Middle Class Suckers

Because of the demented twisting of “… separation between ” C&%*#! ” & State” the following should be outlawed as they clearly violate the newly believed intent:

– Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. It is a Christian holiday. Surely this is the first to go. And for the few that make claims that this was first a pagan holiday, have at it. Pagan religions are still religions.

– Easter is no longer tolerated. This again is a Christian holiday and unabashedly so must go.

– Thanksgiving, “…as a day of public fasting or thanksgiving” is not to be tolerated. Fasting is the fourth of the Five Pillars of Islam. The pilgrims celebrated “thanksgivings”, days of prayer thanking God for blessings. Two reglions means double the trouble.

– Saint Patrick’s Day is unconscionable. There is no celebrating any Christian saints.

– Halloween, or “all hallows’ eve” is the day to oppose “all saints’ day” and is a day of worship for satan cults. This holiday is banished.

– President’s Day, or Washington’s Birthday shall be chopped from the list of federal holidays. We cannot observe a day for people that take their oath of office by putting their hand on a religious icon.

– Valentine’s Day, shall be shot through the heart because it is a feast to yet another Christian Saint, Saint Valentine.

– New Years Day, which is January 1st on the Juian calendar corresponds to January 14th on the Gregorian calendar, and it is on that date that the followers of some of the Eastern Orthodox C&%*#!s celebrate new year. Any Eastern Orthodox celebration will not be considered a national holiday.

– Martin Luther King Jr Day – shall be forgotten because we can’t set aside a day in remembrance for a Baptist Minister as a national holiday.

– Independence Day – we shall sever our ties with this day because we cannot celebrate a day when we signed a document that declares each of us to be a free person because we are endowed with unalienable rights from our Creator. Many do not believe in a Creator.

– Columbus Day – we shall not allow a Christian organization, the Knights of Columbus, to lobby for a holiday to suit their own needs. This was not of secular origin and therefore will not stand.

Therefore, and hence the days forward we will have two observed federal holidays:
Labor Day and Memorial Day.

We are not done just yet. That just covers holidays. Let us be thorough and ensure a fuller separation from C&%*#! and State. Wiki tells us:

The present-day concept of the weekend first arose from the Dies Solis (Day of the Sun) decreed by Constantine and from Biblical Sabbath. The Christian Sabbath itself was just one day eash week, but the preceding day (the Jewish Sabbath) also came to be taken as a holiday in the twentieth century.

No day shall be a day of rest because it is either a Christian or Jewish day of rest. Therefore we will move to a 7 day work week to ensure to unentangle our federal government from any of these religious underpinnings.

Therefore the above shall apply to the following:

• Teachers in each and every public school, at all levels.
• Postal workers get more time to ensure our mail gets delivered in a timely fashion with the new 7 day work week.
• All other un-named government workers.
• Anybody receiving grant money, including Big Bird and his friends.
• All persons working on the roads, bridges, and any other public works projects.
• Students in any public school now have a 7 day school week. (If we can’t subject them to Christmas carols and/or plays, we certainly can’t expect them to take off the Jewish and Christian Sabbaths.) Private schools that do not receive tax dollars can continue with a five day school week if they desire.
• Those working at GM and Chysler are currently required to follow this seven day work week because we the people, in the form of the federal government, own stock in those companies.
• Those receiving government benefits also cannot observe any of these religious days. The government cannot support a lifestyle that takes the Jewish and Christian holy days off, so there will be new requirements concerning payment distributions.

To ensure the government isn’t promoting these filthy religious ideals on those that receive government benefits, they will now only be distributed daily, in person, with photo id. Just drop by your local government services office during business hours to receive your daily allotment of whatever you believe you deserve. Benefits not claimed on the day they are available will be forfeited to the State because the “work” required to obtain them was not completed. We cannot observe religious holidays when giving out government benefits.

We sincerely ask that you explain to your children why the holidays are no longer allowed to be celebrated and why they now have to attend school seven days a week instead of five. It is for the good of America and what the writers of our great founding documents truly envisioned for this fine nation. One more step towards separation of C&%*#! and State!

