Is it Immoral to Collect Social Security?

[Hoodat]

Is it Immoral to Collect Social Security?

Eric Peters  -  May 24, 2025

Libertarians – those strange ducks who espouse the alarming-to-some idea that no one owes anyone else any portion of the money they worked for (among other strange and alarming-to-some ideas) – oppose forcing anyone to “contribute to Social Security for just that reason. On account of the being forced to, for openers. Their money is taken from them to finance retirement “benefits” for other people who – for just that reason – have no right to those “benefits.”

The government affirms this harsh fact.

Its high court has ruled – that is, decreed – that Social Security “benefits” are alms which no one has a right to – which is reasonable based on the fact that every cent of “benefits” paid out is not the “contributor’s” saved-up/invested/interest-accrued money but someone else’s money, extracted from them just as it was extracted from him. That is why Social Security is often referred to as a Ponzi scheme, named after a famous fraudster who lived 100 years ago. The difference now is that this fraud is both legal and compulsory.

It is also alms.

And yet, it also isn’t that in that alms, properly speaking, are freely given. You know of someone who has fallen upon hard times; or you know of a charity that aids people who have fallen upon hard times and you wish to help by donating money. This is a very different thing than being compelled to hand over money, which is what occurs when you are forced to “contribute” to Social Security.

Having got all of that out of the way, the question arises: Is it immoral to accept “benefits” derived from the government having forced someone else to finance them? This question seems to answer itself. Obviously, it would be immoral to walk next door to your neighbor’s home, knock on his door and demand that he hand over “benefits” because some other person had previously knocked on your door and demanded that you hand them over. It is an example of the old truism that two wrongs do not make a right.  .  .  .

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2025/05/24/is-it-immoral-to-collect-social-security/

[Hoodat]

'Social Security' in itself is immoral.  It is immoral to force people to pay into it at the point of a gun with the false promise that it will be there for them when they retire.  It is a ponzi scheme, through and through.  It is the greatest contributor to cyclical poverty in existence today.

The immorality resides solely in those perpetrating it.  But to the person collecting?  No.  That person had no say so in the beginning.  They have zero right to what is being paid out.  They are solely at the mercy of those running it.  It is nothing more than welfare for securing senior votes.

[roamer_1]

Alright... I'll bite. As I am now loafing on disability and senior benefits, I probably have a dog in this hunt.

I will begin by saying that I largely agree - National Social Security is a scourge. But it's all I got. And I paid in for years and years for that coverage. And since there ain't nothing else, I am stuck requesting that benefit to which, by my payment for decades, I am entitled to receive.

Now, like I said, I am in agreement, and stuck the way I am, with no other option. And to make matters worse, I wore myself out so terribly by the time I gave in, that my income was a pittance for the last 5 years of my production (which is what determines benefit). So what I receive, outside of bitchin health care, is a pittance.

But all that being said, we are a wealthy people, who are called upon by God to take care of the elderly and the widow -- Maybe we should start with what you think that ought to look like... Maybe that's the family and the Church, but then what to do with those who fall outside of those things? At some point the state is called upon to care for them, be it county, state or national. How does that work?

[cato potatoe]

We are likely stuck with it, because financial literacy is not taught in high school.  Most people are satisfied with a safe 2.4% return, having never been introduced to index funds.

[roamer_1]

We are likely stuck with it, because financial literacy is not taught in high school.  Most people are satisfied with a safe 2.4% return, having never been introduced to index funds.

What about where the market crashes? Do you remember all those retirement funds that were washed away during 'Too Big to Fail'? No fault of them folks... firemen's pensions, teachers pensions... They were doing the right thing, and paying attention... but the investors were just cut off of GM... Tough sh*t, too bad... That was massive carnage. No, the market ain't the answer.

[Fishrrman]

OK, Briefers, a show of hands:

How many here are past retirement age?
How many (who are eligible to collect Social Security) have REFUSED IT because to collect it is immoral?

I'll be waiting for your replies.
I sense I'll be waiting a long LONG time.

(by the way, I'm in my 70's and have NEVER collected Social Security. I stopped paying into it back in 1979, almost 50 years ago...)

[Hoodat]

We are likely stuck with it, because financial literacy is not taught in high school.

Intentionally not taught.  By design.

[cato potatoe]

What about where the market crashes? Do you remember all those retirement funds that were washed away during 'Too Big to Fail'? No fault of them folks... firemen's pensions, teachers pensions... They were doing the right thing, and paying attention... but the investors were just cut off of GM... Tough sh*t, too bad... That was massive carnage. No, the market ain't the answer.

