I looked at my annual Social Security report today. by Walt Thiessen
(libertarian)
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
It came in the mail last week, that annual statement from the Social Security commissioner telling me how much I'm supposed to collect from the government when I retire. Most of us receive these statements in the mail, realize that they're not a bill, spend five seconds looking them over, then toss them in the trash. I think it's worth our time to pay closer attention to them, because if we do, we'll find out that we've already lost money on Social Security.
I'm not talking this time about how much better off you'd be if you could invest your retirement funds any way you saw fit rather than having the government confiscate them to give them to current retirees. No, I'm talking about the losses already built into the benefits you expect to receive from Social Security when you retire.
If you still have your statement around, pick it up and turn to page 2. See the section at the top entitled Your Entitled Benefits? That's where you see what you're supposed to get based on what you paid in over the years.
Now, look at the bottom of this section where the asterisk (*) can be found. Read it. It says, "Your estimated benefits are based on current law. Congress has made changes to the law in the past and can do so at any time. The law governing benefit amounts may change because, by 2037, the payroll taxes collected will be enough to pay only about 76% of scheduled benefits."
So, apparently, before I've even retired, I've already lost nearly one-quarter of what I had a right to expect in benefits, which means even dog food likely won't be on the menu. At least that's what the government claims based on their rosy predictions of the future. Yes, I said rosy. The doomly predictions are much worse, and all self-respecting government spokespersons routinely reject such gloom-and-doom pronouncements out of hand. Of course, this is the same government that was caught completely by surprise by the financial crisis. Go figure.
The other side of the story is that Medicare will be bankrupt long before 2037, which means the government will be struggling to find money to fix it. Anyone want to bet how much our Social Security benefits will be worth by the time the politicians are done raiding them to pay for fixing Medicare?
Oh, and what about all the bailouts? Well, the government assures us that they've all been (mostly) paid back. They say nothing about the coming next round of the crisis that we're expecting once the Alt-A and Option ARM mortgages reset this year and next, peaking toward the end of 2011, while half of all commercial real estate across the country is "under water" and fully one-third of commercial real estate is not expected to be able to qualify for renewal of financing once their loans come due over the next few years, according to the TARP Congressional Oversight Panel. Meanwhile, the FDIC insurance fund now stands at $20.9 billion in debt, a negative balance rather than a positive balance!
Of course, the financial crisis is over, right? Not!
Let me be the first to give you the bad news (if you don't know it already). Your Social Security benefits are going to disappear like crazy over the next few years, as the government does its best to prop up a badly broken financial system which financed, among other things, a badly broken, government-driven health care system. (Just follow the money.) They'll either do it by inflating like crazy (the likely scenario), which will destroy any value your Social Security benefits might have over time, just like they destroyed the value of the dollar over the 50-100 years. Or, they'll do it by cutting benefits and raising FICA taxes dramatically. Either way, we're screwed.
Just remember. They're from the government, and they're here to help you.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 5
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Walt Thiessen only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Walt Thiessen is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Remember that Social(ist) Security is a completely voluntary program.
Before you protest and say that it isn't, and that your "employer" withholds on you, do the research.
Virtually all "employers" simply dance to the tune of mis-applied federal regulations that do not actually apply to them. (Exception: state and federal government employers, to whom the regulations actually apply, and a very few "well-educated" "employers.")
Virtually all "employees" also voluntarily take on the misapplied status of "taxpayer" that legally only applies to government workers and to those who willingly accept the status. (Exception: the growing number of people that have learned that their status is that of "non-taxpayer.")
You and your readers can find a LOT of well-documented and highly enlightening educational material here:
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2010-03-02 15:27:45
Sure, creator. I suppose that if you can find that rare employer who will pay you well under the table or if you can be among the 5% of small business enterpreneurs who remain in business after two years operation and don't mind risking the government's wrath, you can consider Social Security to be "voluntary".
Hey creator, I tried to get our payroll company to stop withholding SS theft and they said the law will not allow them to stop my withholdings. I even called the SS Administration and asked them if the program was voluntary. They stated that indeed it was, but in order to stop having that taken out from my check I would need to contact the IRS. I did and the issue is not resolved. Any suggestions?
Walt, although admittedly and sadly rare, there is nothing "under the table" about getting ALL your pay for your work, and using such pejorative terms just plays into the hands of tyrannical government. As you well know we have an inalienable right to contract, whether or not the government "encourages" us to exercise it.
Staying in business is just as hard as ever, but I can assure you that if you bend over to government demands, it is all that much harder to do so. I am not trying to imply that it is easy to resist government pressure to "conform," but IMHO it is the lack of such spine in this country that is a far greater problem than government itself.
Tim Gandee, I'll just repeat my suggestion that you "study up" at the Original Intent website and learn what your options are. Don't expect the IRS or your employer to follow the law unless you apply pressure. (BTW, your employer or their payroll company is lying to you for their own convenience, and the IRS lies continuously and as a matter of policy.)
It will only take you a few hours at the most to read the articles you find at Original Intent, and as a result you will be better educated than 99% of all Americans, including most in the libertarian and conservative movements of all stripes. I also suggest that you follow all the links that you can find there.
Finally, make up your own mind to resist, and to do whatever it takes to become "one less taxpayer," even if that means finding a better place to work, or working for yourself. If we sit around waiting for everyone else to do it, it will never happen.
Posted By: Walt Thiessen
Date: 2010-03-02 19:18:54
First, let me say that creator is a good friend, and I trust he understands that our debate disagreements are merely that: disagreements. I have a great deal of respect for him as a person, as a debator, and as an advocate.
Having said that, I think it's irresponsible to treat the notion of the term "under the table" as pejorative in a legal environment where people are routinely punished by the government (and more specifically by the IRS) for exactly the kind of behavior creator advocates. One thing he rarely admits is that these prosecutions routinely take place and that one who follows any tax avoidance formula places oneself at great risk relative to the government authorities.
On the other hand, he's correct that it's all about resistance. The important thing, in my mind, is that if people are going to resist in the manner he suggests, they should be fully cognizant of the personal risks involved in that resistance. Downplaying and even dismissing those risks is deplorable. Claiming legal authority as protection is dicey at best and irresponsible at worst when tyranny is the rule of the day.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
