Why Social Security Doesn’t Work

How will history judge Social Security in America? I predict Social Security will be viewed as a “program that helped many older Americans offset the high cost of living, provided important supplemental income for many Americans, and generally was a success”.

And that can’t be further from the truth. In reality, Social Security is…

  • Morally questionable at best (forced labor)
  • Unaccountable, as there is no clear separation between Social Security funds and other government expenditures
  • Unsustainable, with the proportion of payees and recipients dwindling due to people living longer, illegal immigrants, and other factors

Social Security is Morally Questionable

Is there any reason I can’t save for retirement and old age on my own? Of course not. People did it for centuries before Social Security came about. Secondly, is there a legitimate reason why I could be forced to save for someone else’s “Social Security?” Again, no. The truth about Social Security is that it robs and enslaves Americans, and hinders economic growth while stifling freedom and liberty both now and in the future.

Social Security is Unaccountable and Unsustainable

Now, in the year 2008, the Social Security system is both morally and economically bankrupt. We are still forcing working Americans to fund the “golden years” for other Americans, with no real choice in the matter. However, not only is there no specific fund for Social Security, there isn’t even money to fund it beyond the next 15-20 years!

It is possible (although certainly not moral or economic), for 3 or 4 working Americans to support 1 or 2 retired people. Possible does not make it morally acceptable or desirous, but possible nonetheless. However, can you expect those same 3 or 4 working Americans to support an ever growing number of retirees? These working Americans have their own bills to pay, their own families to support, and now we are burdening them with an ever growing number of dependents?

And Then There’s Inflation…

This doesn’t even take into account the role inflation has on the Social Security scam (has a nifty ring to it, doesn’t it?) If we factor in inflation, we get this not so rosy picture of the future of Social Security:

Say I pay in $20,000 in my lifetime into Social Security. Not only do I not know where this money is going or if I will even get it back, if I ever do get paid, my money will purchase less and less than it would if I just took the cash I earned and stuffed it in my mattress. God forbid I put it in a low risk investment such as a CD, or (shhh!) my own personal 401k or Roth IRA.

So if you are under 50 and working in this country, you are looking at the following scenario: Forced labor, no transparency as to where your money is going, a broken system, and a repayment of your money that is less than what you paid in (in real terms).

The Government’s “Solution” Perpetuates The Problem

This would be hilarious if it weren’t so sad and true: There is no real push to eliminate Social Security! Some in the government actually want to increase the earnings cap and thus tax earnings even more to make up for the shortfall!

Only in government would this fly: We’re facing a huge shortfall, we have trillions in unfunded liabilities, so instead of even considering a different direction, let’s just tax and tax and tax and throw more and more money at the problem. Don’t even give people the option (there’s that pesky freedom thing again) of opting out of Social Security, just tax them some more and see where it gets us.


  • Pingback: taspar marki()

  • Pingback: rewfarasfvmsdr()


    Two points about Social Security….
    One is that the feds have dipped into it and been pissing it away for decades. Accountability dictates that they return what they took/stole. And it should be a separate fund, off-limits from the big spenders of both parties.

    Second, the idea of privatizing Social Security(Dubya’s wild idea) is nothing more than another bailout for Wall Street.
    If you haven’t lost a lot of money on your 401k you surely know a number of folks that did. Only Wall Street makes money on those investments.
    My savings go to the local bank. It’s not a gamble like the Wall Street casino 401k scam!

  • Phillip Ferrell

    Yeah, Joan, that’s a good idea. Get you a one way ticket out of this country and go see if you can find you one of those countries like you like.

  • Pingback: Social Security – the Third Rail of Politics [Reader Post] | Flopping Aces()

  • Textynn

    I am with RP on most things except his SS stand point. What is the difference between personal savings and SS. One is SS cannot be taken from you in the event you are sued in an unfortunate accident for example. It also means that people that are hurt early in life and crippled will not get the help they need because they haven’t worked long enough to save enough. Another example, SS forces employers to a pay a wage that includes enough to save on, it’s built in.

    I would vote for RP except this country needs single payer and SS. If a rich old man can’t see how it is to be a poor struggling woman always with low pay and forced to “subsidize ” employers by taking on all kinds of costs they shouldn’t have to pay for, then he just lives in a whole other world . Wages are so low that the idea of forcing people to save without a guaranteed fail safe back up is shows a complete and total disconnect. Employers are allowed every game in the book when it comes to low pay and formulas to get out of pretty much everything.

