• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are Seniors Lazy Parasites

Are seniors that use SS one of these...

  • Terrorists

    Votes: 10 55.6%
  • Leftists

    Votes: 4 22.2%
  • Lazy

    Votes: 1 5.6%
  • Parasites

    Votes: 3 16.7%

  • Total voters
    18
The bolded part is why I am financing the education of my grandchildren....so they can pay into SS.
BUT, eventually, the SS program has to die of old age, or at least face major surgery so we can cut out the wasteful parts of it.

The fraud alone is a huge number. My elderly neighbor is crippled and can get a scooter for $1500 out of her pocket, but the vendor gets $2500 if the govt pays for it. Why can't the govt get the scooter at the same price the vendor is offering to the citizen?


I actually I think the Gov. should get a bulk discount.

scooter%20store.jpg
 
If you end SS medicare medicaid all pensions and paid benefits...what do you do with all the millions of people that cant save for their own old age or dont...or cant save enough...what do you do with the millions that dont have health care as they get sick...
All the teaparty does is rail on entitlements they only OFFER solutions to get rid of them...but they dont tell US who is going to pay for all the people that dont work now who arent going to start..who cant work now...who dont make enough to do it on their own...etc etc etc....harry with all due respect...I believe your a gentleman and this is not directed at you...the teaparty is totally full of ****

I'm not affiliated with the Tea Party, Democratic Party, Republican Party and really not even the Libertarian Party.

I come to my ideas and beliefs from multiple sources.

Replacing SS with a mandatory, conservatively managed, private account would be better in the long run as it does not rely on future revenues but the revenues placed in it now.

Replacing Medicare with system, similar to what Singapore has, is my idea for everyone.
Both sustainable solutions without giant unfunded liabilities.
 
You're correct, private businesses that sell retirement plans do go out of business. But, I'm sure that the government will step in a rescue who stupidly bought a retirement plan from a retirement company that they should have known would go out of business.

The really big ones are protected by the govt, especially if it is one that holds congressional retirement funds.
 
I think SS should be done with through attrition, those who are or were forced to pay into it should benefit from it. Those who haven't entered the work force yet should be required to take another non tax funded retirement plan. That said, I disagree with that seniors should be paid what they put into it, that won't work because what seniors put into it wasn't voluntary, and denied them those funds to invest into a market which could have paid them 100 fold more than what SS pays.

Now then there is risk associated with investment for retirement through the private sector, this is true and one remedy is getting back to a company paid pensions or retire or 401K matches. The government can this promote incentive's by hefty tax breaks amongst many other looser requirements for setting up shop.
 
Last edited:
....The fraud alone is a huge number. My elderly neighbor is crippled and can get a scooter for $1500 out of her pocket, but the vendor gets $2500 if the govt pays for it. Why can't the govt get the scooter at the same price the vendor is offering to the citizen?
We bought my mother-in-law’s first scooter, a 3 wheel design, she needed one but couldn't qualify. Ten years later the government is replacing hers another one, more stable with 4 wheels. My question about your neighbor's two prices is: Are they exactly the same scooter? Or is one a cheap one and the other a safer one. BTY she has fallen with the 3 wheel scooter several times and she doesn’t have the tipping problem with the 4 wheel one. (Sorry, but I'm an engineer and when meeting with vendors I've been told things are the same when they are not, etc. So I have to ask.)
 
The bolded part is why I am financing the education of my grandchildren....so they can pay into SS.
BUT, eventually, the SS program has to die of old age, or at least face major surgery so we can cut out the wasteful parts of it.

The fraud alone is a huge number. My elderly neighbor is crippled and can get a scooter for $1500 out of her pocket, but the vendor gets $2500 if the govt pays for it. Why can't the govt get the scooter at the same price the vendor is offering to the citizen?

Nature of the beast. Whenever the government subsidizes something the price will rise with increased demand. Further, the government purchasing agent has little incentive to look for value or give much consideration to the desires of the end user. Their goal is to buy something/anything that will satisfy the minimal needs of the end user and expend the limit of their budget.
 
So are seniors who payed into social security all their lives and now live off of it in old age, lazy good for nothing leftist parasites?

Ask me again in 8 years, three months and seven days.
 
We bought my mother-in-law’s first scooter, a 3 wheel design, she needed one but couldn't qualify. Ten years later the government is replacing hers another one, more stable with 4 wheels. My question about your neighbor's two prices is: Are they exactly the same scooter? Or is one a cheap one and the other a safer one. BTY she has fallen with the 3 wheel scooter several times and she doesn’t have the tipping problem with the 4 wheel one. (Sorry, but I'm an engineer and when meeting with vendors I've been told things are the same when they are not, etc. So I have to ask.)

