Social Security Trust Fund Running Out of Money

[KRAM1]

For the Social Security System to run out of funds by 2033 is really ridiculous. Now, let me say that I am talking about solutions to the "retirement" fund here...not the disability and entitlement fund portion of Social Security...that is a much bigger mess. But, seems to me to be a very simple solution to the "retirement" part...here goes:

1) Eliminate the wage/earnings cap on "contributions" to the fund through payrolls, and

2) Raise the age to receive benefits...raise the "early" retirement age to 65 1/2 and the full retirement age to 70.

That should work just fine.....now, does anyone in Congress or the White House have the guts to do it? I seriously doubt it. These ideas come from a serious fiscal conservative who is never in favor of raising taxes (and yes, this pretty much includes a tax increase for some), but it's time to stop "kicking the can down the road" and get some work done ASAP that will actually help.

Just my thoughts...and, for some of you..."NO" I am not trying to starve grandma and grandad and I do not hate old people. Just saying it before someone comes on here and accuses me of all sorts of "stuff". The problem is that no one from the White House down (especially not in the White House) has the "you know whats" to take this on and really find a solution.

OK, that's all.....

[PlummMeanGreen]

For the Social Security System to run out of funds by 2033 is really ridiculous. Now, let me say that I am talking about solutions to the "retirement" fund here...not the disability and entitlement fund portion of Social Security...that is a much bigger mess. But, seems to me to be a very simple solution to the "retirement" part...here goes:

1) Eliminate the wage/earnings cap on "contributions" to the fund through payrolls, and

2) Raise the age to receive benefits...raise the "early" retirement age to 65 1/2 and the full retirement age to 70.

That should work just fine.....now, does anyone in Congress or the White House have the guts to do it? I seriously doubt it. These ideas come from a serious fiscal conservative who is never in favor of raising taxes (and yes, this pretty much includes a tax increase for some), but it's time to stop "kicking the can down the road" and get some work done ASAP that will actually help.

Just my thoughts...and, for some of you..."NO" I am not trying to starve grandma and grandad and I do not hate old people. Just saying it before someone comes on here and accuses me of all sorts of "stuff". The problem is that no one from the White House down (especially not in the White House) has the "you know whats" to take this on and really find a solution.

OK, that's all.....

From all acounts (and not CNN polls) I think the beginning of the resolving of this problem will begin after this November when Shellacking II takes place. And It will not have come at a better time.

Much in the USA needs an over-haul and education would be a good place to start; that is, what all our "broken home" generation kids are receiving there with all the revisionists and rubber back-boned types who dont' have the gonads to stand up for anything moral would be a good place to begin this over-haul. I've seen this coming for decades having lived with a teacher (a wife) for about 10 years was where the biggest clue started for me. Hell, on trips out of the country we'd be apologizing for America, too, if we had been taught the crock of revised U.S. history BS they are getting in some of their textbooks across this great country. And some by teachers who can't even pass basic tests to continue to be teachers.

GMG!

Edited April 24, 2012 by PlummMeanGreen

[Censored by Laurie]

the crock of revised U.S. history BS they are getting in some of their textbooks across this great country.

Such as...?

[yyz28]

Kram -

...the very title of your post has the biggest misleader of them all when you refer to the nonexistent "Social Security Trust Fund". There is NO SUCH THING. In fact, it isn't that the fund funds out of money in '30 but rather that there simply isn't enough going in to service the amount going out. HAD there actually been a Trust Fund and the money that people were paying in was actually being invested instead of being tossed into the general funds and thus spent, Social Security would be solvent beyond our wildest dreams, and we'd be able to LOWER the retirement age, not make these difficult choices.

This is same government who stole the American people's money and spent it on things other than what they were supposed to... ...no way they have the balls to resolve this issue.

Plumm -

I agree with your feelings about education, but the way to fix it isn't to have the Federal Government reform, but rathe to get them OUT of the business of Education. It has been a downward spiral since the institution of the DOE. TIme to punt on that idea.

[KRAM1]

Kram -

...the very title of your post has the biggest misleader of them all when you refer to the nonexistent "Social Security Trust Fund". There is NO SUCH THING. In fact, it isn't that the fund funds out of money in '30 but rather that there simply isn't enough going in to service the amount going out. HAD there actually been a Trust Fund and the money that people were paying in was actually being invested instead of being tossed into the general funds and thus spent, Social Security would be solvent beyond our wildest dreams, and we'd be able to LOWER the retirement age, not make these difficult choices.

This is same government who stole the American people's money and spent it on things other than what they were supposed to... ...no way they have the balls to resolve this issue.

Plumm -

I agree with your feelings about education, but the way to fix it isn't to have the Federal Government reform, but rathe to get them OUT of the business of Education. It has been a downward spiral since the institution of the DOE. TIme to punt on that idea.