  • Steven Barrett

    One of the saddest conclusions I’ve come to from reading some of the other comments (and much of what passes for “economic conservatism” bordering on libertarian economics, is the willingness of so many people to give up on the notion that we, as a nation, are no longer our brothers’ keepers. An “I’ve got mine, you get your own, Jack,” attitude seems to be getting more traction. It’s not that I’ve lost faith in our nation’s ability to reach within ourselves to help our fellow man, woman, and child. Indeed, many of the arguments expressing fears that SS, Medicare and Medicaid won’t be there for them aren’t entirely without cause or merit. And while there are people like myself and several good friends of mine who are truly disabled and are unable to hold down a job, I’ll grant that far too many junkies and drunkards have [perhaps unjustly] benefitted due to a lawyer’s cleverly worded SSDI appeal, (especially when cases like the depressed junkie just out of prison should’ve been handled through state, local, private and church organizations better suited for that purpose. Bipolar isn’t a depression resulting from just feeling bad because of a major screw-up in the clinically depressed person’s life. More often than not, it’s a contributing factor in a person’s downward spiral; but NOT necessarily the primary cause. In legalese, it’s a “mitigating circumstance,” but by no means should a physician’s diagnosis be used to excuse criminal conduct. I put the brackets around “perhaps unjustly” because each SSDI pensioner’s case is unique and it’s not for me or anyone to make a final judgment, especially in an open chat-forum like this. On the other hand, like everyone else, I believe that people who don’t qualify for SSDI benefits, but managed to receive them are robbing others and in-effect allowing their unjust fortune to be used as a wedge issue by politicians, lobbyists and very shrewd writers employed by various political front organizations that a shadowy small and very influential clique of business men and former congressional bigwigs to boil up a witches brew of anecdotes, complaints (legitimate and/or bogus) for the sole purpose of creating an even bigger tent-like “protest movement” designed to “give voice” to the mass of silent voiceless American hard-working taxpayers. Hence, the birth of the Tea Party, that cauldron of all sorts of gripes and fears spun and manipulated for the sole purpose of creating some form of “mass opposition” to Obamacare last year and earlier this Spring. Remember Dick Armey? For years he was former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s go-to guy in the House. When he got out, he didn’t return to Texas; he “went native” in DC and in a big way, helping to creating the so-called “Tea Party movement” out of a mixed bag of economic and social conservatives who were united more by what they were misled to fear more than they were adequately informed enough to really hurt the President where he’s most vulnerable when it comes to health care: Abortion. Tired of that word? Sorry, but “read me out:” Pres. Obama had Bart Stupak (D-MI) in his back pocket all along since Stupak told constituents in MI last November (!) he was going to vote for Obamacare anyway. In the meantime, Armey and his pals were all too happy to stir up this cauldron of fears and hates by managing to get Sarah Palin on her high horse to scream bloody murder about “death panels” in the proposed gov’t plan, (even though there weren’t any.) Guess where they were and have been for years? Private sector. What? Yep, you betcha! Not only that, but if you’ve been paying into a private insurer, as most of you, including myself have for all these years, chances are your portion of the premiums have paid for “termination of pregnancy” procedures. Hmmm, kinda helps to explain how so many of the Fifty Million abortions were paid for. Back to the “death panels:” When you hear a story about a private insurer denying life-saving treatment to an insured’s child or spouse, how on earth do you think that came about? Do these companies hire one solitary “hit man” or woman to decide, like Caesar in the Colosseum whether or not that person will live or die in order to cut down on the insurance carriers’ costs in order to placate their Wall Street investors? If that doesn’t smack of “death panel” activity … well, … You never heard of these private company big shot puppeteers and their mouthpieces on Capitol Hill and statehouses across the nation ever complain about the GRAND LARCENY RACKET that denying people life-saving treatment, especially during their youth and prime-of-life years. Oh no. They whipped up a straw devil-in-the-details-that-was-never-in-the-details-to-begin-with in such manner that would’ve had Josef Goebbels beaming from ear-to-ear. They didn’t even have to repeat a whole lie, just the half-truth. And they did the same thing when it came to SS/Medicaid/Medicare: Let’s get real here: Does anyone honestly think that when the TRUTH about Armey and his little Mafioso operation’s machinations to whip up this ersatz neo-silent majority for Era-Obama is fully exposed that Congress will vote to drastically cut our social safety net to the point of practically killing it? Glenn Beck would love that, and so would many of his mindless minions, but you can’t lead a great nation on a cheapskate’s notion of what constitutes valid social policy, especially if the cheapskate’s notion will lead many of us back into lives of want and dependence upon an already overburdened private hodge-podge “system” of charities operated by churches and other non-profits. (Especially if tax deductions used for charity are gutted for persons making over $250K. When the high rollers leave the table, leaving no skin in the game, the loss of those tax deductions and charitable gifts will be a lot more painful to the people who need the services these church-run organizations need to – barely — survive on.) If any of my fellow “commenters” are active church, synagogue or mosque attending citizens, or at least keep up with their scripture readings about our dealings with our fellow citizens, Cain’s example is the last they want to follow; or for that matter, the rich man who ignored poor Lazarus, and the publican viz the rich insensitive Pharisee. Nor, would you want to be caught like the goats in Jesus parable about the goats n’ sheep where he reminded his listeners “that, which you did for the least of these, you did for me,” and “that, which you didn’t do for the least Don’t let today’s “economic royalists” that FDR spoke against during the Great Depression get away with dividing the public as it tried to 70+ yrs ago: “We are poor indeed if this Nation cannot afford to life from every recess of American life the dread fear of the unemployed that they are not needed in the world. We cannot afford to accumulate a deficit in the books of human fortitude.” Add the elderly, children of widows and widowers and the disabled, physically or mentally to the unemployed. And — “true patriotic love for our fellow citizen” to “human fortitude.” PS: Katie, SS is not “unconstitutional” or it would’ve been declared so seven decades ago. Wistfully wishing one could have the constitution remain etched in stone, so to speak as a non-living document would also have left slavery and Jim Crow intact. The last I checked, we’re no longer living in the days of breeches, powdered wigs, knickerbockers, tri-cornered hats and black-powder muskets. Mr. Davis, about the only thing you left out of your interesting post is an attack on Catholicism because the rest of it sure looked like boiler room good ol’ bible’-thumpin’ Bible-belt holler for dog-eat-dog Sunbelt cowboy capitalism if I never saw it posted anywhere else. Mmmm mm!

