The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Religion & Culture / Atheist Fools
|Subject: Re: Entitlement, stolen...||Date: 12/13/2012 5:19 PM|
|Author: JAFO31||Number: 414702 of 492204|
<<<After all an entitlement is something we are owed and that we have paid into...I have paid 10.4% into it all my life...and yes it is that rate since your employer really does not pay the 6.2%; he just takes it out of your pay and counts it as part of your "benefits"..
I am entitled to that money which has come out of all my paychecks through my working life>>>
"That is from another post. I loved the idea and had to make a post o FB about it. A caveat that does not seem to ever come up, Congress has been raiding social security for decades and reallocating that money. It has never been paid back.
People are ENTITLED to have it paid back since it is THEIR money."
The OP is wrong.
"This is often expressed in the idea that Social Security benefits are "an earned right." This is true enough in a moral and political sense. But like all federal entitlement programs, Congress can change the rules regarding eligibility--and it has done so many times over the years. The rules can be made more generous, or they can be made more restrictive."
"THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM MAY BE ACCURATELY DESCRIBED AS A FORM OF
SOCIAL INSURANCE, ENACTED PURSUANT TO CONGRESS' POWER TO "SPEND MONEY
IN AID OF THE 'GENERAL WELFARE,'" HELVERING V. DAVIS, SUPRA, AT 640,
WHEREBY PERSONS GAINFULLY EMPLOYED, AND THOSE WHO EMPLOY THEM, ARE
TAXED TO PERMIT THE PAYMENT OF BENEFITS TO THE RETIRED AND DISABLED,
AND THEIR DEPENDENTS." from Fleming v. Nestor FLEMMING V. NESTOR 363 U.S. 603
TO ENGRAFT UPON THE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM A CONCEPT OF "ACCRUED
PROPERTY RIGHTS" WOULD DEPRIVE IT OF THE FLEXIBILITY AND BOLDNESS IN
ADJUSTMENT TO EVER-CHANGING CONDITIONS WHICH IT DEMANDS. Id.
IOW, there is no vested property right to SS.
"It has long been law that there is no legal right to Social Security. In two important cases, Helvering v. Davis and Flemming v. Nestor, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security taxes are simply taxes
and convey no property or contractual rights to Social Security benefits."
Helvering at http://www.law.cornell.edu/socsec/course/readings/301us619.h...
Not discussing the obligations of the Treasury to repay the special securities to the FICA fund.
|Copyright 1996-2017 trademark and the "Fool" logo is a trademark of The Motley Fool, Inc. Contact Us|