Re: DAILY SUMMARY April 19-20

[Yelmrogned@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/21/99 16:27:09 Eastern Daylight Time, 
ndss@network-democracy.org writes:

<< network-democracy.org >>
1)  the main value I see in the whole SS program is the pride of the 
participant.
We as a people have a high work ethic.  When we started to work we were told 
we first had to obtain a social security ACCOUNT number.  The initials for 
this I am sure were SSAN.  While none of us went over the "contract" it was 
generally understood that just like a bank ACCOUNT, the money you paid in was 
used by the bank for others when you weren't using it, but it was still YOUR 
money in YOUR account.

Somewhere along the line it became your SSN, social security number.  No more 
mention of account, but "everyone" knew that it was still the key to being 
able to withdraw your share from the fund when your time came.  In this way 
you would not have to rely on others, family or government or charity.  While 
the amount you got would not keep you in cans of caviar, it was supposed to 
keep you out of cans of cat food.  In this way you kept your pride, that your 
life of toil had entitled you to a return of some of the funds you paid in 
over your thirty to fifty years of service to the economy and that that share 
would cover real estate taxes on a paid up house or rent on a decent 
apartment, food, heat, clothing and some form of transportation.  In other 
words you were supposed to have taken care of your own retirement through 
your efforts during your career.  You were able to keep your pride.

The main value I would like to see addressed is that same one, pride.  
Whatever changes are made, the "average worker" should be able to retain 
their pride. This is a SOCIAL program, which I take to mean that those most 
in need get the lion's share of the payout.  If, for example, without 
counting the contribution of ss payouts to him, someone is fortunate enough 
to retire with $100K/year income, he doesn't need and should not receive 
anything from social security, regardless of how much he has paid in.  I 
think I remember that president Reagan was qualified for ss after he left 
office.  While he may have paid in over his career he had no need for the 
payout.
I think he turned it down, but I am sure that there are many others who have 
no need but do not turn down any ss payout for which they qualify.  Meanwhile 
you read of people on the other end of the economic scale being arrested for 
shoplifting cans of tuna.  This situation should not be allowed to occur.  

With so many making obscene amounts of money (corporate execs, sports 
figures, performers etc.) and so many out of the "social security" pool 
(government workers), by just including everyone and removing the ceiling on 
deductions/payments would probably go a long way toward alleviating the 
coming problems, but we have to get them all into the system NOW.

While there are still surpluses coming, those surpluses should be invested in 
the stock market by the ss administration.  They should NOT make each person 
responsible for their own "account".  Even the pros on Wall Street can't 
agree on where to invest, and many of THEM are getting burned.  This way the 
government would still be responsible to each participant to fulfill their 
end of the bargain, but if successful in the investing of the surplus funds, 
might wind up pushing off the collapse of ss.

The government must also stop playing games with the payments.  If they want 
money for something other than social security costs and payouts, raise taxes 
or cut spending to pay for it, don't "borrow" from ss against a worthless IOU 
which will cause taxes to be raised much higher in the future if they ever 
pay it off.  And don't treat it as a "pool" or "fund" when they are looking 
to steal from it, but have it be an "account" again when they want the people 
to be charged with it's preservation (probably hoping that they all lose 
their shirts).  Then, when the people find they have been snookered by their 
government at the cost of their retirement, they will lose both their pride 
and any faith or love they still have for their government, and will 
ultimately fall back on the charity of the government if that happens. 

Use the ss funds ONLY for those who made contributions, and their immediate 
family in the cases where the contributor is deceased.  Continue to take care 
of all the other categories of needy who have been pushed under the ss 
umbrella, but do it through the use of other funds, even if it means raising 
taxes to do it.

P.S.  if this is not the proper way to reply to your email, you should 
include the correct address in the email.  I did try to reply at the website, 
but have forgotten my nickname and or password.  I assume that I did register 
or you would not have sent me the email in the first place, if you could 
include our nickname/passwords in your emails to us that would facilitate 
logging on at the website.  In lieu of that, there should be a "forgot your 
password" feature included at the site to be reminded of how we registered 
originally.

[Moderator's Note:  The Web form is intended for people who find
e-mail replies inconvenient to make.  The name to use is your
real name, and the e-mail address should be wherever you receive
e-mail.  There are no special nicknames or passwords needed for
this site.]

keep up the good work!