    • Hey! You still around?
      What do you think about Buddy Roemer?

  • Steven Barrett

    Joan, I really don’t think I’m able to help you understand anything when it comes to living on a disability pension. It does help my family stay ahead of the wolf, and if you think I’m still getting away with gouging the taxpayers…what can I say? If you enjoy playing the Pharisee to the Publican, well that’s your choice. Hmmm, now I’ve GOT to find all that extra money you claim I’ve been receiving; not to mention all those freebie health care services and copays I don’t have to worry about . . .

  • Steven Barrett

    Joan, I collect SSDI and I had to apply for it. It wasn’t a picnic and I had to go through hoops n’ hurdles to qualify for it. I didn’t treat it as an “entitlement” if I had to qualify for it. I never asked the government for anything for anything above and beyond what SSA rules said I was qualified to receive, and only if I met them first. “Not to be mean,” of course, but who are you to judge how much I (or anyone else) is entitled or not entitled to receive in SSA/SSDI benefits if the government (SSA) to which I paid my contributions to has determined I met the basic minimum requirement? As a matter of fact, I don’t give a care to how much you’re entitled to or not. The Pharisees went out of business 2,000 years ago, but under the ever-watchful eyes of the “gotta-make-everbody-accountable” mindset that’s gripping an ever increasing gaggle of gripers and whiners that’ll never be content until the last damn bean’s been “accounted for” and any careless miscreant’s been “held accountable,” it looks like they’re on a fast-track to do what they can to disprove F. Scott Fitzgerald’s quip about “no second chances in America.” Let me remind you, that in all your calculations and reasoning, if you can call it that, to discard the ill-fortunes of so many fellow taxpayers who just happen to be disabled enough to QUALIFY for SSDI payments. Oh, I’m sure you didn’t want to be so mean to deliberately forget this little inconvenient fact; but by and large, most recipients of SSDI receive at the most a princely sum of around $1,200 a month. Don’t get me wrong. I’ll NEVER complain because if it wasn’t for SSDI, my wife and our four children would’ve lost our home. Never mind any “backdoor”-ing, for us there’d be no doors, walls or roof: Period. Our story isn’t unusual. Some of our children were indeed disabled and they, too, had to be subjected to a battery of tests before they could be deemed qualified for additional help in school. Any additional benefits our kids received, they received secondarily through me because I filed first and quite reluctantly for reasons I’d rather not share; save for the fact they are not related to any lack integrity or defect of character. You didn’t want to appear “mean,” but your line of argument reeked of Ebeenezer Scrooge’s mindset prior to his visitations from the Spirits. What I found most telling was what you didn’t want to address, or simply overlooked, the estimated 50 millions of ABORTED would-be fellow American citizens, workers and most importantly, human beings who were sacrificed on the altar of political cowardice, grandstanding, misplaced values and a twisted application of our common laws protecting privacy, not to mention decency. Wait till the “accountability moment” for this happens. It won’t be pretty. Nor should it be. In the meantime, I hope my fellow generation of babyish boomers get used to the idea of knowing their children and grandchildren will experience the economic uncertainty that my grandparents would’ve faced if the Social Security Act wasn’t passed.

