NO, and I will make a comparison to prove otherwise.
Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into...
Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into...
NO, and I will make a comparison to prove otherwise.
Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into and he is only exercising his right to receive the benefits he is entitled to. He has stated if SS was a program when he first started in the work force gave him a option to opt out, he would have done it without question. That option was and still is not available.
(more)Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into and he is only exercising his right to receive the benefits he is entitled to. He has stated if SS was a program when he first started in the work force gave him a option to opt out, he would have done it without question. That option was and still is not available.
http://www.sodahead.com/unite...
Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into...
Since the Social Security ACT has been enacted, it is mandated that every employee MUST pay into SS and there is NO legal way to opt out of SS. Those contributions that are mandated to be paid are YOUR funds and under the SS Act those funds are entitled to those eligible to collect at age of determined retirement.
When Congressman Paul first was elected, he was given the option to opt out of the Congressional Retirement Fund in which he did. This CRF is taxpayer funded and throughout his congressional career, Dr. Paul has voted against any legislation or programs that lay a burden on the taxpayers. Because of his decision to opt out, he will NOT collect a Congressional Retirement pension.
Dr. Paul has continuously proposed a plan where younger workers should have the option to opt out of Social Security and use that money to fund their own independent retirement plan. His proposal also would use the funds that are spent on illegal wars and foreign aid which total into the billions to be used instead to shore up SS and Medicare until a pragmatic plan can be in place to slowly phase out or reform those plans.
So in essence, to call Ron Paul hypocritical is a oxy-moron in the sense, SS is a program he was forced to pay into and he is only exercising his right to receive the benefits he is entitled to. He has stated if SS was a program when he first started in the work force gave him a option to opt out, he would have done it without question. That option was and still is not available.
You voice what you hear from many in their 30's & 40's, say today, (Including my own adult, kids). "I will take care of myself, give me that money and I will save where I want to...." or some such logic. The trouble is, for the most part they're not saving, nor did all too many of the baby boomers who are now at retirement age do very much thoughtful planning. (That alone absolutely has stunned me...) Some of their best earning years were doing the booming 90's and they are now to the point where they should have had a nest egg to carry them thru and if they aren't still working, they're scrambling for a job as a Greeter at Wal-Mart. Certainly not all I might add, but the statistics show an enormous amount of them.
What people, including my working kids, can't seem to get their arms around is the fact that Social Security was never ...
You voice what you hear from many in their 30's & 40's, say today, (Including my own adult, kids). "I will take care of myself, give me that money and I will save where I want to...." or some such logic. The trouble is, for the most part they're not saving, nor did all too many of the baby boomers who are now at retirement age do very much thoughtful planning. (That alone absolutely has stunned me...) Some of their best earning years were doing the booming 90's and they are now to the point where they should have had a nest egg to carry them thru and if they aren't still working, they're scrambling for a job as a Greeter at Wal-Mart. Certainly not all I might add, but the statistics show an enormous amount of them.
What people, including my working kids, can't seem to get their arms around is the fact that Social Security was never meant to be a retirement program. It was implemented so that never again would seniors be "caught" as they were in the last Depression. It is a safety net for when all else fails, the stock market, the banks, your private investments, you will have a net to fall into. My great-grandparents lost everything over 75 years ago. Their farm after the bank collapsed, their savings in that failed bank and had absolutely nothing. They moved in with my grandparents and my dad who was a teenager when the crash came and it was very, very hard. Before our own crash in '07, the President was working very hard to privatize SS or starting to work at it and my own kids thought it was a great idea.....then the crash came and I (with just a touch of humor) said to them, ahhhh, had your dad and I had the choice of pulling out the tens of thousands of dollars we've invested in ss and put it all in the stock market before this crash came, which one of you would have us move in? That was because we did indeed lose many thousands of our privately owned portfolio, which has slowly but surely been coming back.
Wall Street was salvitating at the thought of getting their hands on those ss funds and think of the enormous hardship that would have occurred had they been able to do so. It would have made the depression 75 years ago look like a cake walk.
You made many good points to ponder and reflect. Thank you.
As for myself i do agree with your children and many young people, My husband and i would like to opt out of SS and save and put that money where we see fit.
again thanks.
I'm afraid too many, (my own late parents included), depended on SS as their only means of income and they epitimized what "fixed income" was.
I would prefer to be able to invest that money on my own (and I do invest). At least then I would see some money. Or I could just spend that extra money on consumer products and services, thus stimulating the economy! ;-)
Another point I would make is that while you are obviously thinking and planning for your own senior years, the vast majority of (especially the Baby Boomers), never have. I am frankly astonished that so little has been saved by that generation. The boon years of the 90's should have been a watershed of savings for them and statistics show that they did not. They did indeed "spend the extra money" and now find themselves in a boatload of hurt.
Also, since we are living longer, we will need Social Security longer. Luckily, we can just raise the retirement age again.
His policies would wake people up, who support and take advantage of this now Welfare Dependent Nation, to get off their Butts and do something for themselves instead of sittin on the couch waiting for their next check.