"Welfare"?

[Hawkmoon]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-24/more-half-america-gets-more-welfare-it-pays-taxes

According to Zero Hedge, half of Americans receive more from the federal government than they pay in taxes. If that truly covered only welfare-type programs, I would see it as a cause for alarm. HOWEVER ...

Delving into the article, it finally became clear that they are including Social Security along with "welfare." You may disagree with me, but I think it's entirely wrong to include Social Security. As a Social Security recipient, I don't consider that I'm on "welfare," I consider that I'm now at the stage of my life at which the government is fulfilling its side of the contract we entered into when I took my first paying job, at the age of 18, and started paying a portion of every single paycheck I received over the course of my entire working career into the Social Security fund. I do not regard it as my fault that the .gov mismanaged and raided the fund

[griz]

Yea, a lot of those "statistics" just reflect the perspective of the person, or organization, compiling them.  As an example, the fed gov believes about 15 percent of Americans are living below poverty level, yet they do NOT count the welfare benefits they receive as income.

[K Frame]

"I consider that I'm now at the stage of my life at which the government is fulfilling its side of the contract we entered into when I took my first paying job, at the age of 18"

It's cute how you think you entered into an equitable, two-sided contract.

More like you were forced to cough up, at the point of a gun, money from your pay check with no guarantees at all that you MIGHT get some of it back decades in the future.... IF politicians from both sides of the aisle didn't bleed the fund dry and divert it to other projects in the meantime.

[bedlamite]

I consider socialist security to be a ponzi scheme.

[dogmush]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-24/more-half-america-gets-more-welfare-it-pays-taxes

According to Zero Hedge, half of Americans receive more from the federal government than they pay in taxes. If that truly covered only welfare-type programs, I would see it as a cause for alarm. HOWEVER ...

Delving into the article, it finally became clear that they are including Social Security along with "welfare." You may disagree with me, but I think it's entirely wrong to include Social Security. As a Social Security recipient, I don't consider that I'm on "welfare," I consider that I'm now at the stage of my life at which the government is fulfilling its side of the contract we entered into when I took my first paying job, at the age of 18, and started paying a portion of every single paycheck I received over the course of my entire working career into the Social Security fund. I do not regard it as my fault that the .gov mismanaged and raided the fund

I don't particularly care whose fault it is, since it's my money being taken under threat of force.


Sorry man, it's welfare.  The Fed.gov is taking money from me and giving it to you.  If I , (and all the other folks paying SS tax right now) stopped paying the gov, they'd have to stop paying you pretty rikky-tic.  I'll not condemn you for taking it, as your money was redistributed, and I understand trying to get some of your own back, and indeed I'll take whatever breadcrumbs are left when I get to retirement age.  

But let's call a spade a spade.  It's a welfare program.

[Hawkmoon]

It's cute how you think you entered into an equitable, two-sided contract.

I don't recall using the word "equitable" ...

[K Frame]

I don't recall using the word "equitable" ...

Then you get the point I'm making.

You didn't enter into a contract.

You were coerced into complying with something over which you have absolutely zero say.

That's not a contract, no matter how benign.

[HankB]

As of 2012, the Heritage Foundation reported that US spending on "welfare" broke the $1,000,000,000,000.00 per year mark - all kinds of programs from free Obama phones to food stamps were included, but Social Security retirement benefits were NOT included in this calculation.

How equitable or "fair" SS is can certainly be debated, but it differs from "welfare" in that people EARNED their retirement benefits. "Welfare" benefits are NOT earned, they're simply given to people to buy their votes support their needs.

SS today has trillions in the trust fund, all "invested" in a special class of government securities which are similar to things you and I can get like treasury bills and savings bonds -  but of course, the SS securities are ONLY for SS. Which would probably fuel many pages of debate and discussion here.

FWIW, a couple of decades ago Fortune magazine carried an article in which SS was compared to annuities. To make a long story short, back then a lifetime of SS withholding, invested at 3%, would have bought a 65 year old retiree a lifetime annuity paying 75% MORE each month than the maximum SS benefit.

[brimic]

SS is confiscated from workers, held at an effectively negative interest rate, then given back to the worker when they retire. I would call it a lot of negative things, but I wouldn't call it welfare.

[MechAg94]

The way I look at it, Social Security could be privatized and still work more or less (probably better).  Welfare and other similar programs would still be taking money from someone and giving it to someone else. 

[MechAg94]

On the calculations, I wonder if they are using the actual money people get paid or the total amount spent by those govt departments divided out?  That is a very big difference.  I was hoping the Trump Administration would start reporting on the administrative costs of these programs.