    • Joan

      Oh my. You and your family are drawing down full free medical and money for the rest of your lives. I just said most people have their children on it now. Think of the insanity of having children declared permanently disabled, labeling kids that way for the rest of their lives just for their parents to live off of them. That’s one of the tragedies of everyone feeding off of the free medical and entitltement programs. If you tell elderly people you are on disability, they would complain and complain you are on welfare, saying it is for them. Disabled people say, no wealthy old people shouldn’t get so much, it should go to them. People who had to go off of welfare say, no, they had no where else to go, it should be for them, then are the most “entitled.”

      The problem is that more than half the population of this country is feeding off of it at this point, there are very few people left paying into it. If you paid 10K into it, I bet you have gotten over 100K out already and will get it for the rest of your life, paid 1,000 into Medicare and get free medical care for the rest of your life, never mind several children you get free money and health care for. You will add many millions of dollars to the debt. Are the other 120 million people in this country who are doing the same thing all “entitled” to do so, or I know, you are special, it should go to you but not the other 120 million people who say it should go to them, say they are the ones who are special. Everyone is doing it. It’s all going to have to stop somewhere. All of these people can drive and shop and have children, the only thing they can’t do is work. 90 percent of them are not disabled. It’s the total nanny state at this point. Where is the 100 trillion dollars going to come from to pay families like yours 3-4 members free money and free health care for life? Half the population is on it.

      Whenever the government gives out free money, eventually everyone figures out how to get their hands on it. Now, we have the elderly trying to do away with welfare an trying to get the illegals deported thinking that way the welfare they were receiving will go to their entitlements. Everyone is only fighting like crazy to keep their part of socialism. Our country is in really bad shape. Half the people label their children disabled to get free money. The country really is over.


        You gave yourself away with the rant on “socialism.”
        That indicates a strong,recurring addiction to conservative radio. Which leads to brain atrophy. A lot ranting void of substance.

    • Joan

      Steven, you helped me to understand the entitlement mentality in this country now. I had no idea. You feel entitled to free money and free health care for the rest of your life and entitled to money and free health care for your family based on paying a few dollars into SS and Medicare. I get it. No one cares where the money is going to come from, no one admits it is utterly unsustainable, no one cares about that, everyone feels the government must pay them, give them money, take care of them. What would happen to everyone if those two programs were done away with? What would everyone do if they could only get 5 times what they paid in, 5 years of payments, which would be more than reasonable? What would people do if they had to go back to working? I finally get the American mentality now. Everyone needs the government to take care of them, they can’t do it, and they are entitled, it’s their money. I see. I want a one way ticket out of this country indeed. Now the pieces of the puzzle are all coming togther, now I know why people have become so mean. I get the whole sea change of this country now. Thanks.