Ahhhhh, but I speak of the accounting for the different two sections...there is, indeed, accounting just not actual money. So, my point stands as written. Congress, the GAO, etc. deals with this stuff as if there were indeed actual funds by calculating the amounts...hypothetical that they may be...in the two "funds". I think we all understand that there are not actual funds with actual "saved" dollars in them. Are you kidding me? let Congress see a dollar sitting around somewhere and they will spend $5.00! POINT HERE IS...a simple solution to help fix Social Security...at least the "retirement" part of it...and again, Social Security was NEVER intended to be a retirement vehicle...just thought I'd mention that in case you wanted to go off on that tangent as well. Maybe someday we can stay on topic and discuss the "solutions" proposed.

Edited April 24, 2012 by KRAM1

[yyz28]

Ahhhhh, but I speak of the accounting for the different two sections...there is, indeed, accounting just not actual money. So, my point stands as written. Congress, the GAO, etc. deals with this stuff as if there were indeed actual funds by calculating the amounts...hypothetical that they may be...in the two "funds". I think we all understand that there are not actual funds with actual "saved" dollars in them. Are you kidding me? let Congress see a dollar sitting around somewhere and they will spend $5.00! POINT HERE IS...a simple solution to help fix Social Security...at least the "retirement" part of it...and again, Social Security was NEVER intended to be a retirement vehicle...just thought I'd mention that in case you wanted to go off on that tangent as well. Maybe someday we can stay on topic and discuss the "solutions" proposed.

Not hypothetical at all. First of all, most people DON'T get that, and polls indicate that. The term TRUST FUND insinuates that there is money in a TRUST FUND as there actually IS money i(or a financial instrument of some time) in ANY other TRUST FUND, you, I or business cares to set up. So, the language is confusing. ...to further make the point that Social Security was "NEVER intended to be a retirement vehicle" is to simply ignore history, as is to argue that the original intent and part of the sales pitch for Social Security is that it would actually be a reserve of cash.

Social Security was amended for the first time after passage in 1935 in 1939. One reason for the proposed changes in 1939 was a growing concern over the impact that the reserves created by the 1935 act were having on the economy. The Recession of 1937 was blamed on the government, tied to the abrupt decrease in government spending and the $2 billion that had been collected in Social Security taxes. Benefits became available in 1940 instead of 1942 and changes to the benefit formula increased the amount of benefits available to all recipients in the early years of Social Security. These two policies combined to shrink the size of the reserves. The original Act had conceived of the program as paying benefits out of a large reserve. This Act shifted the conception of Social Security into something of a hybrid system; while reserves would still accumulate, most early beneficiaries would receive benefits on the pay-as-you-go system. Just as importantly, the changes also delayed planned rises in contribution rates. Ironically if these had been left in place they would have come into effect during the wartime boom in wages and would have arguably helped to temper wartime inflation. The amendments established a trust fund for any surplus funds. The managing trustee of this fund is the Secretary of the Treasury. The money could be invested in both non-marketable and marketable securities.

The Act was an attempt to limit what were seen as dangers in the modern American life, including old age, poverty, unemployment, and the burdens of widows and fatherless children. Protecting people from Poverty in old age by definition makes Social Security a retirement vehicle. In fact, it encouraged a good deal of elderly employed to retire when benefits became available.

The government adopted a unified budget in the Johnson administration in 1968. This change resulted in a single measure of the fiscal status of the government, based on the sum of all government activity. The surplus in Social Security trust funds offsets the total debt, making it appear much smaller than it otherwise would. This allowed Congress to increase spending without having to risk the political consequences of raising taxes. This is when the Government began actively stealing the people's money.

...not to go off on a tangent again, but I find it helpful to understand the history of something if you're going to try to find solutions for it. ...but the solution is rather simple.

1. Allow people in their 20's & 30's to opt out and allow them to choose private investment instruments. (to be regulated, which normally, I hate, but if it would push people into fending for themselves instead of letting big brother take care of them, I'd be for it in this case)

2. Repeal unified budgeting. Force the Government to go back to building reserves on Social Security.

3. Cut Government Spending. Roll it back to any year you wish 2008 or previous. Economy was kicking ass in '97. How bout we go back to 1997 government spending?

4. Repeal the "FICA Tax Holiday" so that we're actually collecting the money going out to social security from those in the program.

