I think Rand is wrong on means-testing Socialist Security.

and others want to raise the cap on contributions and throw it away so people are taxed all the way up their salary. Rather than tax it and give it to the government to 'manage' he says, means test above that amount in a declining percentage. So he's 'opting out for you' with regard to the amount above the current cutoff for contributions, essentially. If the govt gets it they'll just spend it somewhere else, anyhow if history is any judge.

This will be likely at the very top end of post retirement income but they are trying to figure out still exactly where it will have to cut in to make it solvent under that system. But it is in response to the alternative the Dems are pushing to tax more.

But he can't just say no, if SOMETHING isn't done, the entire system will fail. It needs to be fixed, and no one but he and his Dad are willing to take the heat so the basic program will still be there.

Now they say it takes nearly 17 years - and of course they hope you don't live that long.

The governmnet wants you to drop over dead at about age 62.

Then it means they thieved you all your life.

This rotted program should never have been allowed to be created in 1937 under the communist FDR.

The government believes THEY can save your our retirements better than YOU can.

And they don't even give you a choice in the matter.

But they have prooved that they CANNOT do a better job.

They are near broke and now want to means-test and keep raising the age of elegibility so that people die off before collecting.

I want my money back - and I want out -but they won't allow it (they wrote me a letter saying as much).

I don't call this liberty in any way shape or form.

We don't live in a free country anymore when the government rips off 20% of your paycheck.

Unless of course you fall under the Earned Income Tax Credit where not only don't you pay ANY taxes - you get money FROM the government in another communist money grab and redistribution.

Here's an interesting if slightly dated article on Social Security. It makes some good points. I still go with the taxation is theft argument.

http://www.ctj.org/pdf/socialsecuritytaxearningscapnov2006.pdf

Social Security for retirement and Social Security for disability need to be completely separate. Disability should be based on means/need but retirement should be retirement, period. People pay into Social Security for retirement for years and years. When the stock market goes crashing like it has the last few years, any other retirement savings they invested in could be blown up. So, if they are stuck putting in 7.5% of their income into it and even twice that if incorporated (15% for my husband for 30 years!) there should be no means testing for retirement. That is absurd. There are so many free loaders on the Social Security dole who never worked for it. Those are the ones who should be doing means/need testing but NOT retirees. They worked for it.

I am one of those "poor fools" who paid an obscene amount into the system and has since retired. I do not fool myself into believing the government has my money and that I should be able to get it back. The government stole it and spent it. It is gone.

I will collect what I can, as long as I can, because I would much rather I have the money than the feds. But I do not think workers today owe it to me.

Means-testing will come. No way around it. The alternatives are worse.

The insanity must stop somewhere. Someone is going to get short shifted so why not phase it out in the least painful manner. Gotta start somewhere.

I tried to opt-out but they wouldn't let me.

I even offered them a good deal; I told the SS Administration that if they paid me back all $80,000 I've paid into it that I would not charge them any interest.

Then after receiving my money back I would be out of the system - never to collect a dime from the government.

I told them this would be a good deal in case I live past the age where I am collecting MORE than I had paid in.

They said sorry but they couldn't do that.

I'm just trying to help.

I didn't get that he was referring to existing payers into the system. Was he not referring to a long term plan by looking at the various options for consideration? I agree, I hope means testing should never be on the table. ...you know...equal pay for equal work... gender equality... same soc security for all citizens...I am sick and tired of this socialist mentality that covets what others earn.

"AT LEAST give that person all the money they paid into it and THEN stop the benefits."

How would doing this keep the system viable?

harbor a common misconception about Social Security.

Please read the Social Security Act of 1935 and the amendments thereto.

Then read the Helvering decision of the U.S. Supreme Court which determined the Act constitutional.

In short, and this is from Helvering, Social Security is NOT an insurance, savings, annuity or other invest scheme. The money you paid in SS taxes is not held for you in any account. It is not owed to you in any way shape or form. The fact that you paid the tax, cannot impose any obligation on the Treasury or else the Act would be unconstitutional. The Act itself does not mandate or order the Secretary to pay out any benefit, but merely authorizes him to do so. The taxes collected under authority of the Act are to be deposited into the General Fund, and like all other taxes, are to be considered GIFTS to the Treasury by the taxpayer.

So, it is not your money.

You don't have any claim on it to get it or anything else "back."

You did not "pay into" any system.

There is no Treasury account with your name on it. (or number)

You paid a tax. That is all.

Congress thanks you.

They spent the money.

It's gone.

The end.

Rand is against increasing taxes on the rich. I think his point is there is a "trade-off". If the rich don't get back the money they paid into Social Security, they will benefit by not having their taxes raised(which I believe will happen anyways). But, if the rich receive Social Security, then they will pay higher taxes.

I'm sure he'd love to give everyone what they've paid into it, but we can't. It's impossible. We can't even afford current retiries. I've paid over 10 years worth and I know I will never see a dime of that money. It's already been spent 10x over. I'm sure by means testing he means people recieving large pensions or have a 401k plans and such that do not require SS will not recieve it. But without a doubt if he gets a chance to eliminate it he most likely would which means more money for us to put it away ourselves, but people rely on the government to take care of them. We must rely on ourselves not a group of beaurocrats to save our money.