That’s why we need private accounts, not pensions.  Any retiree can preserve his balance by withdrawing more than he needs after good years (not enough to change his tax bracket), and as little as possible in a down year.  Ideally a person with a balance of less than $1M will have moved most of his assets out of stocks by 65.

[massadvj]

It is not immoral to take Social Security.

God created us to be sovereign first to ourselves, then to our families, then to our tribes, our communities, our nation and the world. That is the natural order of things, and it makes sense, which is why they tell mothers on airplanes to put the oxygen mask on themselves before they put it on their children. Each individual putting himself first is the basis of a free society.

I used to tell my students that the best thing they can do for their families, their communities, or their country is to be successful themselves. This flies in the face of the liberal claptrap that they must first be "global citizens." 

I used to also tell my students that it is not their fault that they were born in the most absurd times in human history, but it would be their fault if they failed to take advantage of it.

So to those who question the morality of taking Social Security, I tell you this: it is immoral to put the interests of the collective above your personal interests, and it is also not your fault that you were born into this absurd program.

Take the money and stop feeling guilty.

[Hoodat]

( . . .I stopped paying into it back in 1979, almost 50 years ago...)

A luxury I was never afforded.  At age 52, I openly stated on this forum that I would gladly surrender any future claims to Social Security if in return the government allowed me to place all future social security taxes into an IRA.  Because even with only 15 years of contributing those taxes into an actual retirement account, I would have come out better than what Social Security will pay me on half a century of collecting taxes.

[The_Reader_David]

Even Ayn Rand collected Social Security.  When questioned about it, she replied something to the effect, "I didn't get to make the rules."

[Hoodat]

That’s why we need private accounts, not pensions.  Any retiree can preserve his balance by withdrawing more than he needs after good years (not enough to change his tax bracket), and as little as possible in a down year.  Ideally a person with a balance of less than $1M will have moved most of his assets out of stocks by 65.

Correct.  And even those that had all their money in stocks, the market still recovered.

Back in 2008-09, I started upping my 401(k) contributions while some of my co-workers stopped contributing altogether.  Sucks to be them.

So what was the federal government doing at the time?  Taking 100% of my social security taxes and funding government.  No retirement savings.  No lock box.  They spent it the second they got it.  All with the promise that when I turned 65, I would get full retirement benefits.  Except now, I can't get that until I turn 67.  They moved the goal posts.  And at some future date,  I will see my benefits cut 20% when they finally acknowledge the insolvency that Social Security has been experiencing for over a decade now.

It's a friggin' PONZI SCHEME!  If John Hancock, Charles Schwab, Fidelity, etc. were doing this, their entire board would be facing 40 years in prison.

[Hoodat]

Consider someone earning $35k annually from age 22 through age 67 at the same (real) salary.  Instead of the government confiscating those social security taxes at the point of a gun, let's say that person were given the freedom to invest those social security taxes into an individual retirement account earning only 5% interest.  He/she would have amassed a personal retirement fund of $700k.  That person would be able to draw that same salary amount off just the interest of that account, keeping the entire principle intact and leaving an actual inheritance for future generations.

Social security is evil.

[Bigun]

A luxury I was never afforded.  At age 52, I openly stated on this forum that I would gladly surrender any future claims to Social Security if in return the government allowed me to place all future social security taxes into an IRA.  Because even with only 15 years of contributing those taxes into an actual retirement account, I would have come out better than what Social Security will pay me on half a century of collecting taxes.

Nor was I afforded such an opportunity even though I begged for it for forty plus years. I told them many times that they could keep what they had already stolen in exchange for simply leaving me alone in the future. They refused, and now I'm getting my monthly checks. Those checks would be many times larger had they agreed to my deal. Calculate the amount of $$$ you would now have if you had been able to invest $100 per month @ 5% for forty years.

[ScottinVA]

I paid into that system for 52 years and waited until I was old enough to draw at the full retirement rate.  I sure as hell am going to continue to draw from it.

[ScottinVA]

Even Ayn Rand collected Social Security.  When questioned about it, she replied something to the effect, "I didn't get to make the rules."

Amen to that. 

[Bigun]

I paid into that system for 52 years and waited until I was old enough to draw at the full retirement rate.  I sure as hell am going to continue to draw from it.

Me too! But had I been allowed to invest privately for those 52 years I would be able to take out a minimum of $5,000 per month and never touch the principal in my investment account. You getting $5000 per month from SS? I'm sure as hell not.

[roamer_1]

That’s why we need private accounts, not pensions.  Any retiree can preserve his balance by withdrawing more than he needs after good years (not enough to change his tax bracket), and as little as possible in a down year.  Ideally a person with a balance of less than $1M will have moved most of his assets out of stocks by 65.

