Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Your help needed my friends

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 07:44 AM
Original message
Your help needed my friends
When I get something like this, I like to post them here because my DU friends are the most knowledgeable people I know and you always have some great rebuttal links.

Anyways, a friend of mine got this e-mail. Any information (with links) that I can use to put together a solid rebuttal would be helpful. If anyone here feels like being vindictive enough to turn this guy in like the Freepers did to one of our own for their post on DU, feel free because I don't know the guy nor do I like his jackass comments.... :)

Rp
-----------------
From: Dyson, Frank
F.Dyson@stanleyassociates.com

FW: Social Security

Pass this around to all those who think John Kerry (Democrat) is the right man for the job. Especially those who are looking forward to getting a Social Security check some day.


Social Security-interesting
Now we are getting to election issues!

And which party is for those who really try to support themselves?

Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA)
Program. He promised:

1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary,

2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program,

3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year,

4.) That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust Fund" rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program, and,

5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as
income.

Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month -- and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to "put away," you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent "Trust" fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically-controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democratic Party.

Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the U.S.

Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to
immigrants?

A: That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive SSI Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!

Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and violation of the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!

And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it!

Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election year!

If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.

How many people can YOU send this to?

Keep this going clear up through the 2004 election!! We need to be heard!
****************************************************************************
**********************
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and any included attachments are from Virginia Hospital Center
-
Arlington and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this message is confidential and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be
unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by e-mail or you may call Virginia Hospital Center - Arlington's Information Systems Department (+1) (703)558-6566.

** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content **
**************************************************************************************************
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
meegbear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. This keeps showing up like a bad penny ...
Edited on Tue Jun-15-04 07:53 AM by meegbear
Here yah go:

http://www.snopes.com/cgi-bin/news/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000003

If the link doesn't work, it's because a space keeps appearing in the link after 'get_topic'. Just copy and paste it in a new browser.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. See!
You guys rule.

I just sent out a reply with the Snopes article to about 35 Republicans who thought they were all smart in attacking Kerry and Dems. Thanks. :)

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 07:53 AM
Response to Original message
2. more lies
Typical right-wing misinformation passing as truth.

Snopes has taken this apart, Q&A by Q&A. Only
one or two are actually true

http://tinyurl.com/bfrs

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
3. When I got that email, I sent the snopes link back
And it made and impact. The guy who sent the original message to me then sent the snopes link out to all of the same people, and copied me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:15 AM
Response to Original message
4. "How many people can YOU send this to?" NONE...because I don't lie
to my friends and family.

I would email back (including all the other people he forwarded this email to) and ask him/her to check snopes.com before he forwards any emails containing misinformation and lies.

The reason those right-wing a**holes do that is because nobody ever emails back asking them to stop sending those lies. These idiots think, since they don't get a response, other people think like them. They'll stop if you return that email to him/her and all of his buddies pointing out that he is spreading lies.

This is really p*ssing me off. I don't send any "liberal" hate chain emails around telling lies about Bush. But those right-wing idiots think they can do it to us because we just sit there, read their crap, and than silently hit the delete button without complaining.

Why are some Democrats such wimps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. I did just that...
You'll be happy to know I hit the 35 Republicans that had forwarded this e-mail to each other (and subsequently to me) back with a hammer.

I don't take bullshit from Republicans, especially when I have all of you to help me debunk it.

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. I have friends at work who always complain about receiving
those emails but they never do anything against that. This just drives me nuts.

I am glad that Democrats have started to fight back. I hope I can convince my co-workers to do the same.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:28 AM
Response to Original message
7. This same one came around when Gore was running for President!! They just
put "GORE" in place of all the "KERRY"....

Fascinating.

They can't even make up new chit. They keep regurgitating the same of crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Not only lies, but
They're attributing the GOOPers sins to Democrats!

Q: Which party put a tax on Social Security?
A: The Democratic party.
FALSE

Actually, it was Ronald Reagan, a Republican, who signed a bill taxing
Social Security benefits.
http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html
"The 1983 Amendments...


Shameless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thecrow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
9. My RW brother sent me this and I sent this back:
I am only posting this is whole because it may inform others...
Myths and misstatements of fact frequently circulate on the Internet, in email and on websites, and are repeated in endless loops of misinformation. One common set of such misinformation involves the history of the Social Security system.

One Common Form of the Myths:

"Franklin Roosevelt introduced the Social Security (FICA) program. He promised:

1) That participation in the program would be completely voluntary;
2) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the program;
3) That the money the participants elected to put into the program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year;
4) That the money the participants paid in would be put into the independent "Trust Fund," rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement program, and no other Government program.;
5) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income."



Franklin D. Roosevelt

Assuming the Presidency at the depth of the Great Depression, Franklin D. Roosevelt helped the American people regain faith in themselves. He brought hope as he promised prompt, vigorous action, and asserted in his Inaugural Address, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." (http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/fr32.html

CORRECTING THE MYTHS AND MISSTATEMENTS

Myth 1: President Roosevelt promised that participation in the program would be completely voluntary

Persons working in employment covered by Social Security are subject to the FICA payroll tax. Like all taxes, this has never been voluntary. From the first days of the program to the present, anyone working on a job covered by Social Security has been obligated to pay their payroll taxes.