SOURCE:
* Wiki *

There is some debate as to whether America arose because of what the federal government did for the people versus what the people did on their own because the federal government didn’t get in their way. Lets start at the beginning with the pilgrims since they are considered the group that got the ball rolling. This group started in England, but left due to religious persecution. Homes were raided and several were arrested before the remaining members fled to the Netherlands. Even there the English authorities attempted to arrest one of their members because of his writings. So they fled even further, getting a land patent from the London Virginia Company to settle in what is now the United States of America. They got financing from the Merchant Adventurers and traveled across the Atlantic on the Mayflower. That winter in 1620 was so harsh that only seven residences (of a planned nineteen) and four common houses were constructed during the first winter.

Quoting as best I can without mistake from “Of Plimoth plantation” by William Bradford, page 110, which puts us near the end of 1621

After y departure this ship, (which stayed not above 14 days,) the Gove’ & his assistante haveing disposed these late moers into severall families, as y best could, tooke an exacte accounte all their provissions in store, and proportioned y same to y number persons, and found that it would not hould out above 6. monthat at halfe alowance, and hardly that.

In 1622 they received provisions that “yet Gods blesing it upheld them till harvest. It arose but to a quarter of a pound of bread a day to each person” Here is what is written about the 1622 harvest: “Now y wellcome time harvest aproached, in which all had thir hungrie bellies filled. But it arose but to a litle, in comparison a full years supplie;… Also much was stolne both by night & day, before it became scarce eatable, & much more afterward.”

What is important about this? Some people were being pursecuted for their beliefs and writings, even after moving to another country. Their government was persecuting them even when they left their country. They went to private companies, the London Virginia Company and the the Merchant Adventurers, to get a new start in another land. They didn’t go to a government, but private companies. Since they really didn’t know the true power of private property they started by setting up a communal system that failed miserably. They were barely able to feed themselves and much of what they grew they themselves stole from the common fields. So how did this grow into the world’s strongest superpower? Again, let’s go to William Bradford’s writtings: Of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647

All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expecte any. So they begane to thinke how they might raise as much corne as they could, and obtaine a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length, after much debate of things, the Gov[erno]r (with the advise of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corne every man for his owne particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to goe on in the generall way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance), and ranged all boys and youth under some family. This had very good success; for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corne was planted than other ways would have been by any means the Gov[erno]r or any other could use, and saved him a great deall of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now wente willingly., into the field, and tooke their little-ones with them to set corne, which before would allege weakness, and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.’

Edited version of chapter 16 (Of Ply Plant)

All this while no supply was heard of, neither knew they when they might expect any. So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number, for that end, only for present use (but made no division for inheritance) and ranged all boys and youth under some family. This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been by any means the Governor or any other could use, and saved him a great deal of trouble, and gave far better content. The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability; whom to have compelled would have been thought great tyranny and oppression.
The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years and that amongst godly and sober men, may well evince the vanity of that conceit of Plato’s and other ancients applauded by some of later times; that the taking away of property and bringing in community into a commonwealth would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God.

Oh, very interesting indeed. So they divided up the land and let each family grow their own corn. No longer did they have socializied food production. And the results were greatly improved. That was one of the basic tenants that made America rise to power in a few short decades, and pass up century old countries. Private property ownership. You owned your land, and you got to keep the results of your own labors. Their fair share was 100% of their labor. Their fair share was not paying for their neighbors’ shelter, clothing, food, medical care, retirement, or other desires.

So what about these infamous roads and bridges? If the federal government created them, then we would not had any until the founding of our federal government in 1776. That obviously is not the case. So roads and bridges came before the federal government was established. But some argue that sure, there were roads and bridges, but not that many. Or they weren’t good ones. And that is the reason our country grew? Looking at the date congress passed the Federal- Aid Road Act of 1916, proves otherwise. We were already a world-super power with the world’s third largest navy and were producing so many goods that went to Britian, France, and Russia that the trade inbalances were destroying the value of the French currency and had already done so with the Russian currency. So again, we were already a global power prior to federal government taxing the successul private sector for money to build roads and bridges. Businesses were created, and built, and grew long before the federal government started building roads and bridges.

Even today, many roads and bridges aren’t initially built by the federal government, state government, or even the local government. Today, most are built by land developers, using privately invested funds. They don’t use tax dollars. They buy the land, put in roads, bridges, curbs, and sidewalks. Anything that is needed. They lay water, gas and sewer lines. Power and phones lines are run. Then they divide up the land, build houses and sell them. These roads, bridges, some of the water and sewer lines are taken over by the government and then maintained. The sidewalks and some water and sewer lines are taken over by the new home owners. Federal government You didn’t build that.

