Breaking Promises

For as long as I’ve been in this business, I’ve been warning people that the entire Social Security system is built on a teetering house of cards and that people in my and later generations will end up being stiffed when we retire, even after paying in hundreds of thousands of dollars during our working lives.

Although I don’t think it is in the least bit fair, I still believe that to be the case and continue to believe that the only salvation for the bankrupt SS system is to install a means test for who will receive benefits. Anyone who has a net worth over a certain amount specified by our rulers in DC, or an annual income above a certain level (also specified by our rulers) will receive no SS benefits, regardless of how much had been paid in to the imaginary trust fund. This will increase the demand for services of those who assist in impoverishment planning, which currently deals mainly with qualify people for Medicaid assistance.

When I tell people this, they almost always express disbelief and claim the government would never break such a sacred promise as the one to support us in our golden years. As one who believes that we can learn from history, I have to remind them of examples of broken promises from our esteemed rulers in DC, starting from the treaties with the native American Indians to the current taxation of SS benefits in spite of the original promise that they would always be tax free to compensate for no deduction for the payments into the system.

I just came across this story of how the Feds are quite openly breaking the agreement that existed with military veterans who served for 20 years or more to cover their lifetime medical costs. For those skeptics who believe in the Social Security Tooth Fairy, ask yourself this. If the Federal government has no qualms about stiffing men and women who risked their lives for the security of this country, what’s to stop them from doing the same thing to everyone who has paid in and has been counting on a monthly retirement check from the SSA?

KMK

Cut fraud instead of hiking taxes

This is a question I hope more people ask. Why are the taxpayers the first place our rulers look to when they have budget problems, when they should be reducing the huge amounts of money lost through fraud and incompetency?

KMK

Should immigrants be taxed?

This is an interesting issue, on which I’m not sure exactly how it should be. On one hand, I’m opposed to taxes and any impediment to the free use of one’s money. If these people earn the money, and are in the USA legally, they should be allowed to spend it or send it where or however they choose.

However, if they are pleading poverty and therefor receiving a lot of services for free that the rest of us have to pay for, there may be some merit to having them pay some kind of fee or tax to reimburse the taxpayers who are subsidizing them. This is also similar to the argument against repealing the sales tax on food and medicine that I heard during the recent campaign season. Many people wanted to keep the sales tax on food and medicine just for the specific reason to force Mexican immigrants to pay something in taxes, since they spend a good portion of their disposable income on food.

This is no longer just an issue for border states, such as the PRC. Here in NorthWest Arkansas, there is a fast growing population of Mexicans who work for the Tyson poultry plants. Just a few weeks ago, I was behind a woman in a Conoco station who was using their Western Union service to wire some money back to Mexico and there were several others in line to do the same thing.

KMK

State of the states: budgets in crisis

Several “grasshopper” states are suffering the consequences for poor planning and wild spending programs.

KMK

States inch toward online sales tax deal

Democrats and The Bush Tax Cut

More Tax Cuts on Bush Agenda