Social Security

[MolaKule]

Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Subject: This is good History on Social Secutity

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
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,
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.


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 U.S.


Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive SSI Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!


Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and violation of 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! Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election year! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.

 

[DJ]

I really truely wish that infomation mattered, but fact is that there are a lot of sheep among us and they believe whatever the media said that day. At work I am surrounded by Democrats one day they started in on GWB and Cheney one other guy and myself managed to quickly shut them up by simplty pointing out facts that once they thought about it they already knew. The "anyone but Bush" crap irritates me too, vote for someone because you believe they can do the job well NOT because they are someone other than the guy you hate.

 

[dickwells]

I wish I could agree with you DJ, but I gotta go with the ABK (anybody but Kerry) crowd. Just was reading how his unit comrads in VN asked him to leave, for a number of reasons among which was his careless, needless, and agressive shooting in "freefire zones". (Worldnetdaily.com)

 

[darryld13]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MolaKule:
[QB] Can anyone confirm or deny this?

Subject: This is good History on Social Secutity

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,
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,
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.

---

The first 3 are definitely not true according to the Social Security Legislative history link. I suspect that answers to the last two can be found in the Social Security web site link I provided.


1) & 2) INCOME TAX ON EMPLOYEES

SECTION 801. In addition to other taxes, there shall be levied, collected, and paid upon the income of every individual a tax equal to the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 811) received by him after December 31, 1936, with respect to employment (as defined in section 811) after such date:
(1) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1937, 1938, and 1939, the rate shall be 1 per centum.
(2) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1940, 1941, and 1942, the rate shall 1 1/2 per centum.
(3) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1943, 1944, and 1945, the rate shall be 2 per centum.
(4) With respect to employment during the calendar years 1946, 1947, and 1948, the rate shall be 2 1/2 per centum.
(5) With respect to employment after December 31, 1948, the rate shall be 3 per centum.

2) DEDUCTION OF TAX FROM WAGES

SEC. 802. (a) The tax imposed by section 801 shall be collected by the employer of the taxpayer by deducting the amount of the tax from the wages as and when paid. Every employer required so to deduct the tax is hereby made liable for the payment of such tax, and is hereby indemnified against the claims and demands of any person for the amount of any such payment made by such employer.

3)DEDUCTIBILITY FROM INCOME TAX

SEC. 803. For the purposes of the income tax imposed by Title I of the Revenue Act of 1934 or by any Act of Congress in substitution therefor, the tax imposed by section 801 shall not be allowed as a deduction to the taxpayer in computing his net income for the year in which such tax is deducted from his wages.

[ May 14, 2004, 05:34 PM: Message edited by: darryld13 ]

 

[2x]

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 U.S.

One of the biggest travesties. Lets tax you all your life without you having any say in it, then when it's time to get that money back, we'll tax you on that as well. It's called double taxation, and it should be a crime. Social Security is a government sponsored pyramid scheme. If you or I tried to run a pyramid scheme, we'd get thrown in jail. But if the gov't sponsors it, you have to participate and pay twice to get anything. Real sweet deal indeed. But yep, it's those nasty Republicans who steal from our seniors blah blah blah.

 

[Shannow]

Well if it's all so wrong, why aren't the incumbent parties trying to fix things and make them right.

We've got very similar issues down here, and the rhetoric from the Government is "This was implimented while the labor party were in power, it's not our fault."

After 9 years it really wears thin, when the incumbents are the only ones who can implement the changes.....unless they really want it in the first place, but also like to bleat about it as an each way bet.

 

[labman]

Social Security is a pyramid scheme that hasn't crashed yet. Thus to millions of people receiving a check each month, it looks good. The Republicans have been trying to change it for years, but the Democrats terrify the electorate with a pack of lies every time. Kerry has pledged not to change it.

 

[JohnnyO]

Props to labman.

Further, I own a small business and by far the largest tax my employees pay is FICA. My matching half is my third largest expense after wages and workers comp insurance. Then there's my mom who collects far more a month in SS than she made in her working life from 1957-1960. That money has to come from someplace.
If elected king, I would lower the current SS rate and raise the taxable wage ceiling, currently about $70k or so.