The phone lines started with dedicated lines run from one house to another with a phone on each end. If the same house wanted to talk with a second house, a second line was run and they had two phones. Today the telecommunications companies, which are private companies, own the phone lines. Federal government You didn’t build that.

Power plants and power lines also started by private individuals. Power plants and transmission lines today are privately owned for the most part. Federal government You didn’t build that. Hoover Dam is probably one of the biggest known exceptions. But many successful businesses were created and our country was a world super power prior to these federal government additions to our infrastructure.
The same can be said for gas lines. Federal government You didn’t build that.
The same for cell phone towers. Federal government You didn’t build that.
The same for radio stations/towers. Federal government You didn’t build that.
The same for televisions stations/towers. Federal government You didn’t build that.

So who built that? The private sector built that. You DID build that! And when it wasn’t built by the private sector, it was the taxes of successful people in the private sector that funded what little the government did build.

SOURCE:
PDF “Of Plimoth plantation” ( http://books.google.com )
Edited version (Of Ply Plant) ( http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu )
Of Plymouth Plantation, 1620-1647 ( http://www.swarthmore.edu )
Pilgrims and Plymouth ( http://en.wikipedia.org )
Federal Roads ( http://inventors.about.com )
* Much more pulled from wiki *

There is hot debate over whether public workers get more pay than private-sector workers. This article is not one of those. This article is to actually explore how many average tax payers does it take to support one single average public federal worker.

The average federal worker earns $83,679, while the average private sector worker earns $51,986. With a spouse, married filing jointly without itemizied deductions, 10% non-taxable retirement contribution, 6.2% social security tax, and a 10% chartable contribution, $83,679 would end up paying around $5400 in federal taxes. Using the same criteria for the private-sector worker gives around $1900 in federal income taxes. So the federal worker pays $5400 of their own salary (with the outlandish assumption that all their taxes go just to paying their own salary and there are no other needs for these federal tax dollars) which leaves around $78,000 left over for the private-sector to pay for. Using $1900 for each private-sector worker (again repeating the outlandish assumption that all their taxes go just to paying the salary of this single average federal worker and there are no other needs for these federal tax dollars) means it takes 42 people to support just the salary of a single average federal government employee.

With around 4,443,000 federal employees, it takes 4,443,000 x 42 or 186,606,000 private-sector workers to just pay the salary of the federal employees. If only it stopped there. But these federal employees can’t pay for their own benefits, we have to! Figures vary, so let’s use the one that makes the number look as bright and cheery as we can make them. The average benefits cost $42,462. We will be generous and suppose that these federal employees pay $12,462 of their own benefits, leaving a mere $30k for the tax-payers to pick up. (Note that private-sector employees average only $10,771 in total benefits received.) That means we will need another 15+ private-sector workers to support our single federal employee, so 4,443,000 x 57 or 253,251,000 private-sector workers to pay just the salaries. 57 isn’t yet the magical number. Let us proceed.

Our federal employee retires and collects monthly checks for the rest of their life. This is wonderful until you look into the financial position of the Civil Service Retirement and Disability Fund (CSRDF.) From this handy-dandy May 2012 Federal Employees’ Retirement System: Benefits and Financing report (which is the report written for members and committees of congress)

In other words, on October 1, 2010, the civil service trust fund had an unfunded actuarial liability of $673 billion. All but $9.7 billion of this unfunded liability is attributable to CSRS. Federal law has never required that employee and agency contributions must equal the present value of benefits that employees accrue under the CSRS.

Note that the CSRS is the Civil Service Retirement System. Think of it as a company pension plan. This is just one portion of the retirement benefits package of federal employees.

You will never guess what they did with the money in the CSRDF. Okay, if you have read “How Secure is Social Security” you might know. Again from our May 2012 Federal Employees’ Retirement System

The CSRDF is similar to the Social Security Trust Fund in that 100% of the monies deposited must be used to purchase special-issue U.S. Treasury bonds. This exchange between the trust fund and the Treasury does not result in revenues or outlays for the federal government. It is an intra-governmental transfer, which has no effect on the size of the government’s budget surplus or deficit.