That presupposes banks that don't go under IF private accounts are not invested, and investments paying off if they are.

Invariably, special interests and employees get served first in a bankruptcy, and investors get to take a ride.

I'll tell you how it went for me... 3 times in my life I got knocked all the way down - I mean not a pot to piss in or a window to throw it out of... On the street.
Two of those times I recovered - Came back to the point of having a well padded checkbook, and starting to go back after investment and IRA... Just to get crapped out again.

It's alright. I am used to it... Quit eating steak and go back to beans. I'm alright with that.

But this last time I got a double-whammy between COVID and the first round of tariffs destroying my business, and my malady coming to full bloom...

Broke on my butt, and can't get back up. Not complaining... Just my turn in the barrel... I get it. But y'all can't know how fast all that planning just disappears under the right conditions. Three months, maybe six, and I was all the way back in the cheap seats. Hell, I was all the way out of the stadium and out of the parkin lot. And I have a whole lot more gumption and understanding than most of your average worker-bees.

Shit happens. Then what?

[catfish1957]

I paid the max SS deduction for my last 25 years of work.  Why should I not get something back for that?

[Hoodat]

Calculate the amount of $$$ you would now have if you had been able to invest $100 per month @ 5% for forty years.

Such a calculation would be based on an annual salary of $9,600, or $800 per month.  After 40 years, you would have amassed roughly $152k.  From that alone, you could continue to draw your regular monthly check for another 31 years.

[Hoodat]

I paid into that system for 52 years and waited until I was old enough to draw at the full retirement rate.  I sure as hell am going to continue to draw from it.

Let's say a month into your retirement, you die.  What will your kids and grandkids get?

[Hoodat]

I paid the max SS deduction for my last 25 years of work.  Why should I not get something back for that?

The decision on whether you "get something back" for that rests solely on the whim of government.

[Hoodat]

Shit happens. Then what?

This is reason #47 why your Social Security taxes should have been invested in an individual retirement account instead of being handed over to government and spent immediately with a (now broken) promise that the Social Security Trust [sic] Fund [sic] would take care of you when you reached retirement age.

I know I would be sitting pretty right now if I had that money sitting in a retirement account right now instead of some promise of government to pay me a simple annuity check that expires the same day I do.  And if I die tomorrow, my kids would be inheriting that individual retirement account.

[roamer_1]

All y'all presume 40 years of smooth sailing. Y'all don't know what a meat grinder life can be.

So I will ask it again. Shit happens. What then?

[roamer_1]

This is reason #47 why your Social Security taxes should have been invested in an individual retirement account instead of being handed over to government and spent immediately with a (now broken) promise that the Social Security Trust [sic] Fund [sic] would take care of you when you reached retirement age.

I know I would be sitting pretty right now if I had that money sitting in a retirement account right now instead of some promise of government to pay me a simple annuity check that expires the same day I do.  And if I die tomorrow, my kids would be inheriting that individual retirement account.

I had both and lost it all. Three times.

[Smokin Joe]

OK, Briefers, a show of hands:

How many here are past retirement age?
How many (who are eligible to collect Social Security) have REFUSED IT because to collect it is immoral?

I'll be waiting for your replies.
I sense I'll be waiting a long LONG time.

(by the way, I'm in my 70's and have NEVER collected Social Security. I stopped paying into it back in 1979, almost 50 years ago...)

Past full retirement age, still working, collecting my full benefit I not only paid into since I was 14, but am still paying into. It's enough to pay the bills, so the paycheck goes to savings and projects, after eliminating all debt.

Something about paying into something for close to 55 years inclines a person toward getting something back, especially when it was promised (back when Social Security cards said "Not for identification...").

It is not my fault the government has routinely mismanaged those funds.

What is my fault was the ill timed loss of most of my nest egg through ill chosen investments. Before you say I should have sought an investment counselor, the ones I checked out wanted to load me up with tech stocks --in 1999, but I was leery of that, just before the dot bomb. That made me leery of the whole thing, and I tried my hand at picking stocks. I have had a couple 2X or 3X plays, and some investments that have held their value, but more that did a nosedive when I bought in. So, now I'm rebuilding that while Social Security pays the bills. I will work as long as I can, but then, the only time I have lived a life of 'leisure' was when there was no work to be had.

[Lando Lincoln]

I waited for full retirement to file for SS.  As for my career, I probably worked at least a year too long. Covid was huge - had I known I’d have to manage through that, I’d have run for the hills.

[jafo2010]

For those of you that feel guilt in regard to Social Security, I say stupid is as stupid does.