Same scooter....
they already have it, renting it til they find out if the govt pays for it. If the govt will not, their rent is applied to the purchase price.
The same company sold them a large folding ramp for more than double the going price and I suggested that they take it back. It folded the wrong way and took up too much room in the van. I already had ramps that fold up and fit in the well at the back. He made a cover for the well that is hinged so the right side will lift up for access to the ramps with the scooter in the van..
 
The really big ones are protected by the govt, especially if it is one that holds congressional retirement funds.
So you don't like a government safety net retirement program and you don't trust private retirement planes. OK. So what should we be doing, buying gold and keeping in a safe at home?
 
I think SS should be done with through attrition, those who are or were forced to pay into it should benefit from it. Those who haven't entered the work force yet should be required to take another non tax funded retirement plan.

That will not work. If the young are not forced to pay into SS there is no money to pay beneficiaries. It's possible that we could split the payroll taxes so some portion goes to the SS fund and some is allowed to be invested, but that will increase the SS deficit if we do not also reduce benefits. We could have done this split plan 10-20 years ago and we may have been able to get out of it with little to no pain, but the elderly and the AARP refused to allow that.

That said, I disagree with that seniors should be paid what they put into it, that won't work because what seniors put into it wasn't voluntary, and denied them those funds to invest into a market which could have paid them 100 fold more than what SS pays.

So you want some sort of fairytale system where seniors are paid generous benefits and no one is taxed? It can not work and these delusions of the perfect solution are getting in the way of solutions that may not be perfect but are at least better than doing nothing.

Now then there is risk associated with investment for retirement through the private sector, this is true and one remedy is getting back to a company paid pensions or retire or 401K matches. The government can this promote incentive's by hefty tax breaks amongst many other looser requirements for setting up shop.

Pensions and 401k's are both subject to market risk. But that is the solution. The more dispersed the investment decisions are the better. Pensions are often abused in the same way SS has been but at least the government can regulate them in ways to reduce risk. There is no one to regulate the government and voters have proven too stupid and irresponsible. Some sort of 401k like plans are the best solution.

If we put all our eggs in one basket then the bad choices of just one actor screws us all. It does not remove risk. If we distribute the decisions there will be winners and losers. We will need to think about some help for the losers, but we will still be better off than the current plan.
 
Last edited:
Privatizing social security might work, but then again even if it was effective, if the government is allowed to spend the surplus on other entitlements or expenditures, it's pointless.
 
Same scooter....
they already have it, renting it til they find out if the govt pays for it. If the govt will not, their rent is applied to the purchase price.
The same company sold them a large folding ramp for more than double the going price and I suggested that they take it back. It folded the wrong way and took up too much room in the van. I already had ramps that fold up and fit in the well at the back. He made a cover for the well that is hinged so the right side will lift up for access to the ramps with the scooter in the van..
Same scooter. Thanks. Where did you find out what the government would be charged? The vendor doesn't sound like he should be trusted if he did that with the ramps. It's good that you’re helping them.

BTY, Utah and Arizona, I moved to AZ in '55. Are you on of the Good People of the east valley?
 
That will not work. If the young are not forced to pay into SS there is no money to pay beneficiaries. It's possible that we could split the payroll taxes so some portion goes to the SS fund and some is allowed to be invested, but that will increase the SS deficit if we do not also reduce benefits. We could have done this split plan 10-20 years ago and we may have been able to get out of it with little to no pain, but the elderly and the AARP refused to allow that.
SS is a ponzi scheme and there will be pain associated with it's demise, it has to end and doing so through attrition is the only way. The split I agree is a good idea but we are perhaps beyond that now, there is no money in SS therefor is meaningless about the young funding SS. That said what right do we have to force the young who haven't entered the work force to pay into something they will most likely not benefit from.





So you want some sort of fairytale system where seniors are paid generous benefits and no one is taxed? It can not work and these delusions of the perfect solution are getting in the way of solutions they may not be perfect but are at least better than doing nothing..
I didn't imply anything in regards to some fairy tale system, what did imply was that if the taxpayer was allowed to direct some of the SS the funds to some private retirement plan, the payoffs would have been a lot better that what SS could ever offer.



Pensions and 401k's are both subject to market risk. But that is the solution. The more dispersed the investment decisions are the better. Pensions are often abused in the same way SS has been but at least the government can regulate them in ways to reduce risk. There is no one to regulate the government and voters have proven too stupid and irresponsible. Some sort of 401k like plans are the best solution.