Federal trust funds are not a “store of wealth” like private pension funds. The assets of the civil service retirement trust fund are U.S. Treasury bonds that function solely as a record of available budget authority. The bonds cannot be sold by the trust fund to the general public in exchange for cash. They can only be returned to the Treasury, which recognizes each bond as representing an equivalent dollar-value of budget authority to be used for the payment of benefits to federal retirees and their survivors. The Office of Management and Budget has stated that

These [trust fund] balances are available for future benefit payments and other trust fund expenditures, but only in a bookkeeping sense. The holdings of the trust funds are not assets of the Government as a whole that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury. From a cash perspective, when trust fund holdings are redeemed to authorize the payment of benefits, the Department of the Treasury finances the expenditure in the same way as any other Federal expenditure—by using current receipts or by borrowing from the public. The existence of large trust fund balances, therefore, does not, by itself, increase the Government’s ability to pay benefits…

Federal trust funds do not represent a store of wealth for the government because they consist entirely of U.S. government bonds. A bond represents wealth only when it is held by someone other than the individual, company, or government that issued it. A bond is an I.O.U.—that is, a promise to pay. An I.O.U. received from someone else might be considered an asset, provided that the issuer is willing and able to pay the debt when it is due, but writing an I.O.U. to oneself does not create an asset. This analogy applies to the U.S. Treasury bonds held by the federal government’s trust funds: they are I.O.U.s issued by one agency of the U.S. government and held by another agency of the same government. Both the issuer and holder are part of the same entity: the U.S. government. When federal trust funds redeem their bonds, the Treasury has only one source from which to obtain the required cash: the public. It can do this either by collecting taxes or by borrowing.

So the taxpayers paid $30,000 a year for our federal employees benefits while they were working, and that was sent to the general fund to spend on something else. Now when this person retires, we are going to have to pay that money a second time so it will be there every month to give our federal employee their check.

But nothing to fear here.

Although the CSRDF has an unfunded liability, it is not in danger of becoming insolvent. According to the projections of the actuaries at OPM, the assets of the CSRDF will continue to grow over the next 70 years.

Oh, that makes me feel so much better. Right…the federal government can’t currently keep up with its funded liabilities now (borrowing $.40 of every dollar spent), what makes anybody think they will be able to get to the unfunded versions? And look what I see. The federal government has now outdone the entire nation! The national debt of $16+ trillion has surpassed our great nation’s GDP of $15+ trillion.

How many average tax payers does it take to support one single average public federal worker? 57 when they are working, and then probably 50 or so after they retire.

PS:

According to BLS, there were 111.714 million full-time workers in the United States last year. Of these, 18.073 million worked for local, state or federal government, and 93.641 million worked in the private sector.

We are currently only short 253,251,000 – 93,641,000 or about 160 MILLION full time private-sector workers just to pay current government federal salaries alone!

SOURCES:
1. Federal/private-sector employee earnings
( http://www.fedsmith.com )

5. Federal Employees Retirement
( http://www.fas.org )

The 1935 Social Security Act was created to ensure the financial stability of US citizens when they need it. We pay FICA taxes (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) in and get monthly payments back out under certain conditions. Under a situation like this, it would be prudent if the FICA paid in by a person was collected, invested, and then used to pay out the benefits for that same person when that time came. In that way, each person’s taxes are paying for their own benefits. Our federal government has invested our excess FICA tax money in special series non-marketable U.S. Government bonds. The particular bond type is the Government Account Series (GAS.) So far, this all looks good. The “Social Security Trust Fund” has been invested in bonds that should be worth more at maturity than when they were purchased, thus making money on the over 4 Trillion dollars of excess FICA taxes collected.

Sadly, this is the case. What? That is correct. This is exactly what has happened. The reason it is sad is because very few people really understand what has truly happened. Let’s explore a bit further. The particular bond type, the Government Account Series, is NON-MARKETABLE. That means it cannot be sold to anybody but another federal government department or bureau. So that $4+ trillion in FICA taxes collected that is supposed to be there to pay out social security benefits has been transferred to other government departments and spent. Now we have pieces of paper that say those departments need to give that money back when the social security office needs to pay out benefits. But those departments have already spent it. It is gone. So now the current taxpayer has to pay that $4+ trillion a SECOND time!

