For 50 years we have listened to the Democrats saying “If you vote for the Republicans they will take your Social Security away.” It’s a scare tactic to make sure you vote Democrat.
We must, for future generations, revise/change our current system Privatizing Social Security, as proposed by the Republicans, will work. It will not affect those on S.S. or those now 55 years old.
Consider Galveston County Texas. In l981 county employees opted out of S.S. Employees and employers continued to pay the same amount into a private fund
Today a retiring low income worker making $26,000 yearly. Receives $1,830 from the private fund — his S.S. payment would be $1,007. Nearly $10,000 more annually. A mid-income worker receives $3,600 from the Private fund, just $1,540 from S.S., or nearly $25,000 more per year. Upper-income workers receive $5-6,000 per month from the PRIVATE fund versus $2,500 from S.S. — or $30-40,000 more per year.
The “death benefit” under S.S. is $255. Under the private fund the benefit is four times your last salary up to $215,000.
Wisen up seniors. You’ve been duped by the Democrats for years. What would you do this year with an additional $10,000 or $20,000?
Art Becker
Pillager
Comments (16)
Add commentAnd for 50 years the
And for 50 years the Republicans have tried to get rid of social security.
Remember when Gingrich shut down the government to defund the program?
The GOP continues to spread misinformation about social security going broke in hopes of destroying it. They simply don't believe that we should have social programs.
Why is the comment
section "shut down" for the human rights commission guest column?
Mr. and Mrs. Heintzeman have served the community well: first by volunteering, then by offering insightful analysis of the CWC HRC, and by exposing the bias and political slant of the HRC, AND by alerting the police that one of the HRC members (and former DFL State senatorial candidate) thinks that heavy- handed thug tactics is what qualifies as "human rights." Funny, the guest column trying to create the notion that the HRC "protects us" from thuggery never mentions the thuggery involved with trying to "keep" the HRC.
Put this redundant monstrosity to sleep. Permanently!
Next thing you know, we'll be told that the League of Women Voters is non partisan, too.........
art
Please find a proof reader before you submit these articles. It is almost impossible to make head nor tails of this letter.
Lil'drummie:
In the past comments have been shut down when a hot-head posted something incendiary; maybe the forum-watchers thought it was easier to lock it than keep watching it. Sometimes articles about controversial subjects never get a chance because some of us are unable to keep things cool...
Social security has been, and continues to be a campaign issue. Nobody will mess with it too much, but candidates and hopefuls will say whatever they think it will take to get some attention, but usually have no intention of actually doing anything.
call me cynical, but elections are mostly about which club gets their name in the paper most.
Idea....
Lets turn it all over to Walstreet and let them invest for us. That should work out well for a few of us.....
I'm sure there are rules, even on this
Personal attacks on a person where they cannot defend themselves (and they may not even know about it.)
Unfounded (he said, she said) 'facts' and accusations. These 'facts' destroy lives if people believe them and of course they may not even be true; or they may be distorted.
I read other papers on-line and the Dispatch is way loose with their forums. Some have you sign your real name. Others will not allow the 'meanness' I see here when I log in (rarely.)
Political agenda? I guess if they don't agree with you?
So count your blessings. I can't believe what the Dispatch allows some of you to post without taking it down.
RE: Dispatch Randomly deleting posts
Sorry, no smoking gun agenda...
If your 'comment' is just a link to another website without a substantial amount of personal thought with it, it's going to get treated as spam and filed to the moderation que.
I'm not sure why your list of campaign contributors got sent to the que but I've OK'd it.
It works both ways....
Here were GW's top contributors from the 2004 elections.
Morgan Stanley $603,480
Merrill Lynch $586,254
PricewaterhouseCoopers $514,250
UBS AG $474,325
Goldman Sachs $394,600
Lehman Brothers $361,525
MBNA Corp $350,350
Credit Suisse Group $326,040
Citigroup Inc $320,820
Bear Stearns $313,150
Ernst & Young $305,140
US Government $295,786
Deloitte LLP $292,250
Wachovia Corp $279,310
US Dept of Defense $279,157
Ameriquest Capital $253,130
Blank Rome LLP $225,150
US Dept of State $223,330
Bank of America $218,261
AT&T Inc $214,920
Both parties play by the same rules and both are equally guilty of putting the American people last. Lets get beyond that. The polarizing of America is what is working in Washington.
Looks like the banks gave a
Looks like the banks gave a lot more to Obama. In some cases, more than double.
No Universities on Bush's top list. Now I know why tuition is so high.
dumb question
How does the US government contribute to campaigns? Is that through the check off on our Income Tax forms?
barney
When did he get the money? Before he turned down public financing for the general election? To use during the primaries?
Did McCain's financing include only public financing? Don't think so. So, the playing field had to be leveled, right? Campaign reform is overdue.
contributions
The Federal Government didn't contribute to President Obama. He elected out of public financing for the 2008 campaign.
The above lists are made up of employers of campaign contributors.
Comments
made here are just that, comments. Most of what you see here in the opinion page are what you want to show to make your opinion, even if it can be proven the opposite. And, democrats and scare tactics, wow, the gop does their fair share, and even more. Wake up and smell the roses. You are only hearing what you want to hear. I have heard more gop criticizing of the dems than the other way around.
Some people only hear what they want to hear
Some people only hear what they want to hear...
Coming from the poster child for projection...