If we put all our eggs in one basket then the bad choices of just one actor screws us all. It does not remove risk. If we distribute the decisions there will be winners and losers. We will need to think about some help for the losers, but we will still be better off than the current plan.
This I agree with .
 
Last edited:
Privatizing social security might work, but then again even if it was effective, if the government is allowed to spend the surplus on other entitlements or expenditures, it's pointless.

The accounts are held privately, the contribution towards them would be mandatory.
So in all we wouldn't have to worry about them dipping their hands in the cookie jar.
 
Same scooter. Thanks. Where did you find out what the government would be charged? The vendor doesn't sound like he should be trusted if he did that with the ramps. It's good that you’re helping them.

BTY, Utah and Arizona, I moved to AZ in '55. Are you on of the Good People of the east valley?

No, one of the good people of the west valley....Peoria, near Cactus and 99th ave and Loop 101...
I keep tabs on my elderly friends and neighbors, save them money with minor repairs, and access to my personal hardware stash.
The seller is telling them the prices, and I don't trust the business based on the ramp thing along. I think it is a used scooter, and if so probably doesn't qualify for govt purchase thru Medicare, but I don't know for sure.
 
So you don't like a government safety net retirement program and you don't trust private retirement planes. OK. So what should we be doing, buying gold and keeping in a safe at home?

Don't have gold....
I did the multiple baskets plan....
SS, US Navy, employer retirement plan, 401k, IRA....5 baskets. The IRA had the poorest return, but the others have made up for it. Plus we paid cash for the Utah house, still owe $35K on the AZ house. That debt will be eliminated within 3 years. Would be sooner, but we have a grandchild with serious medical issues and we help that family.

One more source of retirement income, that I did not plan for.
I get some money from the VA for Parkinson's, based on presumed exposure to agent orange in Vietnam. No other member of my family tree, that we know of, has ever had tremors of any kind. Nearly all of them smoked, drank, etc. and lived to their mid 80's before dying of old age/heart failure. I didn't smoke or drink, but will still likely live to 85 or so, but the last years will be miserable. Depends on when stage 5 starts for me.
 
Last edited:
Some of you say that those who were unable to save are irresponsible.
Some of you say that the elderly and disabled should be just be cut off and left to fend for themselves.
Some of you say that the elderly and disabled are parasites.

Well, I have something to say. When I was a young man trying to get a family started I had things like kids, monthly payments, cars and other things that usually left me with less than I needed each month So, I got a second job. My wife was already working. With three jobs we could usually meet the monthly obligations, barely.

Some months we had a few dollars left over to take the kids somewhere, or for my wife and myself to go on a date. I know, such wasteful things.

Then as I began to slowly get ahead in my job money came easier. Then we decided to buy a house. What a great way to save and plan for the future. There is a one time capital gains tax exemption for seniors when they sell a house. We were always told that real estate was a sure thing. Well, that wasn't exactly the case.

But we worked on through it and the market began to recover. Then the oil bust in the 80's hit. Everything in Denver went to hell. We weathered this storm as well. Thing was, our investment wasn't building like we had been told by the experts that it would. Sure, there was some equity, but far short of what we had expected.

I'm just an average man who worked hard my entire life and I have little understanding of the stock market and how it works. Many others I know had the same problem. We had to rely on experts to tell us what was best. The same ones that caused a global financial crisis. Now we are being told we must place our faith in those same people yet again.

I said I was average, not stupid.

Then I left my wife after 20 years and it cost me my lifetime savings of $585,000, which included real estate and a thriving business. At over 40 I found myself broke and starting over from scratch, both in saving and career wise. Then I found that the job market was completely different, employees were now seeking a complete different set of skills than I was trained in. Damn.

So I was forced to take a series of low paying jobs than once again did not meet my monthly obligations. My new wife was working as well. I was unable to work two jobs now as age and disease began overtaking me. Finally I got a job and worked my way up to supervisor. A job with benefits and a decent salary.

Now my body began to fail. I was unable to perform my job duties no matter how hard I fought to. The company let me go. I applied for disability. I can barely even walk up or down the 4 steps to my home. Long term use of medication with some nasty side effects have left me mentally less than sharp. I am unhirable now. After one and a half years of fighting disability I finally have a hearing scheduled in September. My attorney feels my chances of winning are excellent, that I just had to trot through all the hoops first.

Since I have been unemployed for a year and a half I am forced to also apply for Chapter 13 bankruptcy. If I had even tried to work during this time my disability claim would have been thrown out right away.