So what does that leave us with? Our social security system has paper IOU’s that can only be paid with currently collected taxes. The current outgoing payments are only funded by current tax paid dollars. That will continue to function as long as we have enough people paying in. But what guarantee do we have of that? Simply put, none.

The social security system is now a system where the payout going to people at the top is being fed by people at the bottom. The people at the bottom move up in years and hope there are enough younger people added to the bottom to feed tax money in so they can collect while they are at the top. Let’s compare this to a pyramid scheme. Wiki says a

…pyramid scheme is a non-sustainable business model that involves promising participants payment or services, primarily for enrolling other people into the scheme, rather than supplying any real investment or sale of products or services to the public. … The flaw is that there is no end benefit. The money simply travels up the chain. Only the originator (sometimes called the “pharaoh”) and a very few at the top levels of the pyramid make significant amounts of money. The amounts dwindle steeply down the pyramid slopes. Individuals at the bottom of the pyramid (those who subscribed to the plan, but were not able to recruit any followers themselves) end up with a deficit.

So those paying years ago are paid from funds of those that pay in today. Those paying in today hope to get their payments from those paying in the future. This money travels directly up the chain just like a pyramid scheme. There are claims that the social security system is not so because the money paid in today is in the “trust fund” ready to pay out in the future. We have shown this to not be true. The GSA’s will only be exchanged for new money obtained by the government through current taxes.

There is another claim to the difference: the power of the federal government to ensure payment into the system through taxation. Let’s explore the claim of taxing to ensure the future influx of cash into the social security system. There is no guarantee that there will be more people paying into the system than will be taking out nor that incoming FICA tax revenue will meet outgoing payments. In 2011 the total expenditures were $736,083 [million] and total receipts were $805,057 [millions.] That looks good until you dig into where the total receipts comes from. There were only $564,231 [millions] in FICA payroll tax contributions and $23,792 [millions] in income from taxation of the benefits supplied. That totals a mere $588,023 [millions.] The rest came from general fund reimbursements which are taken from NON-FICA taxes collected in 2011, and interest. But that interest comes from other government departments, which is again from NON-FICA taxes collected in 2011, plus a relatively small amounts of gifts to the fund. Ignoring the small gift amounts the FICA tax income was short $171,852 [millions] or over $171 billion. Tell me again how the government can assure us that this system is sustainable.

Oh, I found it on wiki:

In 2007, the Social Security Trustees suggested that either the payroll tax could increase to 16.41 percent in 2041 and steadily increased to 17.60 percent in 2081 or a cut in benefits by 25 percent in 2041 and steadily increased to an overall cut of 30 percent in 2081.

So you pay into this system all your life just to get back 70% of what you was promised, in addition paying NON-FICA taxes to cash out the GSA’s. So how secure will you feel when they break that promise of security the next time? What about the time after that? For a real social security system, please read “Where does our Social Security go?”

SOURCES:
1. Social Security wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org )
2. Social Security government ( http://www.ssa.gov )
3. Social Security recipients ( http://www.ssa.gov )
4. Social Security expenditures and incomes ( http://www.socialsecurity.gov )
5. Pyramid scheme wiki ( http://en.wikipedia.org )

It is a warm late summer day. Not a cloud in the sky. A young single mother of two walks out of her office building and down to the local bank branch to cash her pay check. She cashes her check, safely tucks the money into her wallet, and heads to her car. She is thinking about the yearly fall school shopping she and her two young children are to take the following day. But she is stopped on the way by a robber. This person forcefully reachs into her purse and takes her wallet. They pull out all the bills and set the wallet on the hood of her car as they walk away. The young women cries in desperation “Please give me back my money. That is half my months pay. My kids and I need that to live on.”

There should be laws written to make that action illegal. There should be police there to prevent the crime, and if that cannot be done, then apprehend the perpetrator. There should be judges there to hand down harsh sentences as punishment, so harsh as to deter anybody from doing a heinous act like this ever again!

Luckily we do have some laws written that do make the above a crime, police to enforce them, and judges to hand down the sentences. Unfortunately we also have some laws written that make the above legal. The legal versions are just handled a bit differently, but the outcome isn’t any better. In fact far worse. The legal versions are where the governement takes half a person’s income through taxation.