5. Raise Full Retirement to 70.

Problem solved, government put back into some form of check and personal liberty has been restored. Passes all 3 policy litmus tests for me.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Much in the USA needs an over-haul and education would be a good place to start; that is, what all our "broken home" generation kids are receiving there with all the revisionists and rubber back-boned types who dont' have the gonads to stand up for anything moral would be a good place to begin this over-haul. I've seen this coming for decades having lived with a teacher (a wife) for about 10 years was where the biggest clue started for me. Hell, on trips out of the country we'd be apologizing for America, too, if we had been taught the crock of revised U.S. history BS they are getting in some of their textbooks across this great country. And some by teachers who can't even pass basic tests to continue to be teachers.

GMG!

Been in any schools lately...

---I taught in public schools for 30 years and 35 years in colleges [obviously an overlap... I remember that stupid TCAT test we had to take and only two out of about 1500 in my district failed it... and they were from some very poor excuses for colleges ( won't name ). Your comment is crazy.

---Likely two things have reduced teacher quality SOME. ONE: In the 40's 50's and somewhat 60's... smart women almost had to teach since they could not get jobs in business, engineering, and even law or as Doctors... Sandra Day O'Conner graduated 2ed in law school... and had no job offer.. no one was hiring women lawyers. Those smart women taught in classrooms for decades. Now many are elsewhere. TWO. I teach mathematics (still and when I graduated math engineering jobs did not pay what they do now and there wasn't as many as there are in this tech-crazy world. My two engineer sons made on their first day as much as I was my last one in public school... A lot of the best will not go to education anymore... especially males......I wouldn't now either too much pay elsewhere..it is all about salary.. You get what you pay for... Women are a bit different, many like summers off to take care of their personal kids. Raise saleries and things would change. Still there are a lot of very good teahers out there... Bad ones don't last long usually.... not where I was anyway.

---The biggest problem with education now [remember I have not been in public classroon in a few years and have nothing at stake in this] is all about homes ... many that don't speak English much.. too many from single parent homes who ae never home and sometimes kids with unlievable poor homelifes.. The big problem is so many of those homes give no support to assist education.

---To blanket say teachers are ignorant and stupid is demonstrating exactly that about what is going on.. Education could be better**... but pay elsewhere and opportunity for women elsewhere has removed many of the better oenes but not all. I haae no idea what you did for a living but I am sure I am an expert in your job as you are in education. Just going to school doesn't mean you understand the other side of the desk. ... I can use a computer... doesn't mean I could design one or write software.. which is exactly what my sons do.

Since you are such an expert on education go sub for a while and actually teach.. not just babysit. In fact try doing a few low level classes and test your manhood. I had one with five kids who later werecharged for murder... plus two murder victims [all in one room}. You should be tough enough to handle that that since you have all the answers.. plus I expect you would make great students of them. Every hardened criminal walked through our classrooms and we had to deal with them.

**after Perry's education cuts last time many HS math classes now have 40+ students and PE class here often have 100 kids per teacher... that is not even safe.. Might work with motivated college students but not in HS.

----Go ahead and trash teachers, give them unbelievable conditions to work in.... after all they are too stupid to understand. [so you think...]

_________________

GIVES THOSE DETAILS OF HISTORY BS .. I AM SURE YOU BEING AN EXPERT ON THIS YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIST MANY...

..

Edited April 25, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[SilverEagle]

For the Social Security System to run out of funds by 2033 is really ridiculous. Now, let me say that I am talking about solutions to the "retirement" fund here...not the disability and entitlement fund portion of Social Security...that is a much bigger mess. But, seems to me to be a very simple solution to the "retirement" part...here goes:

1) Eliminate the wage/earnings cap on "contributions" to the fund through payrolls, and

2) Raise the age to receive benefits...raise the "early" retirement age to 65 1/2 and the full retirement age to 70.

That should work just fine.....now, does anyone in Congress or the White House have the guts to do it? I seriously doubt it. These ideas come from a serious fiscal conservative who is never in favor of raising taxes (and yes, this pretty much includes a tax increase for some), but it's time to stop "kicking the can down the road" and get some work done ASAP that will actually help.

Just my thoughts...and, for some of you..."NO" I am not trying to starve grandma and grandad and I do not hate old people. Just saying it before someone comes on here and accuses me of all sorts of "stuff". The problem is that no one from the White House down (especially not in the White House) has the "you know whats" to take this on and really find a solution.

OK, that's all.....

#3. Means testing for the already rich/comfortable. But then, I wasn't surprised that you left that option out.

[GreenMachine]

Been in any schools lately...

---I taught in public schools for 30 years and 35 years in colleges [obviously an overlap... I remember that stupid TCAT test we had to take and only two out of about 1500 in my district failed it... and they were from some very poor excuses for colleges ( won't name ). Your comment is crazy.