  • Theresa Romano

    While this article is interesting and well written it does reflect a little of what Big Brother is telling us.
    Two or three 2010 workers wouldn’t be supporting ANY retirees if Big Brother had SET ASIDE the fica money as the promised in 1935…..
    It is implied in the name itself
    The FICA acronym means Federal INSURANCE something Act….
    Even if grandpa only had 100 a month seized from his paycheck in 1935 under the forced FICA tax….100 in the bank would have been 200 by 1947 and 400 by 1959 and 800 by by 1972. So retiring in 1972 he should have expected 800 a month for that year…based on the year of 1935. Then in 1973 he could have expected $$$ based on his 1936 forced contribution….etc….
    But in 1973 he instead finds out that the big brother is going to SEIZE more money…this time from his grandson, in order to give him the 800 dollars. Why? Why wasn’t the money set aside as promised???
    I’ll tell you why…when Josie…a crack dealer who just got out of jail…got depressed at age 25…the government decided to put her on disability and pay her bills with grandpa’s FICA money. That’s why.

  • Theresa Romano

    This is what I said on another board.
    Federal INSURANCE something Act
    The act was passed in 1935 or something
    If you look at your pay stubs look at what you put in each year.
    Now for every 12 years double the money
    Forget about projections for now…
    In the past our government/big brother/bank was making way more than 5% interest through inflationary practices but….they were at least giving investors 5% back on safe accounts.
    So if IN THE PAST you paid FICA then at the least each year’s payment should have doubled every twelve years.

    Medicare draws from that and gives money to workers.
    But so does mediCAID….and it SHOULDN’T
    They are two completely different animals…
    MediCARE is supposed to come from the FICA money…
    MediCAID is a welfare program where ex-cons and illegals get free psychotherapy…dental coverage…etc.

    For the media/government to use medicare/medicaid in the same sentence as if they were connected in ANY way is criminal…..it’s akin to saying paycheck/handout….as if they were the same.

  • Steven Barrett

    People PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY. It’s not given to them when they turn a certain age or become so disabled that they can’t work again UNLESS THEY’VE PAID INTO THE SYSTEM, (excepting of course, the disabled or SSA recipient’s qualified dependants.) Social Security is not welfare. You have to work at least ten full years in which you are paying into the system and that’s determined by how many points you’ve earned. Granted, I glossed over a lot of the nitty details, but only for purpose of making this clear: SOCIAL SECURITY ALWAYS HAS BEEN, IS NOW, AND ALWAYS WILL BE … SOMETHING THAT’S EARNED. Even people on SSDI have to undergo a battery of tests, submitting piles of paperwork, obtain an attorney (if they have want to have any shot between the time they’ve applied and or knocking on eternity’s door) and even then, many people are shot down on their appeals. (All first applications are initially refused. This, too, sorts out the loafers … and I’ll gladly admit there are far too many, if there’s more than even a handful of bums receiving what they don’t deserve. (Usually prisoners.) What they drain from the SSA in terms of funds, however relatively small in dollar amounts, gives more fuel to fires of the Libertarian Loons who want to gut the system, much like the Vandals’ desires to sack Rome because it was there for the sacking. Do you want to know what’s really hurting SSA, especially you younger folks in your middle and younger working ages, born after Roe v. Wade was decided in Jan. ’73? Try FIFTY MILLION ABORTIONS. You don’t have to be a math whiz to appreciate the damage this form of libertarian weltausschaung has “contributed” to the American moral, social, political and economic politik. GUT LEGAL ABORTION, NOT SOCIAL SECURITY AND THE REST OF THE SOCIAL SAFETY NET. Even more to the point; AMERICA, GUT YOUR AMORAL SELFISHNESS.

    • Joan

      Everybody who wants SS and Medicare makes the argument you make to believe they are fully entitled to all of the free stuff, all the while knowing their parents and grandparents paid a few dollars into those programs and received millions in free health care over 25-35 years for paying maybe 1,000 into Medicare, pay 30K-50K into SS and want 1,500 a month for themselves, 1,500 a month for their spouses, 36K in one year, which adds up to over 700K paid to them for paying maybe 30-50K in. Then, they always make it up they would have gotten rich if only they didn’t pay that six percent into SS, but they never invested the rest of their income, didn’t make one cent. Not to be mean, but since Obama took 500 billion out of Medicare, everyone is scared about the cuts and rationed care, and I see so many, many people in MSNBC, all over the chatboards screaming they paid for it. They pay maybe 5,000 into Medicare, one surgery costs 200,000, one test costs 2,000, times 25-35 years of free care, super expensive end of life care, each person receives over a million in free care for paying a few thousand dollars into it. That’s why both programs need 85 trillion (with a T) to pay out SS and give Medicare to one more generation. They took in 2 trillion, and have to pay out 85 trillion. After one year or less, it becomes welfare. They have to do away with both programs now because too many people are living to be 100, they expected people to pass at 62, there are 75 million baby boomers who want to get it now too, all the young people are backdooring it and getting on the disability component of it. There are about 35 million people on the disability component of it now, and that will go up to about 50 million soon enough. I rarely meet a family that doesn’t have at least one child on disability anymore, when Clinton stopped permanent welfare, everyone moved over to permanent disability, lots of people in big cities where there are no jobs are give up and go on permanent disability. There are 75 million people all together now on SS, another 75-80 million baby boomers about to start going on it, about half a million more welfare people per year go onto the disability part of it. Over half the population will be on it in the next few years, and the money is not there. With an additional half a million piling on disability every year, even the 85 trillion in estimated unfunded liabilities will be very low, closer to 100 trillion the goverment would have to borrow to keep everyone on it.