The above summer day could have been written with innocent bystanders jumping in to save the day by forcefully getting the wallet away from the robber and subduing the villan until the police arrived. But when the money was taken from the young vulnerable mother of two by the government, the bystands just stood there and watched it happening. In fact, editted for today’s America and many of those bystanders would be cheering the act of forcefully taking the money and chanting “Take more! That isn’t enough.” And after the money was taken, they would have walked up to those that took it and asked for their “fair share.” In today’s America, the bystanders are no longer innocent, but instead they are complicit because they take these tax dollars in the form of programs funded by these actions.

Which version is scarier? The latter by far. The lone unlawful criminal doing a single random act of theft is just that, a single incident. We have systems in place to catch and punish this behavior to teach this person, and others, not to act this way. If they continue with such behavior we remove them from society for long periods of time to protect ourselves, our wallets, and even our children. This nightmare will most likely only be experienced once. With the government punitive taxation version of the story, the nightmare is reoccurring. It happens this month. Again next month. Again the month after that. So your dreams are haunted night after night. You think about the school clothes you wanted to buy your kids but couldn’t. You dream about the lunches you wanted to buy them but couldn’t. You have nightmares about putting them through college and wake up screaming, in a cold sweat. Then, not being able to get back to sleep, you weep because you realize there are so many that ask the government to take a “fair share.”

Social security handles both retirement payments, and payments to families when family members die. If an American citizen has no spouse or children to support, then there is no survivorship to contend with. And once children are age 18, they are themselves of age and self-reliant and therefore precluded from survivorship benefits.

Looking over the life expectancy numbers shows a difference between men and women. It also shows that the vast majority of people are highly likely to live at least close to retirement. With the generalization that men and women are split evenly in population (for ease of the math), one half a percent of babies will tragically die before their first birthday, and another half before age three. While we mourn such losses, these children never grew of age to start into the workforce and have a family. So they will not be included in our examination of social security survivorship payments.

We will not be concerning ourselves with the rich here because they have the financial resources to take care of themselves and their families. And so do the middle class in this country. It is those near the bottom that such safety nets are designed to catch. So we will see how this would affect an dedicated minimum wage earner. For our example, we will take a young American citizen born on Jan 1st 1964. They turned 18 in 1982, starting at a minimum wage of $3.35 per hour. If our model citizen worked hard enough to stay employed, but garnered a mere 2% raise per year, and assuming minimum wage stays at $7.25 for the remainder of their working years we end up with this table:

* Where .5% is one half of one percent of the people.

(Please refer to “Where does our Social Security go?” for more details about the above numbers concerning a minimum wage earner.) This can be continued, but let’s just start with what we have here. At age 58, any surviving children will most like be 18 or older and will not qualify. We have a small 6.5% of the populous that will most likely die prior to retirement (with the early retirement age of 59 and a half.) Only half the US adults are married. Using the 2000 census numbers, half the families have no children and those that have children average less than two. So using these factors we have half of those dying early have no survivors getting benefits, one quarter have a surviving spouse only, and one quarter have a surviving spouse with an average of about two children.

Let’s start with families without children:

* Where .125% is only one eighth of one percent of the people.

These 1.625% of people can cover most of these costs with a term life insurance policy starting at age 25 with just a 2% certificate of deposit. For around $40 per month that covers a $400,000 policy. If need be, make it a mandatory policy to ensure their social well-being. So that leaves the last 1.625% of people that die early and have children. The above term life insurance policy would pay for half of it. Let’s adjust the tax system a bit and pay them each an equal portion of the Federal cigarette tax collected each year up to half the current payment. The remainder of the funds should go to the non-retired disabled that truly need our assistance. Since the smokers are more likely to die early, there is a chance that there might be some correlation between the tax collected and the early deaths. The less smokers, the more likelihood that people won’t die early, and the less people needing such benefits.

If you are a surviving spouse receiving social security survivor benefits, are you surviving? Would you rather have hundreds of thousands of dollars in the bank ready for you when you need it, or would you rather get that check for $669 each month which is way below the poverty line? If you are a child reading this, please understand that if one of your parents die, $1339 is all that is coming from social security. And when you reach age 18, nothing will come any longer and your surviving parent will get a reduced payment of $669. If you are a spouse or parent, and truly want a better life for your survivors, don’t let your family suffer and live in poverty with a meager government handout.

