US soybean farmers hurting after China cancels contracts

[Annie]

That’s the deal she made with the nursing home, right? Social Security didn’t supply that?

 

[Annie]

I’m not arguing about Social Security per se. I don’t care what the Libertarian Party proposes. I was simply trying to explain ethics to Stinkcat.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I was simply trying to explain ethics to Stinkcat.

Actually, I would be careful in trying to explain ethics to anyone. You might want to focus on your own understanding of ethics yourself. You claim something is owed to people, but you cannot explain what exactly is owed. We know that social security is not a contractual obligation. Indeed the courts have clearly held it is a welfare program. Now are people owed welfare? The answer is clearly no. So keep that in mind before you start making accusations.

 

[ProVobis]

(Post withdrawn)

 

[Ridgerunner]

My mom gets 1200 a month. She gets to keep 25 and the rest goes to the nursing home.

And unless she is self-pay, which it doesn’t sound like, the rest is paid by Medicaid.

 

[Annie]

The courts have made rulings which are not ethical, so that’s not where I look for ethics.

SS was sold as and continues to be promoted as a deal in which one pays while one works, one gets a return on that money when one stops retires. This is why there is no income qualification for receiving SS: saying that the richer people shouldn’t get it would be a political death blow precisely because of the understanding which has been promoted by the government.

So what the courts say is irrelevant: the program has been a verbal agreement and the government. needs to live up to its promise. A savvy pol might be able to reduce or eliminate bensfits to the very rich, but I can assure you, the perception of the majority of working Americans is that they are putting in so they will be able to get something out.

 

[stinkcat_14]

SS was sold as and continues to be promoted as a deal in which one pays while one works, one gets a return on that money when one stops retires.

The problem is that no specific amount of money was promised. Nor was everybody promised to get money. Some people paid in and got nothing. Some paid little and got a lot. For example, would it be unethical to reduce benefits to $1 a year? No, because no specific amount was promised. The social security administration makes that very clear.

 

[ProVobis]

There are no income qualifications for receiving SS but there are tax consequences the more outside income one collects including interest income, IRA distributions, and even “tax-free” bonds. See the 1040 form for taxable SS income.

 

[ProVobis]

Well yeah, when nursing homes typically charge $5500 a month or so, that’s way over what SS would pay.

 

[Ridgerunner]

SS was sold as and continues to be promoted as a deal in which one pays while one works, one gets a return on that money when one stops retires

The courts might say otherwise, but everybody believes this.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well yeah, when nursing homes typically charge $5500 a month or so, that’s way over what SS would pay.

Truth be told, I am not persuaded that it needs to cost $5500. I do think the requirements of the various bureaucracies are such that they encourage medical and services overutilization.

 

[stinkcat_14]

The courts might say otherwise, but everybody believes this.

Many people who invested money with Bernie Madeoff thought they had a good solid investment.