First, the Social Security Program was established to assist folks in retirement that were past the point of earning wages for the most part.  The average life expectancy when the program started was 59 years of age, with SSI beginning at age 65.  The program was designed such that the average person would NEVER collect a dime.  Again, it was designed to help those that reached 65 and needed a helping hand.

It was never intended to be the sole means to support anyone, EVER!!!!!!!!

But things change with time.  And a huge impact was anti-biotics, which has prolonged life to an average of 78 years of age in the USA.  And along the way, stinking politicians bought votes by lowering the age to collect SSI to 62 years of age.  And since 1984, the stinking corrupt politicians have been raiding the Social Security Trust Fund and leaving I.O.U.s basically.

And now, these stinking politicians are attempting to make you feel guilty and undeserving for collecting SSI.  I say f*** them and f*** that idiocy!!!  And they keep referencing SSI as an entitlement, like it is welfare.  It is no such thing.  It is monies you paid into a trust account in the hope one day that if you lived, you would collect money back.

AGAIN, SSI WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE THE SOLE SUPPORT OF ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!

Now the stinking corrupt politicians are floating the notion they will take away 25% of your benefit come 2030 +/- to keep the program afloat.  AND THEY WILL CUT THE PROGRAM, BUT I SUSPECT BY A NUMBER GREATER THAN 25%.  I THINK EVERYONE HERE BETTER BE PREPARED FOR A 35-50% CUT IN BENEFITS.  All this at a time when life in the USA is being devalued.  We as a society no longer respect life as we did a few decades ago.  We are in fact becoming more like Russia where they do not give two sh*ts about the life of anyone. 

To answer the above question, I am 71 and started collecting at age 70.  I have been in the workforce since I was 15 years of age.  And like roamer, I too have been knocked down enough times, that each time I ended up using the money I saved in my 401k to just survive for me and my family.

I have a modest pension and SSI.  That's it, and a paltry sum tucked away for a rainy day.  And I do mean paltry.  My wife is still working, has just shy of six years to get her 20 years in with the federal government to collect her modest 1% per year pension, cut in half from the prior federal pension.  She will get to collect SSI too when she is 9 years older(15 years from now), when I suspect it will be reduced by 35% or more.

The SSI Program was a good program, but stinking politicians had to put their hand in the till and begin spending YOUR MONEY.  The theft of the money has gone on for 41 years with no one rising to try and fix the theft created during the Reagan years.

To remind all of you, in 1984, Social Security was I believe 6.2% and capped at $32,000.  Since 1984, the Social Security has been indexed up, and 1.45% additional tax added to fund Medicare.  In 2025, to max out on Social Security tax, one needs to earn $176,100.  That is more than 5 TIMES the max income in 1984.

I have zero guilt collecting SSI.  I earned it, and so did all of you that paid into it.  PERIOD!!!!!!!  And if you are not collecting, you are independently wealthy, or you are a fool.

I am not living what I would call a fat life.  I am comfortable. 

There are things our lame, worthless Congress could do immediately to begin to strengthen the program.

1.  END collecting SSI before age 67  That could be done tomorrow for all future recipients.

2.  67 would constitute early retirement.  Increase the age for FRA to age 70 for everyone age 50 and younger.

3.  Begin a new program for individual accounts.  Start out at 1% and increase every other year by 1% until one reaches
     10%, and when the population begins to decline collecting SSI, begin reducing the SSI taxes and phase them out.  Then,
     again increase the individual account by 1% every other year until rate is at 15%.  That timing could be coordinated with
     the end of SSI.  Establish investment programs to get folks between 5% for conservative investors to 10% for more
     aggressive investors.  Monies cannot be touched for any reason but health reasons until retirement age..  The money
     after 40 years in the workforce would enable folks to live comfortably, even at a 5% rate of return.

The American people need to extricate the stinking corrupt politicians from their retirement mechanisms.  All politicians are corrupt to one level or another, and all are self serving.  As long as they can put their fingers in the till, and take what they wish, those being robbed are SOL.  End that nonsense now!!!!!

[roamer_1]

We are a prosperous nation, and I think there is a moral imperative to take care of the widow, the elderly, and the infirm. Byut I do not believe that is the job of the federal government (outside of indian reservations and military). I think it should belong to the various states.

I think it should be family oriented, with tax breaks to families caring for elderly, either in-house or otherwise. If you have a spare house and you can put grandma up there, that property should be tax free, and a very serious write-off for sundries and groceries - A very reasonable transfer without tax or fault.

I think likewise church and community contributions should be freely given without fault to widow, elder, and infirm...

THEN county and state services for those who require it, only after every other avenue is exhausted.