  • Brere Rabbit

    what bothers me (though i am a large Ron Paul supporter) is without something similar it causing a condition to some people much like “Natural Selection.”

    some people are not religious and have no family but physically or mentally cannot support themselves. the family cannot support them either in some cases.

    what would you have them do?

    i agree that the standards are lax, and that a more secure overview of those applying or reviving is a great idea.

    but if you cannot live without help, would you just have them die?

    • Evan

      You are right that there are people who need help, and should get it, but they can’t afford it. But the government-even if there were no corruption, if all the money was given to these people-has no right to take money away from anyone, even for a just cause such as this. For people who truly need it, there are charities. These are far more effective than any government program. With government officials dipping into the money, and money going to people who don’t really need it, its obvious why this program hasn’t worked, and never will work.

  • After reading the article, I just feel that I need more info. Can you share some resources ?

  • tony

    everytime you allow blue,green,grey eyed monsters become the president they creat something new, like the patriot act. the planet is done. once you start taxing and accounting, you cant stop it especially if you promise people benefits. social security is not just unconstitutional, its immoral and against the almightys laws. all people with blue eyes are going to hell for being the beast that they are. all federal governments are going to hell as well.holy dictatorships are designed to last forever. all people should be using silver and gold, no execptions. federal systems are disposible governments created to fail.

  • Katie

    Social Security is Unconstitutional. When people need help, they need to turn to their family, their friends, their church or other social groups. It is not society’s responsibility to take care of everyone. I sold my car so I would no longer have debt. I ride my bike to work and everywhere else. I make my choices for my benefit and I don’t expect anyone to give me money or buy me things. I don’t do drugs or watch television or run my air conditioning unless I am miserable. BTW, I live in Florida, and it’s HOT! Every U.S. Citizen has a choice to be in debt or debt-free. Save for retirement or keep working. I believe that the people who want to be involved in the Social Security pyramid scheme should be allowed to pool their resources and go for it, but I don’t think it should be mandatory to participate. It’s not going to be here when I retire and I resent being forced to make payments equivalent to a brand new car payment every month to pay into the system. It’s a scam and it pays lazy people out of the wages of people who work hard and choose not to spend money on fun things for themselves. If I had that extra money, I could put it aside for my use in the future. It’s UNCONSTITUTIONAL and that is all we need to know. If the founding fathers put this scheme in the Constitution, it would have NEVER been ratifyed.

    • Joseph Anderson

      Get a job as a teacher. They don’t pay into social security.

      Or when you retire, politely refuse the check/donate it for a tax deduction.

      Also, be careful riding that bike and wear a helmut. If you were to get clipped on the way to work and become disabled, you may burden the rest of us by being put on social security. I suppose you could rely on your family to change your diapers and administer your tube feedings. Maybe your minister will change your sheets when the bed gets soiled.

      I think old folks had it so much better in the old days! They had their loving families supply all their needs. They must have been able to save so much money during the Great Depression! Some even got to live in the Poor Farm.

  • You really poses much expertise on t Work | Ron Paul .com. I really enjoyed going through your posting. I really appreciate it.

  • Dear Mr/Mrs Jackson,
    I afraid you are the one who is clueless.

    The forgotten Christian security, as you call it, is a family base priviledge of members taking care of their own with pride. The Pyrymid Social Security System was recognized from its inception to leave our posterity as losers, over burdened to support the elderly and disabled whom they have no idea whether are not are in need of support. And, as you well know, need is not a criteria for recieving Social Security. The wealthy recieve Social Security as much as a political and legal right as those who are abandoned by the traditional family structure that Social Security and the bogus anti-Christ god of personal abundance has murdered.

