RE: Opening statement--investment in stocks, bonds etc

[Javier Jimenez <jimenj@yahoo.com>]

>>>>>> James wrote:
From: Javier Jimenez 
Subject: RE: Opening statement--investment in stocks, bonds etc 



>>>> "Mr. Chairman, let me conclude with a warning about the damaging
moral effects of unfunded social security and other entitlement
programs issued at the dawn of the New Deal: The lessons of history,
confirmed by evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that
continued dependence on relief induces a spiritual and moral
disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fiber. To
dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle
destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of
sound policy. It is a violation of the traditions of America."

>>>>That warning was issued by President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
in his 1935 State of the Union address.

Very interesting. I think you are a little confused. It doesn't
appear that the first part of the quote (before the colon) is from
FDR at all. And, having found the original quote, it looks like
our leg is being pulled here, that the first part is a description
that doesn't fit the context at all. Here is what I found:
<<<<<<

Oh, I'm not confused at all.  Of course those words from FDR had
nothing to do with SS, at the time; however, they perfectly describe
that the current SS is serving the very function that FDR complained
about even before SS came to be.

>>>>>>> James wrote:
FDR is clearly arguing for a system in which the workers make
'contributions'. Would he like some of the Reforms which provide
for a gov't means-tested retirement benefit to provide for a sizable
segment of the working poor's retirement funded by general revenue
and unrelated to any 'contribution'? Well, we can't ask him, but
his words say:

"The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately
before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief
induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive
to the national fibre."

I don't think he would!
<<<<<<
"Contributions" as FDR thought would legitimize his SS program
because worker would be entitled to their benefits and no opposition
leader could argue that it was welfare.  However, the Supreme court
ruled, in the case of Nestor v. Fleming that individuals have no
right to Social Security benefits based on the taxes they've paid.
Congress and the president can change or reduce Social Security
benefits any time they choose.  Thus, contributions are not related
to benefits in any meaningful way, other than by formulas defined
by the SS, and thus, are taxes; and, anyone who is getting a break
at the expense of others, is being administered the very narcotic
that FDR warned about.  And that is the real risk for workers and
for society at large, not individuals owning their retirement.