I think health should be bifurcated from income - In my case, if I make more than 300 bucks in a month my health insurance goes away for that month (after the fact), so any medical bills incurred during that month are not covered. My medical far outstrips anything else, and I would happily support myself otherwise... I am prevented from doing so.

I think most of the problems with SS are actually SSI... Medicaid and welfare. Clean up bastard children, encourage marriage, preach abstention and drug prevention, and clean up administrative costs, which are tremendously top heavy... That would get it flying right before you bust it up and hand it back to the states.

[cato potatoe]

All y'all presume 40 years of smooth sailing. Y'all don't know what a meat grinder life can be.

So I will ask it again. Shit happens. What then?

Then we return to subsistence living.  The government won’t help if the market ever does a permanent collapse.  They will just inflate their fiat dollars and offer it to you for kindling. 

[ScottinVA]

Let's say a month into your retirement, you die.  What will your kids and grandkids get?

I have plenty other investment assets they can share.  The Social Security tax I paid wasn’t an option for me.  Since I paid into it, I’m taking the full-retired amount.

[ScottinVA]

Me too! But had I been allowed to invest privately for those 52 years I would be able to take out a minimum of $5,000 per month and never touch the principal in my investment account. You getting $5000 per month from SS? I'm sure as hell not.

I agree.  I remember when IRAs came into existence in the early 1980s.. it was seen as a private option to SS. Then Congress started tinkering with it and established limits to traditional IRAs.

[Bigun]

We are a prosperous nation, and I think there is a moral imperative to take care of the widow, the elderly, and the infirm. Byut I do not believe that is the job of the federal government (outside of indian reservations and military). I think it should belong to the various states.

I think it should be family oriented, with tax breaks to families caring for elderly, either in-house or otherwise. If you have a spare house and you can put grandma up there, that property should be tax free, and a very serious write-off for sundries and groceries - A very reasonable transfer without tax or fault.

I think likewise church and community contributions should be freely given without fault to widow, elder, and infirm...

THEN county and state services for those who require it, only after every other avenue is exhausted.

I think health should be bifurcated from income - In my case, if I make more than 300 bucks in a month my health insurance goes away for that month (after the fact), so any medical bills incurred during that month are not covered. My medical far outstrips anything else, and I would happily support myself otherwise... I am prevented from doing so.

I think most of the problems with SS are actually SSI... Medicaid and welfare. Clean up bastard children, encourage marriage, preach abstention and drug prevention, and clean up administrative costs, which are tremendously top heavy... That would get it flying right before you bust it up and hand it back to the states.

The day we allowed government(s) to involve themselves in things that had previously been the province of the Church and private philanthropy is the day this country started down the road to hell.

“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

Davy Crockett


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRFaGi2lqrY

[catfish1957]

Let's say a month into your retirement, you die.  What will your kids and grandkids get?

That is a joke right?  I haven't obsessed with austerity and wealth generation for 45 years for nothing.

But your overall premise is dumb.  What about the same concept with life insurance or an annuity?  Smart people understand their genetics and longevity, and the concept of luck buy not being hit by a beer truck.  Then they adjust.    SS is fun money for me, so if it came free of charge, yeah I might feel a tad guilty.  BUT....  our SS is citizenry tenant that comes with gain along with the risk.  When I first paid my first  dollar in it in 1973,  there was no check yes or no box option of my sign up.   

But if and when it goes belly up?  Is just reason number 387 of why a Bastille Day in this country is long overdue. So really from my POV, SS is just static in the grand scheme.    And the point you are bitching more about this than the $38T debt this country shows you are off target.

[catfish1957]

I have plenty other investment assets they can share.  The Social Security tax I paid wasn’t an option for me.  Since I paid into it, I’m taking the full-retired amount.

I hope Hoodat realizes you can donate $19K a year annually to each family member without tax implications.    And it's been over $10K for several years.  Over decades, that adds up, especially if it is invested well.  My progeny is already taken care of.

[GtHawk]

So now if we collect on the social security we paid into for decades, not only are we then leaches on society…we are immoral leaches on society? Well kiss my….grits!

[MeganC]

Do we bear any portion of guilt when we accept money that was taken from others at threat of deadly force?

[catfish1957]

Do we bear any portion of guilt when we accept money that was taken from others at threat of deadly force?

???

[MeganC]

???

If you don't pay the social security tax then armed men will come after you.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Then we return to subsistence living.  The government won’t help if the market ever does a permanent collapse.  They will just inflate their fiat dollars and offer it to you for kindling.

Why do people keep anticipating something this ridiculous? The market will not do a permanent collapse, because as long as there are people, they will want to buy shit.