---Likely two things have reduced teacher quality SOME. ONE: In the 40's 50's and somewhat 60's... smart women almost had to teach since they could not get jobs in business, engineering, and even law or as Doctors... Sandra Day O'Conner graduated 2ed in law school... and had no job offer.. no one was hiring women lawyers. Those smart women taught in classrooms for decades. Now many are elsewhere. TWO. I teach mathematics (still and when I graduated math engineering jobs did not pay what they do now and there wasn't as many as there are in this tech-crazy world. My two engineer sons made on their first day as much as I was my last one in public school... A lot of the best will not go to education anymore... especially males......I wouldn't now either too much pay elsewhere..it is all about salary.. You get what you pay for... Women are a bit different, many like summers off to take care of their personal kids. Raise saleries and things would change. Still there are a lot of very good teahers out there... Bad ones don't last long usually.... not where I was anyway.

---The biggest problem with education now [remember I have not been in public classroon in a few years and have nothing at stake in this] is all about homes ... many that don't speak English much.. too many from single parent homes who ae never home and sometimes kids with unlievable poor homelifes.. The big problem is so many of those homes give no support to assist education.

---To blanket say teachers are ignorant and stupid is demonstrating exactly that about what is going on.. Education could be better**... but pay elsewhere and opportunity for women elsewhere has removed many of the better oenes but not all. I haae no idea what you did for a living but I am sure I am an expert in your job as you are in education. Just going to school doesn't mean you understand the other side of the desk. ... I can use a computer... doesn't mean I could design one or write software.. which is exactly what my sons do.

Since you are such an expert on education go sub for a while and actually teach.. not just babysit. In fact try doing a few low level classes and test your manhood. I had one with five kids who later werecharged for murder... plus two murder victims [all in one room}. You should be tough enough to handle that that since you have all the answers.. plus I expect you would make great students of them. Every hardened criminal walked through our classrooms and we had to deal with them.

**after Perry's education cuts last time many HS math classes now have 40+ students and PE class here often have 100 kids per teacher... that is not even safe.. Might work with motivated college students but not in HS.

----Go ahead and trash teachers, give them unbelievable conditions to work in.... after all they are too stupid to understand. [so you think...]

_________________

GIVES THOSE DETAILS OF HISTORY BS .. I AM SURE YOU BEING AN EXPERT ON THIS YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO LIST MANY...

..

Just curious about something. Are teachers really underpaid? If you figure what they are making per hour based on getting off at 3:30-4:00 every day, weeks off for Christmas, a week for spring break and off all summer, are they really underpaid? Yes, I know some teachers grade papers after school but I work at a mortgage company and can guarantee they don't work half the hours I do. I believe if you actually looked at the number of hours worked in a calendar year, you would see they aren't underpaid at all.

[KRAM1]

#3. Means testing for the already rich/comfortable. But then, I wasn't surprised that you left that option out.

Silver...please explain. I really have no idea what you are talking about here. Why means testing with regard to SS? I already recommended removing the wage max cap...that IS a tax increase for the higher income folks.

And....I am not surprised that you are playing the class warfare card.

[SilverEagle]

Silver...please explain. I really have no idea what you are talking about here. Why means testing with regard to SS? I already recommended removing the wage max cap...that IS a tax increase for the higher income folks.

And....I am not surprised that you are playing the class warfare card.

Means testing....you know....do they really need it? It's kind of absurd when someone like the former head of "insert-the-name-of-some-former-CEO-who-got-a-multi-million dollar-severance package" gets SS when he/she becomes age eligible.

And I'm more than happy to bring up the differences between the classes, since the 1% have more than their share of well paid front men.

[GreenMachine]

Means testing....you know....do they really need it? It's kind of absurd when someone like the former head of "insert-the-name-of-some-former-CEO-who-got-a-multi-million dollar-severance package" gets SS when he/she becomes age eligible.

And I'm more than happy to bring up the differences between the classes, since the 1% have more than their share of well paid front men.

why wouldn't they deserve to get SS? That is THEIR money they paid into it.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

why wouldn't they deserve to get SS? That is THEIR money they paid into it.

---Absolutely.... social security is NOT welfare as ultra conservatives yell about... everyone of us paid for it.... and it is ours to collect... rich or poor.

---Some people die too soon to collect anything... some live an extremely long time and collect more than they paid in and what interest would have accumulated. Like most insurance, some collect a lot, some don't. . It was never even meant to be a complete retirement package but be enough to feed and house people somewhat in their old age without living with their kids or on the streets [as is the case in some countries].

---Reminds me of some people who were wanting to take teacher retirement money to balance the budget.... That is not the state's money, it belongs to us that paid into it. [ the state of Texas doesn't even match it 100%... and Perry et. al. have even been cutting state contributions. ( another reason people in education don't care for him or them ). Most companies have a plan that match employee contributions and it isn't their money either [Enron with Wendy Gramm, Phil Gramm's wife and on their board of directors, thought so.. they stole it leaving former employees of the company and companies they took over with nothing in retirement ]. That was the real tragedy of Enron.... the people who could no longer work and lost their income and insurance.. not the lost jobs.