Please add my ass to the previous list of asses that you can kiss. Twice.
 
Amen Brother Polotick. great post. :peace
 
Some of you say that those who were unable to save are irresponsible.
Some of you say that the elderly and disabled should be just be cut off and left to fend for themselves.
Some of you say that the elderly and disabled are parasites.
1st line - Most only say this in response to a system without SS, not in a system with it already in place. A vast majority are not advocating to just cut people off of SS. Most are saying to end it, but still pay out all those that have in the past put money into it. So all current seniors and soon to be seniors wouldn't get it touched whatsoever.
2nd line- i don't know anyone or any congressman/presidential candidate who wants to do that and i know a lot of people on the right wing.
3rd line- Again i dont know of anyone that believes that, if someone does, they are jerks.

I don't know of any presidential candidate or congressman proposing anything close to what you described above.
 
SS is a ponzi scheme and there will be pain associated with it's demise, it has to end and doing so through attrition is the only way. The split I agree is a good idea but we are perhaps beyond that now, there is no money in SS therefor is meaningless about the young funding SS. That said what right do we have to force the young who haven't entered the work force to pay into something they will most likely not benefit from.





I didn't imply anything in regards to some fairy tale system, what did imply was that if the taxpayer was allowed to direct some of the SS the funds to some private retirement plan, the payoffs would have been a lot better that what SS could ever offer.



This I agree with .
Why do some people think that SS is a ponzi scheme ?
I totally disagree with this "conclusion".
And I do know that private business cannot be completely trusted to handle a man's retirement.....truthfully the problem is the man himself...he cannot be trusted...greed is the problem.
Leave SS alone !
It works for me and millions more.
 
1st line - Most only say this in response to a system without SS, not in a system with it already in place. A vast majority are not advocating to just cut people off of SS. Most are saying to end it, but still pay out all those that have in the past put money into it. So all current seniors and soon to be seniors wouldn't get it touched whatsoever.
2nd line- i don't know anyone or any congressman/presidential candidate who wants to do that and i know a lot of people on the right wing.
3rd line- Again i dont know of anyone that believes that, if someone does, they are jerks.

I don't know of any presidential candidate or congressman proposing anything close to what you described above.

1st line-Please define soon to be
2nd line-After the deal just reached the republicans have not only their fingers but feet both of them in the SS door lets see what they do as they negotiate the next round of cuts
3rd line- I agree
 
1st line - Most only say this in response to a system without SS, not in a system with it already in place. A vast majority are not advocating to just cut people off of SS. Most are saying to end it if these same people would stop and think, long and hard, would they really take such a chance ??? , but still pay out all those that have in the past put money into it. So all current seniors and soon to be seniors wouldn't get it touched whatsoever.
2nd line- i don't know anyone or any congressman/presidential candidate who wants to do that and i know a lot of people on the right wing.
3rd line- Again i dont know of anyone that believes that, if someone does, they are jerks.

I don't know of any presidential candidate or congressman proposing anything close to what you described above.

I think, in truth, that most people want SS to stay as is...
The writing of the polls on this question must be done very carefully.
But, things are a bit different today than they were a century ago when SS was enacted....
Man, himself is still the same...
 
I remain convinced that the conservatives only think about themselves and not the masses.
"The masses can have whatever falls from the cracks".
And this suspected attitude is the crux of the problem.
I am one of the lazy parasites.
 
I think, in truth, that most people want SS to stay as is...
The writing of the polls on this question must be done very carefully.
But, things are a bit different today than they were a century ago when SS was enacted....
Man, himself is still the same...

Probably, but my aunt wanted her daughter to stay 7-years old. She tried to keep her at that age and now we have a very dysfunctioal 55-year old woman. The only significant change in SS is the amount of money workers, especially low-income workers, have to pump into the system. A little over 15% when you're making $20,000 a year is significant.

Are the young people in American spoiled, self-indulgent, egotistical, poorly educated, selfish, or just dumb. You get to pick one. That's rather like the poll we were given, isn't it.
 
Last edited:
Probably, but my aunt wanted her daughter to stay 7-years old. She tried to keep her at that age and now we have a very dysfunctioal 55-year old woman. The only significant change in SS is the amount of money workers, especially low-income workers, have to pump into the system. A little over 15% when you're making $20,000 a year is significant.

Are the young people in American spoiled, self-indulgent, egotistical, poorly educated, selfish, or just dumb. You get to pick one. That's rather like the poll we were given, isn't it.

we don't pay 15%......that's the total for both employer and employee. and in fact, the rate for employees was recently dropped.
 
Back
Top Bottom