bhanusa Loc: Maui, Hawaii

This was yesterday's topic, but I would like to get my two cents in:

Social Security is not a benefit it, is a return on investment and it irritates me that by calling it a benefit it becomes something our "generous" government gives to us like welfare. Money I receive monthly, I invested starting 70 years ago and was mishandled badly by the government starting with Johnson.

Since congressional members do not pay into Social Security and have lifetime pensions, I would like to see all of those funds t***sferred to the Social Security account.

Convention of States that would add another amendment to our Constitution and would, among other things, accomplish that,along with term limits congressional members

aaciolkowski Loc: Sugar Grove Illinois

Can’t agree more!!!

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

I SECOND THAT EMOTION.

MikeMck Loc: Southern Maryland on the Bay

blue-ultra Loc: New Hampshire

I agree with you on your first paragraph. The government used money from the SS trust fund to pay for the Viet Nam war along with a 2 cent addition tax on fuel that they never removed. They also never replaced the stolen money to the trust fund. So much for trust!

concerning paragraph 2, I believe that members of congress pay SS taxes. Plus not all members of congress get a pension. House members need to serve 3 terms to qualify with a limited amount which changes with time served. I do think Senate members have some kind of qualification, need to research that one.

Concerning paragraph 3, While this sounds good, I could not disagree with you more on the convention of states. It that were ever to occur, everything would be on the table, EVERYTHING! A select few would completely rewrite the entire constitution, it is possible!. Those who push this have an agenda.

As far as term limits are concerned again sounds good until you find out the facts. Term limits are already there with the b****t box. If a member is not doing what you want you un-elect him/her. States that have done this have found that the members that are term limited end up as a lobbyist or working for a firm as a consultant that lobby's. New members have no idea how to proceed and get their information from the lobbyist. You end up losing those people who are doing a good job and lose all the institutional knowledge, again the lobby folks move in...

My humble opinion with 14 years of legislative service.

Bob

Bob

jack schade Loc: La Pine Oregon

I totally agree!!!

Jack

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

Trump already saying he will take on SS at start of his second term.

G Brown Loc: Sunny Bognor Regis West Sussex UK

When you see the meaningless and petty jobs that governments employ - to call those on benefits scroungers is wrong.
The salaries and final salary payoffs paid to management in public sector jobs is an insult to anyone 'actually working'.

It is time that we got rid of 'government' within walking distance.... as nearly everything they 'produce for us' is either on the internet or farmed out to private companies.

I appreciate it was the UK that created 'government' and sold it to the world....its time that victorian factory got pulled down

sirlensalot Loc: Arizona

I view SS more as an annuity. There is a type of annuity that guarantees a specific rate of return regardless of the loss of principal. Kinda sorta like SS since the principal has pretty much gone down the s**tter.
Do not think anyone could have projected the increase in life spans which has not helped, but the real issue is of course our congress, who treats our money as their own to spend how they wish. Like so many government programs that were created with good intentions, it is the people that administrate and control it that destroy them. SS is but one of them.
Another example is the FDA - recent news reported if there is a problem with a particular food or drug product, it takes an average of 10 months to react to it. The response was "we're working on it to make it better". If that isn't a typical crapola response by an appointed bureaucrat, I don't know what is. It seems the more we rely on them the more we have to take care of ourselves. What a waste!

Quinn 4

How the hell do you thing FDR pay for WWII, with war bonds?

CA_CanonUser Loc: Friendswood, TX

Social Security benefits are not well understood by most. First: most people get 100% of the dollars they paid into the program back as benefits within 4 years of drawing benefits. I have been drawing benefits for a little less than 3 years and have gotten 100% back already. The argument that if I had invested that money, it would have been much more is suspect. Well over half of the dollars I paid into the program were paid over the last 10 years of employment (and I paid in for 50 years), so I would not have "made" that much on my money. Besides, have you looked at the saving rate for Americans recently? -- most people do not save nearly the percentage they pay into social security, so it is much more likely that most folks would have spent that money rather than "saved" or invested it.
Your second paragraph is incorrect. Members of congress do indeed pay into social security. I won't dispute that they have many other benefits we average Joes don't have (and they don't deserve), but not paying into social security isn't one of them.
Much of the problem with social security is that so many people now get it well before retirement age (disabilities, etc.); and people are now drawing benefits for so much longer than when it first started. When the program was first set up, approximately 10% of workers ever lived long enough to collect benefits; now that percentage is off the charts. The program was not intended to be a retirement pension plan, but to provide only the basics of life for those who reached retirement age. We were expected to provide most of our retirement funds ourselves or through pensions we received from the employer we worked for our entire career. We all know the story on where pensions have gone!

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

If people had done as Mr bush jr had suggested. Take your SS money an invest in stock market who would had gotten it. Since his recession was man made when he had all 50 mortage regulators fired.

BIGRO Loc: NYC

Not being able to retire for at least another 20 years (God willing), I understand that the majority of you are already at that peak. With the current state that we are in, don't any of you find it bothersome that SS is always on the verge of being downsized for lack of a better term. Have you looked around and seen just how many "Senior Citizens" are still working? To me, it started off with the right intentions and may have worked before the government decided it was their personal purse for "projects" that wouldn't get approved. There are hundreds, if not thousands of working class that can't afford to invest and hundreds more that lost their investments. With the increasing prices of necessities ex.. medication, SS won't amount to much as far as survival even it it wasn't tapped into by the government

boberic Loc: Quiet Corner, Connecticut. Ex long Islander

While you areright on most of what you said the is one very big error. The SS Trust fund which would have grown if managed correctly. was , in effect, stolen by the feds and rolled over into the general fund. In an attempt to make the deficit look smaller. AS a result there is NO SS TRUST FUND. The system as it now stands is actually a giant ponzi scheme. With regard to term limits--The president HAS term limits. The framers did not intend that membership in the House should be a lifetime career. The idea, which has now been corrupted to be a career. was there so as to be citizen legislators. Serve a term or 2 or 3 and then return toa "real"job. Bact to SS> Something MUST be done. the Gov't will run out of money, as "entitlements" take up to 75% of the budget And this percentage is growing as the population ages. Tangentialy- A******n is partly to blame here, as we have aborted an entire generation. About 35 million people have been removed. These younger citizens are not contributind to the Ponzi scheme. Think about it. 10% of the population dioes not exist solely due to a******n.

drainbamage

Most people get 100% of the dollars they paid into the program back within 4 years? I paid into it for 48 years, so I figure the amount I paid is about $700,000 or so. In four years, all I've received is approximately $54,000. I hope I live another 16 years to call it even, but if I don't, then the government made a profit on me.