Edited April 25, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

One of the main things to remember is that its cheap to live like the Chi-panese - lots of rice and ramen noodles and Crisco. When you live like this, it cuts down considerably on your costs.

As a meat portion, I also suggest Vienna Sausages and/or Potted Meat Product. Both can be eaten with or without crackers (the food, not the people). Additionally, you can make a sandwich out of the Potted Meat Product.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Just curious about something. Are teachers really underpaid? If you figure what they are making per hour based on getting off at 3:30-4:00 every day, weeks off for Christmas, a week for spring break and off all summer, are they really underpaid? Yes, I know some teachers grade papers after school but I work at a mortgage company and can guarantee they don't work half the hours I do. I believe if you actually looked at the number of hours worked in a calendar year, you would see they aren't underpaid at all.

BULL SH**.... you have no idea how many hours are put in after 4:00 and how many week-ends we spent grading papers..filling out reports etc. sponsoring activities, etc. Even if it was 4 min per student (very conservative) per week grading etc. and I had about 150-160 students** that is 10 hours out of class and after school .. work time at school is usually preparation and other things...and honestly that usually didn't even touch the total...

If it is such a great deal.. quit your job and go do it.... none of my three kids became teachers... they knew what it meant.

---I am retired from public schools but teach some college classes and just spent today 2-3 hours at my wife's school this morning preparing for her Latin banquet tomorrow night... I was also there yesterday afternoon a couple of hours then too.... This is not unusual***.. there goes another evening and several more hours.... by her and me. You are clueless... plus it is an extremely stressful job for most of us... try being around a few 100 kids every day and all that they do..... This afternoon I am covering some friend's math classes (I teach math, only HS math sub they have) while they are going to have to be out (school business).. They will have to grade all those assignments when they return ... on their own time...... You are completely clueless.

---It is a job that if you are ill... you can't just walk out the door...someone has to be there... and you have to have something for the students to do... most just go or stay, ill or not. On most jobs you can just leave... not in school ... can't just leave a classroom with no one up front and with all teh pressure from these state tests... the student don't need to waste any time or we catch hell for low scores... more pressure. .

** most have more now since the Gov. Perry cuts took place in the last session. ...now less teachers.. and the same or more students walking in the door

***Next week we get to spent our entire Saturday night at a HS prom making sure nothing bad happens.. does your job have you do all of these things.??

*** She is still filling out college recommendations, scholarships forms, etc. ..on her own time.. after that great 4:00 PM quiting time you mentioned... many have parents like you who thinks she quits at 4:00 and never even thank her. I have helped students in way they never knew about... talking to various people including one of mine who became an FBI agent.. They random selected me to interview about him.... what I said fit what he had claimed, he was hired. Others knew I knew the person and asked about them before hiring them (all after 4:00 PM). Obviously no thanks there, they never knew what had happened. A few didn't get hired because of my comments about them.... you never know when something may come back and bite you or help you.

..

Edited April 25, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[KRAM1]

Means testing....you know....do they really need it? It's kind of absurd when someone like the former head of "insert-the-name-of-some-former-CEO-who-got-a-multi-million dollar-severance package" gets SS when he/she becomes age eligible.

And I'm more than happy to bring up the differences between the classes, since the 1% have more than their share of well paid front men.

So, now the gov. just flat out robs people of their own money? Nice, Silver. Way to go Comrade. Why do liberals hate successful people so much? They always want someone else to pay and never think anything is fair unless someone else does the paying more? Let's see, liberals complain that low income folks don't have equal access to higher education...yet when same low income folks end up getting a college degree and making a really nice income...the same liberals complain that these previously low income folks who have "pulled themseleves up" and actually worked for a living should pay more taxes....why? Because they earn more than some liberals do...You never see this wage and income jealously from conservatives...it's always the liberals who play this class warfare card...that's when they aren't playing the race card...sometimes they play both at the same time. Just has never computed to me why some folks are so jealous of success.

So, I guess it's only the libs who get to determine "fairness" in life...go figure. Sorry, Silver...just not buying that line of "stuff". But, you are consistent in your beliefs, so I'll give you that...no flip flopping by the great Silver. Stay strong....

[yyz28]

Conservatives would be looking for a way to make good on the promises made to folks near retiring and at the same time be working towards spinning this program down to it's ultimate demise, transferring these responsibilities back to the people with whom it belongs. Building a policy that pushes us back to a privatized retirement program is the only way to ever truly solve this problem. It is likely to be forced on us once the system collapses, which at the current rate, will happen sooner rather than later. ...but if a controlled shutdown is preferred (and it would be by any rational person) a number of strategies, including means testing, would have to be employed.

