General Discussion

Tsiyu

(18,186 posts)

69. I've been here a while - on this earth

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:24 PM

Dec 2012

I was able to give birth to my kids and take family leave because I was afforded excellent health insurance, disability insurance and vacation and sick time.

I was able to get dental care, glasses, and free well visits, vaccinations and ER visits for my children because of great insurance plans paid for all the way or halfway by my employers.

My wages and/or my partner's were more than adaquate to meet modest needs, even working part time as I did.

The CEOs did not pay themselves the net worth of the business every year; they paid -----wait for it ------bonuses even to part timers! One company I worked for gave me a $600 bonus after jobsharing a position for only 6 months, as an example. Companies SHARED the wealth.

I lived it.

Don't tell me it can't be the way things are.

GREED is the ONLY excuse you have, and that's your crime.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

85 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Social security is designed to provide a minimum degree of security upon which a worker builds. [View all] dkf Dec 2012 OP

I've been reading people lately saying SS is fine--if the US economy grows at 3% a year Romulox Dec 2012 #1

But people come to depend on it for much more. That's the reality of it. randome Dec 2012 #2

You hit it on the head...tax rates are not set to provide more than the minimum. dkf Dec 2012 #7

then stop opposing unions and higher wages for people if you want them to save more CreekDog Dec 2012 #12

I have no problem with unions. dkf Dec 2012 #15

At some point in the future worldwide wage levels will probably level out for respective RKP5637 Dec 2012 #27

All governments will strongly oppose real international labor unions. closeupready Jan 2013 #82

Yep, the greatest fear of all governments is people talking and making decisions ... it's a RKP5637 Jan 2013 #84

way off point here Dyedinthewoolliberal Dec 2012 #72

"To expand the system to more than a minimal payment we must increase payroll taxes." Bullshit ... Scuba Jan 2013 #75

FICA taxes reteachinwi Jan 2013 #79

It's not a retirement fund. L0oniX Dec 2012 #3

It is for an increasing number the primary source of retirement funds ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #5

That's not news to me. It was never designed to be a retirement fund. L0oniX Dec 2012 #10

Lots will be alive in 30 years. Igel Dec 2012 #49

You're not a baby boomer ...where the surge in use of funds is. L0oniX Dec 2012 #60

Technically Igel is a baby boomer GObamaGO Dec 2012 #62

Point is that the amount of people on the SS fund will diminsh in 30 years... L0oniX Dec 2012 #66

It's a great addition to workers destroyed & looted pensions. If not for SS poverty would be HUGE! JaneyVee Dec 2012 #4

Definitely is. RebelOne Dec 2012 #33

That assumes pensions DavidDvorkin Dec 2012 #6

True. But that's not what it was designed for. It's an edge against homelessness. Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #76

Don't assume that old people blew their money when they were young DavidDvorkin Jan 2013 #80

And your point would be? Tsiyu Dec 2012 #8

Well said! Spazito Dec 2012 #9

Thank you Spazito Tsiyu Dec 2012 #13

+1 leftstreet Dec 2012 #19

Thanks leftstreet Tsiyu Dec 2012 #22

+1 forestpath Dec 2012 #24

Well maybe you need to address the specific problems instead of expecting social security dkf Dec 2012 #28

Times change and Social security' function has as well Harmony Blue Dec 2012 #30

How about going back to the federal tax rate from 1939.... Spazito Dec 2012 #34

Maybe YOU need to address them Tsiyu Dec 2012 #36

It's a quote from the legislation that broadened benefits. dkf Dec 2012 #38

And you just plopped it down there with no comment Tsiyu Dec 2012 #43

Oh Hell yes! 99Forever Dec 2012 #41

It's called trolling. Some trolls manage to walk between the rain drops on this website. For years Guy Whitey Corngood Dec 2012 #64

Oh, I know but thanks Tsiyu Dec 2012 #67

I figured you're hip to what's going on. I just feel the urge to say it out Guy Whitey Corngood Dec 2012 #70

I understood you completely mon ami Tsiyu Dec 2012 #71

Hells yeah! I'll Guy Whitey Corngood Dec 2012 #73

TO those of us who have maintained our humanity Tsiyu Dec 2012 #74

Shit happens. Things change. SS can be whatever we want it to be. closeupready Jan 2013 #83

. . . Le Taz Hot Dec 2012 #37

The OP thinks it's all your fault CreekDog Dec 2012 #39

It's been wholesale robbery for a long time Tsiyu Dec 2012 #42

Well there is always the dumpster, right? Warren Stupidity Dec 2012 #54

That's romanticizing things. Igel Dec 2012 #53

I've been here a while - on this earth Tsiyu Dec 2012 #69

Thank you, thank you!!! nt shanine Dec 2012 #57

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! - K & R !!! WillyT Jan 2013 #81

"...as a basis upon which the worker, through his own efforts, will have a better chance to provide Brickbat Dec 2012 #11

This quote comes from an era that was mostly rural and it was much easier to provide extras from jwirr Dec 2012 #14

Then maybe the problem is social security hasn't kept up with the times. dkf Dec 2012 #40

In that I agree with you. jwirr Dec 2012 #68

It should be changed to a retirement fund. Pensions don't exist anymore, firehorse Dec 2012 #16

Me, too. randome Dec 2012 #21

So would I. forestpath Dec 2012 #25

But then employers decided that since there is social security they didn't need pension systems. JVS Dec 2012 #17

This is my argument as well Harmony Blue Dec 2012 #20

Looniz, Grey, Lionessa and slackmaster Tsiyu Dec 2012 #18

I can cherry pick too ... GeorgeGist Dec 2012 #23

Another gem from the Traitor To His Class: Arkana Dec 2012 #46

A Bootstraps thread! And it's only Monday n/t leftstreet Dec 2012 #26

ss benefits could be tied to ceo's mean compensation. MrYikes Dec 2012 #29

My mother lived on Social Security and Union retirement income...just barely. Agnosticsherbet Dec 2012 #31

What's your fucking point? 99Forever Dec 2012 #32

The entire premise is a contradiction Harmony Blue Dec 2012 #35

You attacking Social Security or Medicare or tax increases for the rich isn't exactly a surprise. nt stevenleser Dec 2012 #44

The poster never seems to advocate the 90 percent top tax rate of the period. ProSense Dec 2012 #55

In theory... WCGreen Dec 2012 #45

You mentioned the key word there. PENSIONS. When SS was introduced, almost everyone had one. stevenleser Dec 2012 #47

You can't cut it now... WCGreen Dec 2012 #50

There is a slight chronology problem here, but it doesn't change the essential argument. JVS Dec 2012 #52

What the OP also doesn't point out is that the amendment was in tandem... Spazito Dec 2012 #58

Correct, that is what it was designed to do... ms liberty Dec 2012 #48

Correct Harmony Blue Dec 2012 #51

And? Starry Messenger Dec 2012 #56

What's your plan? Specifics please. neverforget Dec 2012 #59

l'll guess gollygee Dec 2012 #63

And what about those retirement age people who did all the right things GObamaGO Dec 2012 #61

Those investors still have their money in those mutual funds in their 401ks. Honeycombe8 Jan 2013 #78

thanks for the info, hannity. dionysus Dec 2012 #65

Oh, yes, because circumstances and laws must never change from PRE-WWII!! WinkyDink Jan 2013 #77

and it might have worked too quaker bill Jan 2013 #85