Update: $2M Michigan lottery winner defends use of food stamps

[layoutshooter]

Social Security was never means tested from day one. It was not set up as a welfare program. Should it be? Maybe, it is a bit late. All the money is gone. Spent by the congress. They have known for decades that the system was shot, nothing was done. They just pointed fingers and lied, to keep getting re elected. They continued to steal wages from hard working people knowing full well they could not follow through.

We put Madoff in jail for more or less the same thing. Just like that putz in Washington now, "borrowing" form federal pension funds to keep the government from defaulting. Not legal in the private sector but okee dokee for the Feds. They suck.

 

[AMonger]

So social security is stealing?

Absolutely, unquestionably, without a doubt. Google Ida Fuller if you disagree. She paid into FICA for three years, for a total of about $23, or something like that. She retired, and a couple years later got her first check for $22. She died in 1970 after collecting about 1000X her money. Had her take been limited to what she paid in plus return on a theoretical investment, it wouldn't have been theft. But the money she collected after that point was stolen on her behalf from workers who worked the month before she collected it. Every one of her checks came from people who worked the month before, not her input. Her input was long since spent.

 

[Turtle]

A honest man of integrity and character would have turned that card back into the State no matter what they told him. A MAN would be ashamed to do this.

I understand the thinking, on a philosophical level, but you're contradicting yourself. If the government is a den of thieves, then all this man is doing is recouping some of the money that those good-for-nothing thieves stole from him. Where's the integrity and character in passively and sheepishly allowing thieves to steal from you? He paid more than his fair share, he's paying for his Bridge Card himself. If he hadn't paid more than $1 million already, you'd have a very good moral argument, but as it stands, he's not doing anything wrong, legally, ethically or morally. While I do understand that those who like to judge people on moral standards rarely do so (it's simply the nature of imposing one's morals onto someone else), the only way to levy a moral judgment is to take into account all of the facts.

ONLY 850,000? I could live the rest of my life on that without a problem. Must be hard on him.

So can he, and he's said as much. He's stated that he doesn't need the Bridge Card. He's also said the law that allows him to continue to use it is "silly".

Oral obligations? I don't want to know.

Typo. It's been edited.

 

[layoutshooter]

I understand the thinking, on a philosophical level, but you're contradicting yourself. If the government is a den of thieves, then all this man is doing is recouping some of the money that those good-for-nothing thieves stole from him. Where's the integrity and character in passively and sheepishly allowing thieves to steal from you? He paid more than his fair share, he's paying for his Bridge Card himself. If he hadn't paid more than $1 million already, you'd have a very good moral argument, but as it stands, he's not doing anything wrong, legally, ethically or morally. While I do understand that those who like to judge people on moral standards rarely do so (it's simply the nature of imposing one's morals onto someone else), the only way to levy a moral judgment is to take into account all of the facts.

So can he, and he's said as much. He's stated that he doesn't need the Bridge Card. He's also said the law that allows him to continue to use it is "silly".

Typo. It's been edited.

Two rights don't make a wrong. Just because the government is a bunch of thieves does not make it OK to do it your self. I was speaking on a philosophical level. Law has little to do with integrity.

You can believe any thing you want. It is your choice and opinion. I would not do it. I believe it to be wrong. No one in here, or any where else, is going to change their minds on how they feel. I feel as I do , you do as you do. Neither of us can change what happened.

The typo was funnier than the reality.

 

[EnglishLady]

Me? I have no government retirement other than what little Social Security will not pay me because our government spent every penny of the massive surpluses that the system ran for years. It is now just another, bankrupt, welfare program.

Nothing that the system started out as has remained.

I meant Americans in general ..... but seriously are you saying that no-one of retirement age gets a retirement allowance now because that "pot" is empty?

Is the G'ment still deducting SS, but not paying any out in retirement allowances ?

 

[layoutshooter]

I meant Americans in general ..... but seriously are you saying that no-one of retirement age gets a retirement allowance now because that "pot" is empty?

Is the G'ment still deducting SS, but not paying any out in retirement allowances ?

It is still paying out. It now paying out more than it takes in. In a few short years they will not be able to cover what they said that they would be paying. There is not "pot" Every penny that was taken in has been spent.