...So, we don't means test for folks in the system now or near retirement... ...but we do for people who are currently in their 40's and 50's and let them know now so they can plan ahead properly. ...and for the folks in their 20's and 30's, let them opt out entirely. Over time, the system will transition into private funds where there is actually wealth growing instead of some number in some imaginary account somewhere.

If I were given the option TODAY to opt out and put my money in private funds, I'd do it with ZERO hesitation.

...if we're going to keep the system, and try to fix it for its long term survival, then I am 100% against means testing.

FWIW, this class warfare crap is just that. Usually pushed by the uninformed or the ideologues. Anyone whom continues to argue that the upper 1% who make 16% of the income yet covers 32% of our tax burden isn't paying enough into the system for Social Security or any other program, simply has an axe to grind and isn't interested in what the plain and simple numbers reveal. They will argue for the buffett rule, but not question why "1%'ers" who are for it don't just open up their checkbooks and right the wrong they profess to be against? ...they won't mention to you that the President who is trying to score political points on this issue paid a lower rate than HIS secretary this year. They won't demand that the politician they are supporting and who is arguing this point open up his checkbook to right this social injustice.

The federal government has acted in a way with Social Security that would put any other financial manager in prison for the rest of his life. They have stolen the money and spent it rather than invested it as they promised the American People, and as they continue to try and make them think is happening... ...what do you think that annual statement is all about? I don't think the government can be trusted to do the right thing. I don't think the government can fix the problem. I think it will go belly up before any politician has the balls to do something meaningful about it.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

My homeowners association board goes out to dinner once a month with the property management company rep and uses homeowners association dues to cover the cost.

I questioned the HOA president and property management company about it, and they told me they feel that using homeowners association fees for dinner saved the HOA money on printing costs in the long run because the restaurants have wifi.

I pointed out that people's homes in Frisco have wifi and that amount they spent at one dinner would buy 30-40 reams (15,000 to 20,000 sheets) of paper...per month. They said that a home couldn't handle a dozen or so people once a month; too much trouble. And, they didn't bother to respond to my printing/paper financial analysis.

I pointed out that families in the neighborhood often host two to three times that amount of people at their homes for bunco, pool parties, holiday get togethers, etc. They responded by saying their meetings were legal under Texas law and the by-laws.

I pointed out to them that I never said they weren't legal, just that they were using homeowners association dues to eat out, and that they seemed oddly defensive about it. They finally just said that for their time and effort, they didn't really think there was a problem.

Here's the thing - no matter how big or small the bureaucracy, eventually "spending other people's money" becomes engrained.

Is it a big deal that our HOA will waste $1,000-$2,000 on dinners just for the board and the management company? In the scheme of things no. But, the attitude and short shrift given to even the appearance of ethics is what is bothersome. First, the excuses, then the defensiveness. Then, finally, the "so what, mind your own business" gig.

With anything governmental (social security and whatnot) and quasi-governmental (HOA and the like) - govenment-minded people really just want what my HOA and property management company want: just for me to mind my own business and not ask any questions about what they do with my money. That makes them happy.

[forevereagle]

My homeowners association board goes out to dinner once a month with the property management company rep and uses homeowners association dues to cover the cost.

I questioned the HOA president and property management company about it, and they told me they feel that using homeowners association fees for dinner saved the HOA money on printing costs in the long run because the restaurants have wifi.

I pointed out that people's homes in Frisco have wifi and that amount they spent at one dinner would buy 30-40 reams (15,000 to 20,000 sheets) of paper...per month. They said that a home couldn't handle a dozen or so people once a month; too much trouble. And, they didn't bother to respond to my printing/paper financial analysis.

I pointed out that families in the neighborhood often host two to three times that amount of people at their homes for bunco, pool parties, holiday get togethers, etc. They responded by saying their meetings were legal under Texas law and the by-laws.

I pointed out to them that I never said they weren't legal, just that they were using homeowners association dues to eat out, and that they seemed oddly defensive about it. They finally just said that for their time and effort, they didn't really think there was a problem.

Here's the thing - no matter how big or small the bureaucracy, eventually "spending other people's money" becomes engrained.

Is it a big deal that our HOA will waste $1,000-$2,000 on dinners just for the board and the management company? In the scheme of things no. But, the attitude and short shrift given to even the appearance of ethics is what is bothersome. First, the excuses, then the defensiveness. Then, finally, the "so what, mind your own business" gig.

With anything governmental (social security and whatnot) and quasi-governmental (HOA and the like) - govenment-minded people really just want what my HOA and property management company want: just for me to mind my own business and not ask any questions about what they do with my money. That makes them happy.

