45 million Americans make less than $20,000 per year.

[kentuck]

What are they going to do without any Social Security when they get old?

They don't make enough to invest in the market. They barely make enough to survive on.

But, the Democrats are going to vote to cut the payroll tax and start the dismantling of the Social Security system today. They are making a tragic mistake.

We should not wish to go back to those days at the turn of the century when many old people had nothing. If their families did not take them in, they would die from the weather or starvation. It can happen again and the Democrats are voting for it to happen.

[Statistical]

1. No money is being cut from SS. $120B from payroll tax (regressive) vs $120B from general fund n/t

[dflprincess]

6. Drawing money from the general fund puts Social Security in the

"contributing to the deficit" category and leaves it open to future cuts in the name of the "greater good".

As long as SS is paid for by its own funds any argument that it had to be "trimmed" because of the deficit can't work. Now a Democratic president and Congress are opening it up for attack. How long do you think it will be before some Republican or "new Democrat" stooge decides that "we" just can't afford that $120 billion?

[kentuck]

8. Bingo!

Thanks.

[msongs]

2. congress persons and presidents should be put in that category & their healthcare cancelled nt

[dflprincess]

3. And they will not only lose Social Security

With the refusal to extend the $400 "making work pay" credit, singles making less than $20,000 are going to see a tax increase this year.

I'm really fed up with every last one of them.

[dkf]

4. Lower paid Americans are the only ones getting a decent rate of return on their Social Security

Contributions thanks to the very progressive payout tiers of social security.

Social security will definitely be around for the lower paid. It is the higher paid that social security is of questionable value to.

[kentuck]

5. It's not an investment in a stock market fund.

It is an insurance program. They do not hit the lottery with their SS checks.

[dkf]

11. Most people won't even get the return of intermediate government bonds.

And not even the longer term return of treasury bills.

In addition, Insurance, not just investments, can be analyzed using internal rates of return.

Here is the internal rate of return for the social security system as calculated by the social security administration.

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/NOTES/ran5/an2004-5.html

[kentuck]

13. It's "social" security.

It's for the "social" good of the people.

[starroute]

14. It's insurance, not an investment

Maybe some people won't get the return on social security that they could have if they'd put the money into treasury bills -- but the point is that *everybody* could find themselves in the position where they have nothing else.

Unemployment, illness, bankruptcy for other reasons -- there are any number of reasons why you might not be able to count on those investments when you get old. Social security is there for everyone, no matter what. It's the safety net of last resort.

So stop thinking about what you could do with all that money if you only had it to invest on your own and just be grateful that you have something you can fall back on come hell or high water.

[Enrique]

7. those people don't exist politically

they're not the "middle class" everyone's always concerned about.

[H2O Man]

9. Recommended.

I remember when, in the 1980s, George Foreman spoke about how social programs had changed his life. He noted that under Reagan, caring about the poor and disadvantaged had "gone out of style."

Today, not only do republicans show hatred for the poor and disadvantaged, but there are far too few democrats in Washington showing any concern. The sad truth is that there is class warfare going on, and it is the rich who have gone on the attack against the middle class and poor. Yet we have some apologists saying it is "wrong" to define today's reality in terms of class warfare.

[sarcasmo]

10. The working poor are screwed and 45 million is near 10 percent of this country.

[TheKentuckian]

15. More like 15% of the whole population and a much larger chunk of the workforce

Keep in mind how many are children or elderly and that is around a third of the workforce.

The "middle" that is served by the tax cuts is in the 75-250k area or in other words the top 20%.

[kentuck]

16. Right on target.

It sucks so bad.

[sarcasmo]

17. Either percentage is way to scary.

[NNN0LHI]

12. Since 1973 every time the union autoworkers got their yearly 3% raise everyone got a raise

And that in turn is what bankrolled everyone else's increase in their SS, Medicare, government pension or whatever. Now that those workers have taken a 50% cut in pay most likely a lot of other people are going to be taking some cuts in pay too. Its inevitable.

UAW had a good system in place to get their workers a fair days pay for a fair days work. We would never strike all three automakers simultaneously. We would pick one of them as the strike target. A different one every contract. That way the one we were negotiation with knew the other two automakers were going to keep selling cars like hell while their own production lines sat idle. Tended to put a little pressure on them to negotiate in good faith.

Don

[Kat45]

18. I'm one of those people, when I even have a job (which I don't at present).

I didn't always make that little, but I also didn't make very much. I also have no family, and I'm too old to find a rich guy to marry. I'm screwed when I get old. (And BTW, education is not THE answer to employment concerns in this country; I have a freaking advanced degree.)