 

[EnglishLady]

It is still paying out. It now paying out more than it takes in. In a few short years they will not be able to cover what they said that they would be paying. There is not "pot" Every penny that was taken in has been spent.

Hmmm I think that is happening the world over. Too many older ppl, now from the Baby Boom periods.

 

[layoutshooter]

Hmmm I think that is happening the world over. Too many older ppl, now from the Baby Boom periods.

It is not the fault of too many older people. It is the fault of government not putting aside the funds needed to cover expected costs. They had massive surpluses from day one. It was not invested for future needs. They knew this day was coming. They did nothing to prepare. All the time telling the American people that it was either the Dumb-O-Crats or ReBumLiCans fault. They continued to pad their own pockets. Their retirements are safe and they will not be cut. I am not sure about congress people but past presidents get 100% of the wage that they were earning when they leave office. So Obama will make $500,000 per year, for life, for doing nothing. You can bet your booty that he did not pay into a system to cover that kind of retirement. What a farce.

 

[greg334]

It is not the fault of too many older people.

D*mn right it is the fault of a lot of older people. They seem to be the one's with a lack of integrity and values that you are claiming this guy and the government has.

Read what I said;

IF one can afford not to take social security, but does any way, what that shows is greed and no forethought of others who can't afford it or the system that may be faulting in the near term.

One example is right here, those who have multiple investments and businesses hide their true income in order to get money out of a broke system - which means they too are part of the problem.

Many complain and cry about how unfair life is when someone collects food stamps but that person put in more money into the system that out weighs by multiple of 30 than many have put in combining their life time 'contributions' into social security and use the lame excuse that they put into it so they want to get something out of it.

So to put this in real numbers, if one is retired at say 65, their life time contribution I understand doesn't exceed $192,000 BUT their benefits are expected to be paid out over the estimated remainder of their lives (18 years) is more than $314,000 which does not include Medicare benefits (Source GAO report on Social Security 2009). If one can afford not to take Social Security, then they should not be allowed to which is estimated to be about 9% of the present retired population. This is a substantial savings and it can easily offset the programs debt that has been accumulated.

So who is really stealing?

The person who has a $125k plus revenue source and hides it from everyone and collecting Social Security or the person who paid $1.15 million in taxes?

 

[layoutshooter]

D*mn right it is the fault of a lot of older people. They seem to be the one's with a lack of integrity and values that you are claiming this guy and the government has.

Read what I said;

IF one can afford not to take social security, but does any way, what that shows is greed and no forethought of others who can't afford it or the system that may be faulting in the near term.

One example is right here, those who have multiple investments and businesses hide their true income in order to get money out of a broke system - which means they too are part of the problem.

Many complain and cry about how unfair life is when someone collects food stamps but that person put in more money into the system that out weighs by multiple of 30 than many have put in combining their life time 'contributions' into social security and use the lame excuse that they put into it so they want to get something out of it.

So to put this in real numbers, if one is retired at say 65, their life time contribution I understand doesn't exceed $192,000 BUT their benefits are expected to be paid out over the estimated remainder of their lives (18 years) is more than $314,000 which does not include Medicare benefits (Source GAO report on Social Security 2009). If one can afford not to take Social Security, then they should not be allowed to which is estimated to be about 9% of the present retired population. This is a substantial savings and it can easily offset the programs debt that has been accumulated.

So who is really stealing?

The person who has a $125k plus revenue source and hides it from everyone and collecting Social Security or the person who paid $1.15 million in taxes?

They took my money, without my permission. I had NO option other than jail. They spent most of it on other things than what it was stolen from me for. They lied.

Where are the surplus funds? Why has SS never be audited?

There is no means testing in the system. It does not matter how much others make. Once you means test it, it becomes just another welfare program. It was never meant to be that.

It was also going to by a voluntary program. They lied about that. The SS number was never going to be used for anything but SS. They lied about that.

As I said, their pensions are not going to be cut. Their pay is not going to be cut. They are not going to jail for ripping of the People for decades.

Why is it that the little guy is always at fault? I want my money back. Where is it? I earned it. It is rightfully mine. It is my private property. It was taken from me at gun point.

 

[layoutshooter]

D*mn right it is the fault of a lot of older people. They seem to be the one's with a lack of integrity and values that you are claiming this guy and the government has.