    If you want to pretend Christianity is in your heart, as you go walking to Jericho and see the man who the anti-Christ priests walk way around so not to be associated with riff-raff, and the so called good people don’t want to be burdened with either (Luke 10:30-32), you help that man within the means you have and nothing more than that (Luke 10:33-35). You are not only bypassing the wasteful institutional middle men of church and state (Luke 10:36-37), but you are helping to destroy the incompetent institutions and religious brick crap houses, as the Lord has willed (Matt 23:15,23; 24:1-2)….

    All lofty notions of serving God by contributing to someone else’s higher authority are anti-Christ, and you have been told how to “..do it not….(but) keep the sayings of this book (and) worship God (Rev 22:8-9; Matt 25:37-39,37-39,37-39)”

  • Jackson

    You are so clueless.

    How come it’s ok to pay for a police, firefighter, military or politician, but not for a nurce or doctor with federal or state money?
    How come it’s ok to lock people in with food and free health care, but not to citisens who have worked all their life and beening f*cked by “insurrance” companies of the help they need?

    If you pay $20 000 to an “insurance” companiy, you KNOW you never will get it back. And that is not becouse of any inflation.

    Social security is not demanding that all doctors have to work in “the system”, the are free to do stuff that the security system doesn’t cover. Like doing face lift etc. You need a safty net to catch people from hitting the floor. But if they want to be at the roof, they need to climb themself, and still have the net catching if they fall to far. That way there won’t be that many criminals either. Becouse some people wont be pressed to steal to survive.

    For real, this is not social security, social here was and is not same as the political socialist, it’s christian security. “Do to others what you want them to do to you”. It’s so basic I can’t understand your standing, except if you isn’t a good christian.

    But I guess you won’t let this be posted here…

  • According to the socialist insecurity administration, “a social security number is not required to live or work in the United States nor is it required to have for the sake of having”. No law REQUIRES anyone to give their employer a socialist slavestate number. Without that number, not only do you not make yourself liable for FICA, you are also not liable for the so-called “income” tax, and, because you are not liable federally you are not liable for state income tax as well.

    Prior to the IRS having to put all of their publications online, their pub 515, Withholding Requirements for Non Resident Aliens spelled it out right on page 2 and later on page 3, stating that all a citizen or resident of the United States need to is provide his employer a signed statement to that effect and his employer was relieved from any duty to withhold. No slave number, no W-4, no W-2 at years end, and no expectation on the part of the Infernal Revenue Swindlers to receive a fiscal proctology report, i.e., a form 1040.

    Likening the income tax/socialist insecurity system to The Matrix, the IRS is analagous to the Sentinels or “squiddies”, i.e., search and destroy robots. Korporate Amerika is Agent Smith. Korporate Amerika has been doing the dirty work since the days of the so-called “victory tax” which was the start of income tax withholding.

    Withholding for social security started on January 2nd, 1937. People knew it was voluntary at that time, but signed up for it because it seemed like a good deal. It was, after a fashion, for them. It’s just that they were mortgaging their posterity in exchange for a dubious retirement annuity, funded in the same manner as a chain letter or pyramid game. It also established the critical nexus for laying an income tax on the wages of ordinary Americans.

    I interviewed one of the last holdouts who refused to sign up for socialist insecurity many years back. He described how increasing pressure was placed on him to sign up. He would receive lecture after lecture as to why he should, questioning him as to “why he thought he was so special”, etc. Finally, after Pearl Harbor, it was “sign up if you want to keep working here”. Apparently, the government was covertly twisting the arms of employers/Korporate Amerika to do their dirty work. In this way, the nine learned orangutans in black nightgowns could read the law AS WRITTEN and have no problem with it. Of course, as written and as enforced are two different things.

    Korporate Amerika needs to fear “We The People” more than the IRS. If “We The People” took charge like the unions did way back when, Korporate Amerika would learn to fear broken plate glass, broken teeth, and broken bones more than nastygrams and sheisters from the IRS.

    As for Ron Paul: Ron, you should have gone public with the voluntary nature of Social Security in your campaign. You would have had nothing to lose. You could have backed up what you were saying with documentation right from the government. Hopefully you still will at some point.