Yeah, if you think it's immoral, fine. Personally I don't have a problem with my tax portion going to the *truly needy*. The loafers can KMA. Whether it's SS or food stamps etc. As a society we can collectively decide where our tax dollars go to, but not individually. Death and taxes basically.

[GtHawk]

If you don't pay the social security tax then armed men will come after you.

Did the people my dollars went to for their SS feel any guilt? NO! This is 5he game we are forced to play so NO I feel no guilt. Until the game is changed and people are allowed to invest their money as they wish this is what we have. You can’t cancel people who worked their lives paying in expecting the return, piddly as it is, they were promised nor is right to guilt them for taking what they were promised.

[roamer_1]

The day we allowed government(s) to involve themselves in things that had previously been the province of the Church and private philanthropy is the day this country started down the road to hell.

That's right. Philosophically, any time government takes over YOUR responsibility, to give you freedom, it is at the expense of all of our liberty. That must be the eventual end, in every case.

Yah calls upon the nation to care for the elder and the widow, and the infirm, that is true. But the FIRST call is laid out in the ten commandments. It is foremost laid upon !YOU! to honor your father and your mother. !YOUR! responsibility as a bearer of the image of Yah. That is a deep and ingrained thing about being Human, and will not be changed.

!YOUR! responsibility first, and by extension, family... House. Clan.
The Church should not be in the way if that. The Church should assist that.
Government should not be in the way of that. Government should assist that.

That is the natural order of things.

Liberty has responsibilities.
Freedom has consequences.

[jafo2010]

roamer_1...

I think most of the problems with SS are actually SSI... Medicaid and welfare. Clean up bastard children, encourage marriage, preach abstention and drug prevention, and clean up administrative costs, which are tremendously top heavy...

Medicaid and welfare, lumping them in with Social Security benefits, how OBTUSE OF YOU!  They are separate programs having nothing to do with SSI.  SSI is funded by those earning an income.  They pay with their dollars to fund SSI.  The folks receiving Medicaid and welfare did NOT fund a damn thing.  I am so tired of the ignorance of this key fact!!!

But, it is the stinking corrupt self serving politicians that want you to believe they are all in the same basket.  They are not!!!!!!!!!

When Congress began robbing the Social Security Trust Fund in 1984, it became clearly evident that they were so brazen and realized they could get away with just about anything.  And they have continued this behavior ever since.  Robert Dole when he ran for POTUS proudly hung his hat on SAVING Social Security with what they did in 1984.  And nothing has changed and nothing has been done to correct the criminal abuse of the taxpayer ever since.

Marriage is all but dead.  Only traditional folks get married.  And even then, it is after living with one another for years and having 1-2 kids.  With the decline of religious adherence, marriage is dying.  And it is further reduced in relevance by allowing same sex marriage.  Same sex marriage reduces the significance of marriage and makes the meaning of it all a joke.  Marriage is a sacrament in many religions, a union of one man and one woman in something held sacred in that religion.  Not any longer for most in our society.

Years ago, it was reported the average child lost their virginity at age 16.  I am certain it is younger yet today.  Abstinence is not important.  Despite diseases that can be deadly, young folks disregard safe behavior.

The UGLY TRUTH is that everything the federal government touches turns to sh*t.  They should not administer any program.  Billions are lost to fraud every year, and they never appear to make an effort to reduce it. 

The Social Security Administration is staffed with folks that are poorly trained and frankly, dumb as a box of rocks.  I still do not have my SSI what it should be.  They have incorrect data for two years of my income.  I have gone five times to correct it, and each time I got a different story, different requirements.  Still not what it should be.  Their incompetence is costing me money.

The only fault with SSI rests with our worthless do nothing Congress, men and women who no longer represent US citizens.  They care more about illegal invading criminal aliens then the good citizens of the USA.  How disgusting that equation has become.  That is why until we get term limits, this is no longer a government of the people, for the people and by the people.    The people, the US citizens no longer matter.  Just like Russia.  It is disheartening.

[catfish1957]

If you don't pay the social security tax then armed men will come after you.

Unless you can find someone who wants to pay you wages under the table in cash.  Let me know how far you get in your employment search adventures without filling out a "W-4"

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

Medicaid and welfare, lumping them in with Social Security benefits, how OBTUSE OF YOU!  They are separate programs having nothing to do with SSI.  SSI is funded by those earning an income.  They pay with their dollars to fund SSI.  The folks receiving Medicaid and welfare did NOT fund a damn thing.  I am so tired of the ignorance of this key fact!!!

But, it is the stinking corrupt self serving politicians that want you to believe they are all in the same basket.  They are not!!!!!!!!!

