stand to receive, in many cases.

Absolutely! I've been saying that for at least the last 40 years. Had my money, to include the employer match, gone into my paycheck to be invested in a regular taxable brokerage account, I would have been far ahead of what my SS check is.

But that's a separate issue over whether people in or near retirement have a moral claim to SS. It is also separate from how to fix the system.

I agree completely, Fly-Sig. It's Absolutely! a flawed program.

But... that doesn't mean I won't claim my benefit when the time comes.

quote:

P.S. It's a contract.

P.S. No, It's definitely NOT a contract. The Supreme Court has spoken on that.

First, and most obvious, is the fact that I did not agree to this so-called contract. I wasn't even alive in 1935.

A Contract is an agreement between parties, creating mutual obligations that are enforceable by law. The basic elements required for the agreement to be a legally enforceable contract are:

Mutual assent (offer and acceptance)
Consideration (something of value is exchanged)
Capacity (e.g., minimum age, sound mind)
Legality (lawful purpose)

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

I've benefitted from unemployment insurance, but how much is paid in and how much is paid out is minuscule compared to SS.

Please stop saying "trust fund". Unemployment insurance and SS are not in any way anythign approaching a "trust fund". Unemployment is simply a current account at the state level paid into by employers and paid out to the unemployed. Hopefully they do something with it to earn interest or some return. It is insurance, not something you will get, no matter what, when you reach a certain age.

The difference in scale between SS and unemployment is huge, but the concepts are analogous.

Both SS and unemployment are indeed trust funds in that the monies are segregated from the general fund. Ostensibly to protect it from being raided by politicians. Neither one is a true investment fund designed to reserve and grow money paid in by a particular person for their potential future benefit. They aren't managed the way a private trust fund would be (hopefully) to grow via investment. Both are cash in by workers today to pay cash out to non-workers today.

Either both or neither are pure socialism. People who have paid into the system in the past are either fully entitled to a check from both or neither. I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously.

True, unemployment is an insurance-ish benefit, though SS has always been touted as an insurance against poverty in retirement. Not everybody qualifies for regular SS, only those who've earned and paid into it a minimum number of quarters. Note that if you don't live to claim SS, you get nothing from it. Conceptually they are the same.

Disability and Medicaid are true government administered charity, which could be considered socialist as it is taxpayer funded.

SS is not segregated, all excess receipts go to the general treasury fund BY LAW and are replaced with Treasury bonds that are exclusive to SS. There is nothing in "trust" except the Treasury bonds. Trust funds hold assets, not debt.

Individuals do not pay into unemployment, employers do. I claimed in Michigan after getting laid off after transferring there 5-6 months earlier. I got the full extent of what Michigan allows, regardless of when I became a resident or what was paid on my behalf by my employer in the multiple locations I worked. I also claimed in Indiana after living here 8 years due to my employer closing the site here. I got whatever Indiana allows. I wouldn't say I am "entitled" other than the idea of equal protection and I got the same as anyone else of similar salary that was out of work. It's not a trust fund either, just a current account.

Regardless, SS is pure socialism. Unemployment insurance is to some extent, but it is insurance and there is a shared risk pool, it could very easily be administrated privately to the same effect, and probably more efficiently.

quote:

quote:
I said: P.S. It's a contract.

Chellim said. P.S. No, It's definitely NOT a contract. The Supreme Court has spoken on that.

You are right. The '60s court case revised the view. It isn't a contract anymore. I think the fact that they had to take it out and play with is shows that the view of the installers might have been different. It was certainly different to the now victimized.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously.

Are you unaware that workers do not pay into unemployment funds?

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:

SS is not segregated, all excess receipts go to the general treasury fund BY LAW and are replaced with Treasury bonds that are exclusive to SS. There is nothing in "trust" except the Treasury bonds. Trust funds hold assets, not debt.

You're arguing semantics, and the bonds are assets. All of SS is, in theory, segregated so that it cannot be raided to pay for other things. The semantics are that in fact it is not like any trust that you or I would set up with our assets, but in the context of comparing it to unemployment it is a government trust fund just like unemployment is, by being a segregated fund. Whether the fund is managed in a responsible way is irrelevant.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
Individuals do not pay into unemployment, employers do. I claimed in Michigan after getting laid off after transferring there 5-6 months earlier. I got the full extent of what Michigan allows, regardless of when I became a resident or what was paid on my behalf by my employer in the multiple locations I worked. I also claimed in Indiana after living here 8 years due to my employer closing the site here. I got whatever Indiana allows. I wouldn't say I am "entitled" other than the idea of equal protection and I got the same as anyone else of similar salary that was out of work. It's not a trust fund either, just a current account.