What I got from that is that you need to join the HOA board and get you some free food.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Conservatives would be looking for a way to make good on the promises made to folks near retiring and at the same time be working towards spinning this program down to it's ultimate demise, transferring these responsibilities back to the people with whom it belongs. Building a policy that pushes us back to a privatized retirement program is the only way to ever truly solve this problem. It is likely to be forced on us once the system collapses, which at the current rate, will happen sooner rather than later. ...but if a controlled shutdown is preferred (and it would be by any rational person) a number of strategies, including means testing, would have to be employed.

...So, we don't means test for folks in the system now or near retirement... ...but we do for people who are currently in their 40's and 50's and let them know now so they can plan ahead properly. ...and for the folks in their 20's and 30's, let them opt out entirely. Over time, the system will transition into private funds where there is actually wealth growing instead of some number in some imaginary account somewhere.

If I were given the option TODAY to opt out and put my money in private funds, I'd do it with ZERO hesitation.

...if we're going to keep the system, and try to fix it for its long term survival, then I am 100% against means testing.

FWIW, this class warfare crap is just that. Usually pushed by the uninformed or the ideologues. Anyone whom continues to argue that the upper 1% who make 16% of the income yet covers 32% of our tax burden isn't paying enough into the system for Social Security or any other program, simply has an axe to grind and isn't interested in what the plain and simple numbers reveal. They will argue for the buffett rule, but not question why "1%'ers" who are for it don't just open up their checkbooks and right the wrong they profess to be against? ...they won't mention to you that the President who is trying to score political points on this issue paid a lower rate than HIS secretary this year. They won't demand that the politician they are supporting and who is arguing this point open up his checkbook to right this social injustice.

The federal government has acted in a way with Social Security that would put any other financial manager in prison for the rest of his life. They have stolen the money and spent it rather than invested it as they promised the American People, and as they continue to try and make them think is happening... ...what do you think that annual statement is all about? I don't think the government can be trusted to do the right thing. I don't think the government can fix the problem. I think it will go belly up before any politician has the balls to do something meaningful about it.

---A lot of college personal do have an option of investing into a stock fund or joining TRS [teacher retirement system ]... most I know regret doing the stock fund... Things like 2008 happen which can nearly wipe them out. For retirement you need not be so greedy and take the safer route. plus two... it is very possible to outlive your stock-fund money... S.S. and TRS you can't. S.S. should be never be considered your only retirement fund... you do that on your own as you said you wanted to do. Another feature in social security is some survivor benefits for your minor kids... my wife collected for years as the result of her father being a WWII casuality. Guess you also would need to take that insurance too if you opted out.

..

Edited April 25, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[yyz28]

---A lot of college personal do have an option of investing into a stock fund or joining TRS [teacher retirement system ]... most I know regret doing the stock fund... Things like 2008 happen which can nearly wipe them out. For retirement you need not be so greedy and take the safer route. plus two... it is very possible to outlive your stock-fund money... S.S. and TRS you can't. S.S. should be never be considered your only retirement fund... you do that on your own as you said you wanted to do. Another feature in social security is some survivor benefits for your minor kids... my wife collected for years as the result of her father being a WWII casuality. Guess you also would need to take that insurance too if you opted out.

..

I don't support a stock fund. Any fund that would replace Social Security in the private sector would have to be diverse. Stocks may be included, but the percentage would be largely driven by your age and proximity to retirement. If there is a fund with actual cash in it the survivors get that benefit. ...and we shouldn't be paying military next of kin via Social Security. That can be done using other systems. Outliving your money is always a concern, but again, not something that couldn't be worked out in the private sector.

[KRAM1]

Ever heard of the Galveston Plan? Check it out...might open a few eyes around here.....

[GreenMachine]

BULL SH**.... you have no idea how many hours are put in after 4:00 and how many week-ends we spent grading papers..filling out reports etc. sponsoring activities, etc. Even if it was 4 min per student (very conservative) per week grading etc. and I had about 150-160 students** that is 10 hours out of class and after school .. work time at school is usually preparation and other things...and honestly that usually didn't even touch the total...

If it is such a great deal.. quit your job and go do it.... none of my three kids became teachers... they knew what it meant.

---I am retired from public schools but teach some college classes and just spent today 2-3 hours at my wife's school this morning preparing for her Latin banquet tomorrow night... I was also there yesterday afternoon a couple of hours then too.... This is not unusual***.. there goes another evening and several more hours.... by her and me. You are clueless... plus it is an extremely stressful job for most of us... try being around a few 100 kids every day and all that they do..... This afternoon I am covering some friend's math classes (I teach math, only HS math sub they have) while they are going to have to be out (school business).. They will have to grade all those assignments when they return ... on their own time...... You are completely clueless.