When Congress began robbing the Social Security Trust Fund in 1984, it became clearly evident that they were so brazen and realized they could get away with just about anything.  And they have continued this behavior ever since.  Robert Dole when he ran for POTUS proudly hung his hat on SAVING Social Security with what they did in 1984.  And nothing has changed and nothing has been done to correct the criminal abuse of the taxpayer ever since.

Marriage is all but dead.  Only traditional folks get married.  And even then, it is after living with one another for years and having 1-2 kids.  With the decline of religious adherence, marriage is dying.  And it is further reduced in relevance by allowing same sex marriage.  Same sex marriage reduces the significance of marriage and makes the meaning of it all a joke.  Marriage is a sacrament in many religions, a union of one man and one woman in something held sacred in that religion.  Not any longer for most in our society.

Years ago, it was reported the average child lost their virginity at age 16.  I am certain it is younger yet today.  Abstinence is not important.  Despite diseases that can be deadly, young folks disregard safe behavior.

The UGLY TRUTH is that everything the federal government touches turns to sh*t.  They should not administer any program.  Billions are lost to fraud every year, and they never appear to make an effort to reduce it. 

The Social Security Administration is staffed with folks that are poorly trained and frankly, dumb as a box of rocks.  I still do not have my SSI what it should be.  They have incorrect data for two years of my income.  I have gone five times to correct it, and each time I got a different story, different requirements.  Still not what it should be.  Their incompetence is costing me money.

The only fault with SSI rests with our worthless do nothing Congress, men and women who no longer represent US citizens.  They care more about illegal invading criminal aliens then the good citizens of the USA.  How disgusting that equation has become.  That is why until we get term limits, this is no longer a government of the people, for the people and by the people.    The people, the US citizens no longer matter.  Just like Russia.  It is disheartening.

Eh, the effect is the same. Fact is you can withdraw far more out of SS then you ever put in, making it basically equivalent to a means-tested benefit like medicaid, etc. It's a tax we all pay for, and some will take out far more than they ever put in.

[Hoodat]

The day we allowed government(s) to involve themselves in things that had previously been the province of the Church and private philanthropy is the day this country started down the road to hell.

Word.

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

The day we allowed government(s) to involve themselves in things that had previously been the province of the Church and private philanthropy is the day this country started down the road to hell.

“Mr. Speaker–I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as much sympathy for the sufferings of the living, if suffering there be, as any man in this House, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one week’s pay to the object, and if every member of Congress will do the same, it will amount to more than the bill asks.”

Davy Crockett


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRFaGi2lqrY

It goes all the way back to the Revolution, and they had poor houses before then as well. We've always had some sort of relief for the poor.

[jafo2010]

Weird Tolkienish Figure...

Yeah, if you think it's immoral, fine. Personally I don't have a problem with my tax portion going to the *truly needy*. The loafers can KMA. Whether it's SS or food stamps etc.

Another person defaming folks collecting Social Security.  You brainwashed people amaze me.  Taxpayers funded Social Security.  Folks on welfare and Medicaid did not fund a damn thing.  So please, stop lumping people that contribute nothing to those of us that were forced to pay taxes into Social Security.  Not one person I know was given a choice in paying Social Security Taxes.  I worked f***ing hard all my life, and I resent people like you referring to recipients of SS as loafers.

There is such a disdain for the working people in the USA.  It amazes me.  And to lump them in with people that never worked an honest day, that astounds me.

We have stinking politicians displacing white collar US citizens from high paid positions to provide jobs to folks for half or less the salary and no benefits, almost exclusively from India.  I have worked with hundreds of them, where US citizens are 10% on a project, folks from India are 90%.  We have other politicians that allow millions to pour into our country that end up taking mostly the blue collar jobs from US citizens, and again, no one cares.  Perfectly fine to destroy the lives of US citizens.

And then there are federal funds for federal programs being paid to system people in China, India, and Ukraine at even lower salaries than the ones brought to the USA, and I have been on projects with folks from all three countries, where typically 35 -100 of the folks on projects funded by the federal government are in those countries.

Anything is legal in the USA when it comes to destroying our workforce for the benefit of foreigners.  And Trump's dishonest rhetoric of promises made, promises kept, it is all a lie.  He ran in 2016 promising to end the H1-b Visa Program.  He ended up increasing numbers 1st term, and is promising to do so again this term.  The fools that keep voting these people into office who destroy US citizens lives, and no one cares.  Certainly no one cares on these boards.  I have not seen one person here on these boards voice the same complaint. 

When as a society we no longer care about our fellow citizens, guess what, we become more like Russia, where they do not care about their fellow man.  At least they have a reason, they are living a life of fear in a totalitarian system that gets you killed if you speak up against the leaders of government.  Here, we just follow like sheep, meek with every step, and fully tolerant of folks that no longer represent us in Congress.

