eagleye13 wrote:
SOCIAL SECURITY CARD !
Dick Kantenberger
Gifted Education Writer
Examiner.com
History Lesson on Your Social Security Card
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn't know this.
It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what's what and it doesn't matter whether you are Democrat or Republican.
Facts are Facts.
Social Security Cards up until the 1980s expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in th United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the
message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.
An old Social Security card with the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message.
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be
Completely voluntary,
No longer Voluntary
2.) That the participants would only have to pay
1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
Incomes into the Program,
Now 7.65%
on the first $90,000
3.) That the money the participants elected to put
into the Program would be deductible from
their income for tax purposes each year,
No longer tax deductible
4.) That the money the participants put into the
independent 'Trust Fund' rather than into the
general operating fund, and therefore, would
only be used to fund the Social Security
Retirement Program, and no other
Government program, and,
Under Johnson the money was moved to
The General Fund and Spent
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
Under Clinton & Gore
Up to 85% of your Social Security can be Taxed
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
now receiving a Social Security check every month --
and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
the money we paid to the Federal government to 'put
away' -- you may be interested in the following:
------------ -------
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the
independent 'Trust Fund' and put it into the
general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically
controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
------------ --------- -------
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social
Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the
'tie-breaking' deciding vote as President of the
Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
------------ ---------
Q: Which Political Party decided to start
giving annuity payments to immigrants?
AND MY FAVORITE:
A: That's right!
Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
even though they never paid a dime into it!
------------ -- -----------
Then, after violating the original contract (FICA),
the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it!
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of evolve.
But it's worth a try.
How many people can YOU send this to?
Actions speak louder than bumper stickers
PLEASE DO KEEP THIS ONE ROLLING ACROSS THE COUNTRY. HOPEFULLY IT WILL OPEN A FEW EYES!!!!!!!
SOCIAL SECURITY CARD ! br br Dick K... (
show quote)
Plenty of Republicans voted with the Democrats to defeat SS. In fact, the impetus came from the budget-cutters from both parties, especially the Republicans. The more conservative, the more they want to cut spending and cut taxes for the rich. Be honest. Read the following:
A PURELY RATIONAL VIEW OF CONGRESSIONAL SPENDING AND TAXING CONTAINING NO OPINIONS, ONLY FACTS AND LOGIC.
The intention of this essay is to convince voters that Congress has the power and the duty to create a strong and prosperous nation. If you find no fault with the following facts and logic, please copy and distribute the essay as widely as possible.
Our Constitution enables Congress to spend without income and sets no limit on its spending. (The words income and deficit do not appear anywhere in Madisons Constitution.) Hence, Congress has primary responsibility for our economy. The President can only influence Congress in its spending.
Congress could spend without borrowing if it would only rescind its law that requires that the Treasury, by auctioning interest-bearing treasuries, borrow an amount at least equal to the annual federal budget deficit. Under the former gold standard regime, by offering savers a better investment than gold, that law protected our gold supply from depletion. The gold standard regime was dropped when our large trade deficit allowed foreign nations to threaten depletion of our gold supply. Since 1973, we have been under a fiat currency regime and have no need to protect our gold supply. Still enforced, the law unnecessarily increases federal debt and inhibits Congressional spending to build new infrastructure.
Those auctions are still said to prevent inflation by removing cash from the economy but the ultra-safe treasuries can also be posted as collateral for bank loans, yielding the equivalent in cash. During the past six years, the Fed has converted such privately-held assets worth over $3T into cash and is still worried about deflation! Congress can indeed spend without borrowing and unnecessarily increasing our debt.
For Congress, money is only a means of keeping score and is never a store of value. Congress can increase the value of the FEMA, Highway, Medicare, and Social Security trust funds without limit. To provide infrastructure everywhere, free universities, medical care for all, and sustenance for all not able to work, Congress needs only physical resources and time, limited only by the onset of harmful inflation.
Inflation is caused by too much money buying too few resources (goods and services) and is harmful whenever moderate interest rates cannot keep annual inflation below 3%. By promoting investment over saving, annual inflation between 2% and 3% is beneficial. Annual inflation below 2% is dangerously close to deflation, which is a disaster caused by too little money buying too many resources.
As its main purpose, federal taxation reduces inflation by confiscating money from consumers. When Congress under-taxes and/or over-spends, it causes harmful inflation, the only limit on Congress spending. When Congress over-taxes and/or under-spends, it causes harmful unemployment.
By consuming resources, Congress spending increases inflation, decreases deflation, and combats recessions. By consuming sufficient resources, Congress spending can bring recessions to an end.
More and/or better infrastructure improves our productivity and reduces our costs. Our nations wealth is increased whenever Congress, through private contractors, builds infrastructure by hiring people and resources that would otherwise remain idle. Also, the newly hired people combat deflation by their increased spending, which also promotes recovery from recessions. The Constitution obliges Congress to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and to our Posterity. When idle resources are available, failure to build infrastructure cheats our grandchildren out of their rightful inheritance.
The frictional unemployment rate is that irreducible amount, generally assumed to be less than 4%, caused by people changing their occupations. Higher rates are due to chronic underspending by a Congress afraid of inflation that is mainly caused by bank lending, which creates the vast majority of our currency. The cure is better bank regulation, opposed by many in Congress! In the past century, the only serious inflations were caused by wartime or oil shortages, not by ordinary Congressional spending.
Pricing average annual construction labor at $40,000 and assuming that we have 150 million able workers, each percentage point of unemployment represents $60B of infrastructure not produced. Over our past 40 years of fiat currency, we have lost $2.4T worth of assets for every percentage point of average unemployment and its equivalent in underemployment and non-participation in the work force. At a 5% average excess unemployment rate, infrastructure worth $12T could have built enough energy resources and desalination plants to allow all our deserts to bloom and feed the worlds populations.
The above statements are true regardless of any federal debt. The so-called debt crisis is actually a potential inflation problem. If, within a brief time, a large number of treasury holders were to trade their treasuries for cash and spend all of it, harmful inflation could occur. However, those treasury holders would make such a trade and then get rid of all their US dollars only if, by our failure to maintain and renew our infrastructure for our grandchildren, we allow other nations to far exceed our productivity, surpass our manufacturing proficiency, and dominate us commercially in the world market.
Congress mandated the Federal Reserve System to seek
maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates
In fact, it is only Congress itself that can directly carry out the maximum employment mandate by using its spending power to build infrastructure. Thus, Congress has shifted this critical responsibility onto a subordinate incapable of succeeding in the task.
Our future will be prosperous only if voters choose members of Congress who understand how building infrastructure affects the economy and our Posterity. Vote only for those who will rebuild America!
© 2015 Marvin Sussman All Rights Reserved. Permission granted only to copy entirely.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This essay was inspired by the following authors: (e-books are available for about $10.)
*Mark Blyth, Brown U. Prof. of International Political Economy, author of Austerity, (Oxford U. Press)
*Francis X Cavanaugh, US Treasury economist for over 30 years, author of: The Truth about the National Debt: Five Myths and One Reality (Harvard Business School Press);
*Dr. Stephanie Kelton, Chair of the UMKC Economics Department, at NewEconomicPerspectives.org and, currently, Chief Economist of the Senate Budget Committee.
*Warren Mosler, economist, author of: Seven Deadly Frauds of Economic Policy (Oxford U Press);
*Frank N Newman, former Deputy Secretary of the US Treasury, author of: Freedom from National Debt (Two Harbor Press)