From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: Social Security
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Organization: Los Tejanos SCUBA Club and Beer Joint, Austin, Tejas
Distribution: tx
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 01:49:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.204916.5411@novell.com> bboerner@novell.com (Brendan B. Boerner) writes:
>If you retired 4 years ago and have received all of your money by
>today, because life expectancy was estimated to be lower 47 years ago
>or because you just happened to live longer or whatever, would you be
>demanding to to continue to receive your SS check?  If not, fine, but
>when I call SS welfare for the old, I do so because of the recipients
>who have received there payin + interest (lousy as it may be) and still
>want it coming, not because "it's their money" (it isn't) but because
>"they're entitled to it".

If you had a coronary today and have received all of your premiums
back, because having a coronary is such a rare occurance, would you
be demanding to continue to receive your health insurance checks,
even though you hadn't consumed the entire policy limit?

Average life expectancies are just that - averages.  The man who
dies at age 66 11/12ths with no wife and kids doesn't somehow get
to come back to life so he can life 4 1/12th years and collect
every dime he ever put in.  No, he stays dead so the person who
lived that extra 4 1/12th years can collect his Social Security.

>Wow, I've stated in several posts that I think that SS should be
>abolished so folks can sink or swim on there own and now I'm accused of
>trying to do the opposite.  Let me say it again in case you missed it -
>John, I really, really, really do want to you to be able to control how
>you fund your retirement.  If there was legislation in Congress to pay
>out lump sums and phase out SS, I'd call up Pickle, Gramm and Bentsen
>and plead for them to vote for it.  So lay off on the class envy
>crap, ok?

You are giving the same line about how Social Security is welfare for
the rich and complaining that people who own their own homes don't
deserve to benefit from a system which they helped fund.

I'd say that attitude is certainly indicative of someone who suffers
from extreme class envy, as well as someone who wants to punish people
for being good money managers.  Unlike you, I don't care how much
wealth a person has.  All I care about is how much they put in and
how much they are taking out.  Based on the wealthy people's ability
to manage money, I'd say the poor shouldn't get shit and the wealthy
should get everything.  But that's just me - I think people should be
rewarded based on demonstrated abilities, not political favoritism.

Look - I want to be able to control how I fund my retirement, too.
But I have this feeling that your line of thinking is going to result
in my being royally screwed.  See, I suffer from the Puritan ethic
which says you should live within your means.  That means that I plan
to burn my mortgage in just a few years - 5 or 6 at most.  I bought a
nice small house and I have a nice small mortgage.  You would have me
(under the current system) lose some fraction of my Social Security
because I had the foresight to not get a huge mortgage.

This attitude (that no good deed should go unpunished) reminds me of
my relatives in San Francisco.  They had been saving water for years.
When they recently rationed water to everyone, they did so by forcing
people to cut back as a percentage of their current usage.  This
means the wasteful people got more water than the thrifty people.

So, let me ask you this one straightforward question.  Given that it
is very unlikely that Social Security is going to be abolished, do
you favor cutting back on benefits to people who, because they planned
better for their own retirement, now find themselves with some amount
of accumulated wealth?  Or should FICA contributions be the only
deciding factor in FICA distributions?
-- 
John F. Haugh II                  [ PGP 2.1 ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151           [ DoF #17 ]        @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org