[roamer_1]

Medicaid and welfare, lumping them in with Social Security benefits, how OBTUSE OF YOU!  They are separate programs having nothing to do with SSI.  SSI is funded by those earning an income.  They pay with their dollars to fund SSI.  The folks receiving Medicaid and welfare did NOT fund a damn thing.  I am so tired of the ignorance of this key fact!!!

But, it is the stinking corrupt self serving politicians that want you to believe they are all in the same basket.  They are not!!!!!!!!!,

Well, now I am on the inside of all that, looking out.
Technically, I am retired, disabled, and without means. Because I am retired and disabled, technically medicare is my first tier of care. But because I am without means, whatever medicare won't pick up, medicaid must take care of. Likewise my 'pension' is now partly SS and partly SSI.

You can whne and cry and throw dirt in the air all you want, but SSI and SS are so intricately intertwined as to make them inseparable - A monstrous monkey knot. On purpose, to be sure. There is no separating the two anymore. The only way out is to destroy the whole shittaree. And as a recipient, I am a fan of that destruction.

When Congress began robbing the Social Security Trust Fund in 1984, it became clearly evident that they were so brazen and realized they could get away with just about anything.  And they have continued this behavior ever since.  Robert Dole when he ran for POTUS proudly hung his hat on SAVING Social Security with what they did in 1984.  And nothing has changed and nothing has been done to correct the criminal abuse of the taxpayer ever since.

All true, without denial. But here we are. We're in this room now. How it happened is less important than how to fix it. 

Marriage is all but dead.  Only traditional folks get married.  And even then, it is after living with one another for years and having 1-2 kids.  With the decline of religious adherence, marriage is dying.  And it is further reduced in relevance by allowing same sex marriage.  Same sex marriage reduces the significance of marriage and makes the meaning of it all a joke.  Marriage is a sacrament in many religions, a union of one man and one woman in something held sacred in that religion.  Not any longer for most in our society.

Years ago, it was reported the average child lost their virginity at age 16.  I am certain it is younger yet today.  Abstinence is not important.  Despite diseases that can be deadly, young folks disregard safe behavior.

All that is true too - But it does not impact what I said, except as to demonstrate the destruction of liberty, proving my point. Inevitably, it must return to the standard. The illusion is that government can ease the burden by its provision. But it is an illusion. The weight of it will pull the government down, and what will rise will rise directly against our liberty. It is the way of things.

The UGLY TRUTH is that everything the federal government touches turns to sh*t.  They should not administer any program.  Billions are lost to fraud every year, and they never appear to make an effort to reduce it. 

The Social Security Administration is staffed with folks that are poorly trained and frankly, dumb as a box of rocks.  I still do not have my SSI what it should be.  They have incorrect data for two years of my income.  I have gone five times to correct it, and each time I got a different story, different requirements.  Still not what it should be.  Their incompetence is costing me money.

The only fault with SSI rests with our worthless do nothing Congress, men and women who no longer represent US citizens.  They care more about illegal invading criminal aliens then the good citizens of the USA.  How disgusting that equation has become.  That is why until we get term limits, this is no longer a government of the people, for the people and by the people.    The people, the US citizens no longer matter.  Just like Russia.  It is disheartening.

Any surprise I might have is in that y'all expected any different. It's why the Founders treated government like fire - a necessary thing that can provide warmth if strictly contained... Or otherwise it can just as easily burn down the house.

It's burning down the house because we let it. ANY faith and trust lent to government is a direct loss of liberty. Trust none of them. Ever. NONE of them. Take it back and make em walk the line, every minute of every day. Give em an inch and next thing you know, we'll be right back here again.

[jafo2010]

roamer_1...

You can whine and cry and throw dirt in the air all you want, but SSI and SS are so intricately intertwined as to make them inseparable

I learned something today.  I thought SSI and SS were the same thing.  After your comment I searched the two and found out otherwise.

So, Social Security payments are paid to folks that paid taxes into the system.  SSI I suppose is a form of welfare, which  I did not realize.  For those folks collecting SSI, they are in need of a helping hand.  I understand that.

There are young people collecting welfare and consider it their income.  I read a story of a young woman that had a baby every year, and at the age of 26 had 10 kids.  Each month, she was collecting $1,500 per child making a nice six figure income.  No fathers involved, for she probably did not know who the  fathers were for her children.  Didn't care either I suspect.  She just wanted the income that came with having those children.  I have a problem with all of that.  We should not pay unlimited sums of money to folks on welfare.  There should be a limit, one such that people are encouraged to work for a living.