---It is a job that if you are ill... you can't just walk out the door...someone has to be there... and you have to have something for the students to do... most just go or stay, ill or not. On most jobs you can just leave... not in school ... can't just leave a classroom with no one up front and with all teh pressure from these state tests... the student don't need to waste any time or we catch hell for low scores... more pressure. .

** most have more now since the Gov. Perry cuts took place in the last session. ...now less teachers.. and the same or more students walking in the door

***Next week we get to spent our entire Saturday night at a HS prom making sure nothing bad happens.. does your job have you do all of these things.??

*** She is still filling out college recommendations, scholarships forms, etc. ..on her own time.. after that great 4:00 PM quiting time you mentioned... many have parents like you who thinks she quits at 4:00 and never even thank her. I have helped students in way they never knew about... talking to various people including one of mine who became an FBI agent.. They random selected me to interview about him.... what I said fit what he had claimed, he was hired. Others knew I knew the person and asked about them before hiring them (all after 4:00 PM). Obviously no thanks there, they never knew what had happened. A few didn't get hired because of my comments about them.... you never know when something may come back and bite you or help you.

..

Clueless? Okay, I guess my ex-wife and several friends are lying to me when they tell me what a cush job it is. Let me ask you something. How many mornings were you up by 5 am to catch a 7:30 flight, be in meetings all day, then maybe get in bed by midnight only to wake up to make a 7:30 meeting? How many nights were you teaching or working until 10 pm to finish a project? How many Christmas Eves have you worked, taken one day off for Christmas, then in the office by 8 on the 26th? You can spin it anyway you want but teachers in a full year don't work that many hours. You are honestly the first person I have ever heard try and act like teachers work a lot of hours.

[SCREAMING EAGLE-66]

Clueless? Okay, I guess my ex-wife and several friends are lying to me when they tell me what a cush job it is. Let me ask you something. How many mornings were you up by 5 am to catch a 7:30 flight, be in meetings all day, then maybe get in bed by midnight only to wake up to make a 7:30 meeting? How many nights were you teaching or working until 10 pm to finish a project? How many Christmas Eves have you worked, taken one day off for Christmas, then in the office by 8 on the 26th? You can spin it anyway you want but teachers in a full year don't work that many hours. You are honestly the first person I have ever heard try and act like teachers work a lot of hours.

---How many times did I do paper-work until 1-2:00 AM... I can't count. Granted I did take a break after class. and would start a hour or two after supper. PS. I'm guess if you did all of that yoyur salery was a lot higher than a HS teacher. My sons in the semi-conductor business doen't even do that very often and I am not about to tell you what they make but it is several TIMES what I made.

PS: I got home last night at 8:45 .. class. There are a lot worse jobs ... but it is not what you try to make it out to be. Again if it is quit ---and do it for a living.. Your ex-wife probably lied to you about a lot of things....hahaha.. I see she lasted 10 years ... why if it was so easy.? Are you going to watching the NFL draft tonight... I can't .. I will be assisting my wife at the Latin banquet and might get home at 10:00. if your friends thought it was a "cushy" job.... they were doing a poor job. Hope they quit.

Edited April 26, 2012 by SCREAMING EAGLE-66

[GreenMachine]

---How many times did I do paper-work until 1-2:00 AM... I can't count. Granted I did take a break after class. and would start a hour or two after supper. PS. I'm guess if you did all of that yoyur salery was a lot higher than a HS teacher. My sons in the semi-conductor business doen't even do that very often and I am not about to tell you what they make but it is several TIMES what I made.

PS: I got home last night at 8:45 .. class. There are a lot worse jobs ... but it is not what you try to make it out to be. Again if it is quit ---and do it for a living.. Your ex-wife probably lied to you about a lot of things....hahaha.. I see she lasted 10 years ... why if it was so easy.? Are you going to watching the NFL draft tonight... I can't .. I will be assisting my wife at the Latin banquet and might get home at 10:00. if your friends thought it was a "cushy" job.... they were doing a poor job. Hope they quit.

You fail to mention the fact you get 12 weeks off for summer, 2 weeks off for Christmas break and the entire spring break off. You keep mentioning quit my job and become a teacher. Why would I want to cut my salary in half? All I am saying is that if you count the number of hours a teacher works throughout the entire year, its not that much. You would have to work 52 hrs per week to equal a 40 hour work anywhere else. (Personally I don't know anybody that only works 40 hrs per week) Again, I don't care if its hard or not, don't care if its stressful or not. I am just saying for the entire year, teachers don't work a lot of hours. By the way, its 9:37 and I've been home for a couple of hours but I did get into the office at 6:45.