Not to get argumentative about all the details, but where exactly does the money come from that your employer paid into unemployment? It comes from your productivity and thus is an invisible part of your compensation. If you didn't earn it, your employer couldn't afford to pay it. Incidentally, just like the employer's portion of SS. Thus you, invisibly, paid for unemployment insurance.

Call it a current account if you like, but then so is SS. SS is also a pooled risk because you may not live to retirement age, but if you do then your risk of poverty is mitigated by the SS check.

I find it interesting but not surprising that you felt entitled under the concept of equal protection for your unemployment but don't extend that to SS. When you get to 62 you will certainly feel differently after paying hugely into it for decades. You'll want your fair share, the same as others who had similar salary.

quote:

Originally posted by stiab:

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously.

Are you unaware that workers do not pay into unemployment funds?

The money comes out of the worker's productivity. So it is invisible to the worker, just like the employer's portion of SS contribution. It's your money, they just never account for it to you on your paystub.

quote:

Originally posted by stiab:
Are you unaware that workers do not pay into unemployment funds?

Minor quibble, but in three states they do.

quote:

Originally posted by reloader-1:
Can any of you adamant about receiving Social Security acknowledge that it may possibly be a deeply flawed program that likely should not exist?

That’s a possible start. I understand that you paid in well in excess of what you stand to receive, in many cases.

Yes, I can agree the social security program is broken and people would be better off had a better alternative meeting its intent was put in place. But so what?

I can say the income tax system is “a deeply flawed system that shouldn’t exist” either. You might also agree with me but after paying income taxes for 2025 and filing my returns, I better get my refund that’s due me. What about you? You maintained the government has no money. When you do your taxes and should you have a refund coming, will you waive your rights to it because “the government has no money?”

What’s the difference between paying into the income system and demanding any money due you according to the rules and paying into the social security system and demanding any money due you according to the rules? The government won’t be giving you back your money, your money is long gone. Your refund will be money that just got paid by some other taxpayers - a direct transfer of payment according to you.

See how that works?

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
The money comes out of the worker's productivity.

So you were NOT aware, when you said "I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously." It's clear you didn't even know how the system works when you wrote that, it was just a lot of chatter.

quote:

Originally posted by stiab:

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
The money comes out of the worker's productivity.

So you were NOT aware, when you said "I expect you feel fully entitled to the unemployment checks you received because you had paid into it previously." It's clear you didn't even know how the system works when you wrote that, it was just a lot of chatter.

I absolutely did know, and I expected this nonsense response. It doesn't show on your paycheck but it comes out of your compensation. Just like the company's contribution to your health insurance, social security, and medicare.

If your employer didn't have to pay these taxes for you, they could give it to you in your paycheck. You do pay these taxes, the politicians have just intentionally structured it so that you don't see the full magnitude of taxes you pay.

Then tell us the tax rate for unemployment insurance that employers pay.

I am seeing a federal tax of 0.6% on the first $7000 of wages, and Indiana a variable rate on the first $9500 of wages.

The amount of money is very small, like $100 a year or less) so this really is a tiny issue and not relevant to the SS discussion.

quote:

Originally posted by Lefty Sig:
Then tell us the tax rate for unemployment insurance that employers pay.

I am seeing a federal tax of 0.6% on the first $7000 of wages, and Indiana a variable rate on the first $9500 of wages.

The amount of money is very small, like $100 a year or less) so this really is a tiny issue and not relevant to the SS discussion.

What matters is it is exactly the same conceptually as SS with it being money taken from you the worker to give to others today. It is held in a separate government account but it does not have an individuals name on it nor is it invested to grow over time.

Both systems are paid into by you, and then at some future date you are promised under particular circumstances to receive money from the government, which is taken from workers at that time.

As I said in the first post on this, they are different orders of magnitude of dollars, but the same idea. If the government yanked your unemployment checks just when you became unemployed, most everybody would feel cheated out of money they were promised and which they paid into for decades.

Argue, argue back and forth, but what are you going to do about it? Vote!
And we need to deport millions more before they can vote. The SS account is a dumpster full of IOU's. I've been collecting for two years and not ashamed of it, I paid taxes since I was 15. If it doesn't collapse I feel sorry for the taxes my grandchildren will pay.
And as mentioned above, the disability fraud. Where the hell is our DOJ? The Dems used the DOJ to the utmost of their ability. Why can't the GOP get a spine?

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

I absolutely did know...

Wrong, you got caught preaching about a subject you are ignorant of, that's obvious.

quote:

Originally posted by stiab:

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:

I absolutely did know...

Wrong, you got caught preaching about a subject you are ignorant of, that's obvious.

Wow, you're calling me a liar? I suppose that's easy across the internet.