"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Harold & Susan Vordos says...

I feel safer already, don't you?

LOL!

Hmm. Odd, you were not laughing when that other gent
says he was being denied SS benefits. In fact, your
thoughts were quite the opposite:

==================================
Yep, it does suck. I put in more than my required 40 quarters, many of
which were at the maximum, and hated paying each and every dime,
especially
because I was self employed and paid both halves of the tab for many
years.
I didn't work at all for the 9 years before applying for SS when I was 63½
years old, but I am drawing every dime I'm entitled to draw. Hell, I
even
got a raise last January after drawing only one check, and now I
understand
Dubya is giving me another raise, this one 2.2%. Life is good!
==================================

One of the lessons that may be learned here is the fact that I made mention
of having paid in MORE than the required 40 quarters. I have no way of
knowing, nor is it my business to know, if or why this person has or has not
paid his "dues" as is required. Yes, it's a sad thing that he may be
denied SS, but it would also be a tragedy if they handed it out to those
that held jobs by which they may have been exempt, limiting or eliminating
their contributions. You know, like working for the government? Damn it,
I earned my SS, in spite of the fact that I was not a willing participant.
The key word here is having paid in long enough.

Maybe he was denied benefits because the walmart workers
weren't *paying* into the system, eh?

Or perhaps because he held a government job that exempted him from doing so.
I held just such a job VERY briefly in the mid 60's, working as a tool & die
maker for Tooele (pronounced Toowilla) Army Depot. The Viet Nam war was
raging so we were required to work 7 12's with no excused absences except
for death, and that included working Christmas and New Years. In spite of
that, it seems we had more than enough time for the shop workers to paint
cabinets that didn't need to be painted, and good old LaVar had more than
enough time to make a large brass name plate for the desk of one of the
Generals, who also wasn't required to pay into the SS system.

SS isn't an investment. It isn't a trust fund with
money in it. Your benefits are not the money you put
in, which were saved for you. That money's long
gone.

That isn't my fault, and I should not be punished as a result.

Sure it would be great if I didn't have to
pay SS, or if my employer could give me a raise
because they didn't have to pay it either. I personally
thing I should be entitled to the same conditions as those
guys who work for walmart. Which means NOBODY pays into
SS. How would it be, if nobody had to?

I, for years, resented having to pay into SS. I've already made mention of
the fact that I had to pay both halves, so I know and understand all too
well how you might have your feelings, which I also shared. I recall all
too well having paid what I thought was a fair amount on my quarterly
estimates, only to be hit by a $5,000 tab when I filed my taxes one
particular year. For the most part, it was due to SS fees, which were far
and away higher than my tax tab, and were rising rapidly. SS is a stupid
idea that has gotten completely out of control, but I paid and paid dearly,
so I expect to receive the benefits. The government was unwilling to exempt
me when I hoped they would. I'm not too keen on the idea of letting them
(us?) off the hook now. The money I may have put away for my living
expenses was taken from me by them (us?) without my permission. I had no
choice other than to face possible imprisonment for not paying. .

There goes your good life, out the window.

I encourage you to re-think the humor in the
situation where todays workers don't pay SS tax,
and employers are not prosecuted for doing
this.

I am in sympathy with you, but I'm not convinced that the whole of Wal*Mart
is doing that, nor do I see it happening elsewhere. If, by chance, it's as
you say, that employees are not paying into SS, they also will not be able
to draw it. ?? Where is that hurting us, or me? Sounds like a lighter
burden down the road. I also don't deny that there may be instances where
it may be happening. Still, I don't see why that justifies boycotting an
industry that is performing a good and valuable service to our citizens in
providing jobs and in selling goods at a reduced price. If you, or
others, find their policies of (assumed, or accused) lower wages, perhaps
it's time to acknowledge the fact that the American worker is way over paid,
that we are no longer in a position to compete on a global basis, and
without that ability, we are doomed. I have no doubt that you will see
things with a much clearer mind when it is you that is living on a limited
income in retirement. Wal*Mart may suddenly look like a good deal to you,
as it appears to be to us. We live slightly better because our dollars go a
bit farther.

This thing will shake out eventually, so we may as well face the idea head
on and adjust our thinking quickly to moderate the damage that is sure to
come. Denying the inevitable certainly isn't facing the problem, nor is
placing blame on Wal*Mart. Never fail to consider that part of the
problems of today are deeply rooted in greedy people, union members, top
level management, all of which seem to think that they are worth far more
than they are. Don't whine the next time you see a friend lose his job to
China, just consider the fact that had he been somewhat less greedy, perhaps
the price difference between his prospective wages and his current wages may
not have encouraged his employer to do business across the pond.

Harold