In the early years of the program, however, only about half the jobs in the economy were covered by Social Security. Thus one could work in non-covered employment and not have to pay FICA taxes (and of course, one would not be eligible to collect a future Social Security benefit). In that indirect sense, participation in Social Security was voluntary. However, if a job was covered, or became covered by subsequent law, then if a person worked at that job, participation in Social Security was mandatory.

There have only been a handful of exceptions to this rule, generally involving persons working for state/local governments. Under certain conditions, employees of state/local governments have been able to voluntarily choose to have their employment covered or not covered. (The detailed history of the coverage rules can be found elsewhere on our website.)


Myth 2: President Roosevelt promised that the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the program

The tax rate in the original 1935 law was 1% each on the employer and the employee, on the first $3,000 of earnings. This rate was increased on a regular schedule in four steps so that by 1949 the rate would be 3% each on the first $3,000. The figure was never $,1400, and the rate was never fixed for all time at 1%.

(The text of the 1935 law and the tax rate schedule can be found elsewhere on our website.)


Myth 3: President Roosevelt promised that the money the participants elected to put into the program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year

There was never any provision of law making the Social Security taxes paid by employees deductible for income tax purposes. In fact, the 1935 law expressly forbid this idea, in Section 803 of Title VIII.

(The text of Title VIII. can be found elsewhere on our website.)


Myth 4: President Roosevelt promised that the money the participants paid would be put into the independent "Trust Fund," rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement program, and no other Government program

The idea here is basically correct. However, this statement is usually joined to a second statement to the effect that this principle was violated by subsequent Administrations. However, there has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government.

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government." (For a detailed explanation of how the Trust Fund works, provided by the Social Security Administration's actuaries, see the material available elsewhere on our website.)

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself. (The budget treatment of the Trust Funds is explained in more detail elsewhere on our website.)


Myth 5: President Roosevelt promised that the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income

Originally, Social Security benefits were not taxable income. This was not, however, a provision of the law, nor anything that President Roosevelt did or could have "promised." It was the result of a series of administrative rulings issued by the Treasury Department in the early years of the program. (The Treasury rulings can be found elsewhere on our website.)

In 1983 Congress changed the law by specifically authorizing the taxation of Social Security benefits. This was part of the 1983 Amendments, and this law overrode the earlier administrative rulings from the Treasury Department. (A detailed explanation of the 1983 Amendments can be found elsewhere on our website.)



http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

Myths and misstatements of fact frequently circulate on the Internet, in email and on websites, and are repeated in endless loops of misinformation. One common set of such misinformation involves a series of questions about the history of the Social Security system.


One Common Form of the Questions:

Q1: Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

Q2: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

Q3: Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

Q4: Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

Q5: Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?




THE CORRECT ANSWERS TO THE FIVE QUESTIONS

Q1. Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

A1: There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

(For a detailed explanation of how the Trust Fund works, provided by the Social Security Administration's actuaries, see the material available elsewhere on our website.)

Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself. (The budget treatment of the Trust Funds is explained in more detail elsewhere on our website.)



Q2: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A2: There was never any provision of law making the Social Security taxes paid by employees deductible for income tax purposes. In fact, the 1935 law expressly forbid this idea, in Section 803 of Title VIII.

(The text of Title VIII. can be found elsewhere on our website.)



Q3. Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A3. The taxation of Social Security began in 1984 following passage of a set of Amendments in 1983, which were signed into law by President Reagan in April 1983. These amendments passed the Congress in 1983 on an overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

The taxation of benefits was a proposal which came from the Greenspan Commission appointed by President Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan, who is presently serving as Chairman of the Federal Reserve.

The full text of the Greenspan Commission report is available on our website.

President's Reagan's signing statement for the 1983 Amendments can also be found on our website.

A detailed explanation of the provisions of the 1983 law is also available on the website.



Q4. Which political party increased the taxes on Social Security annuities?

A4. In 1993, legislation was enacted which had the effect of increasing the tax put in place under the 1983 law. It raised from 50% to 85% the portion of Social Security benefits subject to taxation; but the increased percentage only applied to "higher income" beneficiaries. Beneficiaries of modest incomes might still be subject to the 50% rate, or to no taxation at all, depending on their overall taxable income.

The details of these provisions can be found on our website.

This change in the tax rate was one provision in a massive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA) passed that year. The OBRA 1993 legislation was deadlocked in the Senate on a tie vote of 50-50 and Vice President Al Gore cast the deciding vote in favor of passage.

(You can find a brief historical summary of the development of taxation of Social Security benefits on the Social Security website.)



Q5. Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A5. Neither immigrants nor anyone else is able to collect Social Security benefits without someone paying Social Security payroll taxes into the system. The conditions under which Social Security benefits are payable, and to whom, can be found in the pamphlets available on our website.

The question confuses the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program with Social Security. SSI is a federal welfare program and no contributions, from immigrants or citizens or anyone else, is required for eligibility. Under certain conditions, immigrants can qualify for SSI benefits. The SSI program was an initiative of the Nixon Administration and was signed into law by President Nixon on October 30, 1972.

*********************************************

Then I said...
Like I said before, please back your statements up with URLs . I just hate it when you send me the opinions of "a friend who said..." or some cut and paste thing from a mis-informed or disinformation freeper site.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-15-04 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. That's even a better response than Snopes!
Great job on that, really.. :)

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC