Text 4649, 55 rader
Skriven 2010-02-06 13:31:22 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
   Kommentar till text 4630 av Bob Ackley (1:300/3)
Ärende: Entitlements
====================
Bob Ackley wrote to Robert Bashe on Friday February 05 2010 at 06:40:

BA>>> One "contribution" is apparently enough.

RB>> No, it certainly is not. The only way you get anything out of the
RB>> U.S. program is if you contribute for a certain minimum number of
RB>> quarters. As I recollect, it's around 60 quarters or five years.

BA> Then the rules were changed.

Not during the time I've been on this earth, or at least since I was employed
in the States in 1956-58. The only change since then has been the increase in
retirement age and possibly the situation with respect to bilateral agreements
sith other countries, although that didn't concern me until I moved to Germany.

BA> As I noted that lady had made precisely one such "contribution" and
BA> then drew benefits for several years, beginning in about 1940.

OK, what the situation was in 1940 is beyond me, as I wasn't even born then.

BA> Of some interest is the fact that in 2010 Social Security will pay out
BA> more in benefits than it takes in in "contributions"...

Is that anything new? Social security in the States is financed the same way as
the system in Germany, namely a "rollover" or "pay as you go" system where the
(forced) contributions of the young are immediately paid out to the old in
pensions. That kind of financing only works when there are more young workers
(_not_ unemployed!) than old people, or at least no more old people than young
workers. That hasn't been the case for many years. The difference is generally
made up from tax revenues.

That's why I keep writing the pension systems based on such financing are
already bankrupt, and will become more bankrupt over time. However, the
governments managing them refuse to acknowledge this and keep trying to pretend
that these pension systems will somehow go on forever.

BA> Insofar as Social Security as welfare is concerned...

I appreciate your arguments, but maintain that "welfare" is something you get
without paying _anything_ in return. Your Social Security benefits have been
paid for, and if the government hasn't managed the money well and has to pay
out more than it takes in, that's not your fault.

BA> It looks like that in about 2012 I will beome a welfare bum living off
BA> the taxpayers - but then the world will end in that year so I won't be
BA> a burden for very long...

;-) Hopefully you're wrong. At any rate, my attitude is that anyone who refuses
a government handout he's entitled to is a fool. We pay high enough taxes when
we earn money to have no bad conscience when we receive it.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)