We can continue to vote for politicians that keep us living way below the poverty line with pathetic monthly payments or we can change those we vote for so even those making minimum wage would pass on hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars to their families when they die.

NOTE: I am not an insurance agent. I don’t sell insurance, nor does my wife or parents. I have nothing to do with insurance except that I have it. I am just a citizen trying to help others see better ways to live our lives as Americans.

SOURCES:
1. Life expectancy ( http://plus.maths.org )
2. Child bearing ( http://www.deseretnews.com )
3. Population information ( http://www.census.gov )
4. Term life insurance rates ( http://www.schuermaninsurance.com )
5. Poverty line ( http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty )

We each pay 6.2% of every pay check as a Social Security Income tax, except for the temporary reduction in our contribution. Our employer matches with 6.2%. That is 12.4% of your gross income being nicely tucked away for your retirement. Let’s looks at our current social security system versus a slightly different model to compare the outcomes. Let’s see how this would affect an dedicated minimum wage earner. For our example, we will take a young American citizen born on Jan 1st 1964. They turned 18 in 1982, starting at a minimum wage of $3.35 per hour. If our model citizen worked hard enough to stay employed, but garnered a mere 2% raise per year, and assuming minimum wage stays at $7.25 for the remainder of their working years (which is highly unlikely), they end up with an $862 monthly benefit from social security at age 66.

Now taking a look at a second model where these same social security income funds are deposited into a retirement account under our model citizen’s name similar to an IRA. They can manage the funds themselves. For the average of all the 50 year averages of stock market returns over the last 100 years (to make sure we get all the major crashes) the return is slightly more than 10% per year. The worst 50 year return happened during the great depression and is 6.8%. Since then we have been have been between 9% and 13%, let’s use 7.75% as a very low ball average yearly return. Now after our American toils year in and year out, they would have $542,864 in their retirement account at age 66. After retirement they shift their half million plus dollars into a very safe investment with just a 2% return. They would draw $904 in interest every month for the rest of their life.

This is locking in the minimum wage at its current rate for 20+ years which is not likely to happen.
This is using Federal minimum wage numbers, which are lower than most state minimum wage numbers.
This is using a yearly pre-retirement interest rate that is about 75% of the 50 year average and only has dropped below that 4 times in the last 110+ years.
This is using a paltry retirement return of 2%, which even with our current terrible economy with quantitative easing is obtainable in long term CDs.

I am sure rules could be created to allow some drawdown of principle over time, but let’s suppose that this doesn’t happen. Then the spouse/life partner/children would get this half million dollars. If two people do this that is over 1 million dollars which is over $1800 per month.

Now lets look at how this would work better than any program ever created to eliminate poverty. When the parents’ die, the children get their retirement account infused with a large sum. Lets say this family had three kids. Each child would receive over $330,000 to add to their retirement accounts. If their children struggle in life at minimum wage like their parents did, they would each almost be millionaires themselves. Just including the lump sum inheritance would move these children each to $1450 per month using the same numbers.

So the best life expectancy in 2020 as per our Federal government is 82.4 years. Using 83, the Federal government will have taken $727,438 of an minimum wage earner’s money, and given back $184,574 of that in payments, leaving the United States Federal government to keep the remaining $542,864. So every minimum wage earner is giving the Federal government over HALF A MILLION DOLLARS.

So why any working person, even a life-long minimum wage earner ever be against reforming social security into personal retirement accounts is beyond me. Apparently the poor in this country would rather the Federal government take their money instead having over HALF A MILLION DOLLARS sitting in their bank accounts when they retire.

(NOTE: Most middle class workers would have several million dollars in their personal accounts at retirement, which far exceeds anything they will get from the Federal Government.)

SOURCES:
1. Yearly federal minimum wages (http://www.infoplease.com)
2. Stock market 50 year averages (http://articles.marketwatch.com)
and (http://observationsandnotes.blogspot.com)
3. CD rates (https://www.google.com/advisor/uscd)
4. Life expectancy (http://www.census.gov)

Well its shortly after the re-election of Obama in 2012 and I feel somthing has to be done to stop the continued “pay for vote” mechanics used by the Liberals.  Promising free items and lifestyles in exchange for votes is going to destroy the Unites States both financially as well as morally.