Read what I said;

IF one can afford not to take social security, but does any way, what that shows is greed and no forethought of others who can't afford it or the system that may be faulting in the near term.

One example is right here, those who have multiple investments and businesses hide their true income in order to get money out of a broke system - which means they too are part of the problem.

Many complain and cry about how unfair life is when someone collects food stamps but that person put in more money into the system that out weighs by multiple of 30 than many have put in combining their life time 'contributions' into social security and use the lame excuse that they put into it so they want to get something out of it.

So to put this in real numbers, if one is retired at say 65, their life time contribution I understand doesn't exceed $192,000 BUT their benefits are expected to be paid out over the estimated remainder of their lives (18 years) is more than $314,000 which does not include Medicare benefits (Source GAO report on Social Security 2009). If one can afford not to take Social Security, then they should not be allowed to which is estimated to be about 9% of the present retired population. This is a substantial savings and it can easily offset the programs debt that has been accumulated.

So who is really stealing?

The person who has a $125k plus revenue source and hides it from everyone and collecting Social Security or the person who paid $1.15 million in taxes?

They took my money, without my permission. I had NO option other than jail. They spent most of it on other things than what it was stolen from me for. They lied.

Where are the surplus funds? Why has SS never be audited?

There is no means testing in the system. It does not matter how much others make. Once you means test it, it becomes just another welfare program. It was never meant to be that.

It was also going to by a voluntary program. They lied about that. The SS number was never going to be used for anything but SS. They lied about that.

As I said, their pensions are not going to be cut. Their pay is not going to be cut. They are not going to jail for ripping of the People for decades.

Why is it that the little guy is always at fault? I want my money back. Where is it? I earned it. It is rightfully mine. It is my private property. It was taken from me at gun point.

 

[chefdennis]

I would gladly let the SS admin keep everything I paid into their ponzi scheme and not collect a dime from them, as long as they stop taking what they do now and from here on out....just let me deal wth my own retirement...

 

[greg334]

They took my money, without my permission. I had NO option other than jail. They spent most of it on other things than what it was stolen from me for. They lied.

You had options, you didn't have to work or you could have gone underground but the system you inherited was here long before you came along so of course you have no option.

Where are the surplus funds? Why has SS never be audited?

Who cares?

I don't care about an audit, I care about ending it.

There is no means testing in the system. It does not matter how much others make. Once you means test it, it becomes just another welfare program. It was never meant to be that.

True there isn't but that's not an excuse for others to take from it when they have the means to provide for themselves through other sources of income.

It was also going to by a voluntary program. They lied about that. The SS number was never going to be used for anything but SS. They lied about that.

NOPE it wasn't a voluntary program, it was setup right from the start to have contributions taken as part of the income tax and after 1943, at the source of the income.

As I said, their pensions are not going to be cut. Their pay is not going to be cut. They are not going to jail for ripping of the People for decades.

Again, who cares? It has nothing to do with either the guy taking food stamps or those who feel it is their right to take from a broken system.

Why is it that the little guy is always at fault? I want my money back. Where is it? I earned it. It is rightfully mine. It is my private property. It was taken from me at gun point.

I think many miss the point of how revenue is raised in this country and how they can if they want change it but no one is willing to say what a few are saying on the local, state and federal level about social security or welfare.

I would gladly let the SS admin keep everything I paid into their ponzi scheme and not collect a dime from them, as long as they stop taking what they do now and from here on out....just let me deal wth my own retirement...

I agree with you 100%. I don't care what I put into it, if I had a choice I would give it to a combat vet to help them out but I don't have a choice.

 

[Turtle]

Two rights don't make a wrong. Just because the government is a bunch of thieves does not make it OK to do it your self.

Well, no, just because the government is a bunch of thieves doesn't make it OK for me or anyone else to be a thief. But, if you steal something from me, I think it's perfectly fine for me to steal it back from you.

 

[layoutshooter]

Well, no, just because the government is a bunch of thieves doesn't make it OK for me or anyone else to be a thief. But, if you steal something from me, I think it's perfectly fine for me to steal it back from you.

Well I don't steal. So therefore you have no need to steal from me.
We are both safe then.

 

[layoutshooter]

OK, I was wrong about it once being voluntary. Not that it matters much. I still had no valid options. Be a bum or have my private property taken from me at gun point. Constitution my hind toe.