BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Rapparee
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 09:47 AM

Stim, I am "entitled" to Social Security and Medicare for the same reason I'm "entitled" to my car or home -- I paid for them. In the same way I'm "entitled" to my VA benefits -- I "paid" for them, although not with money.

As for Wikipedia, it's a usually somewhat reliable and quick place to look stuff up but if you rely on it you'll eventually find yourself in trouble.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 10:50 AM

That just happened to be the most concise definition that I found--it may happen to be true that you paid in to Social Security--that's one of the qualifiers for that particular entitlement(as well as the funding mechanism), but entitlements, which are also called mandatory programs, are grants that the gov't gives to anyone who meets the qualifications that they've set--here is a list of most of the other Federal large scale entitlement/mandatory programs, courtesy of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.(excluding Veterans Benefits)

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, unemployment insurance, SNAP (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program), SSI, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), the school lunch program, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP), the Earned Income Tax Credit, and the refundable component of the Child Tax Credit.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 02:30 PM

It may well be that all of those programs are 'entitlements' but to me, the operative word is 'entitlement', i.e. something one is entitled to because of a previous vesting. Most other uses of the word seem spurious to me.

One could say that everyone is entitled to breatheable air, though. :) I guess that the US Bill of Rights also refers to things one is entitled to.

So I dunno. (The older I get, the fewer things I am sure of.)

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Songwronger
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 08:22 PM

The meaning of "entitlement" has been muddied.

I pay into Social Security, the government invests those payments for me, and at retirement I draw a pension from the plan. The plan I paid for.

Same with Medicare.

I made payments DIRECTLY into those funds, and I am entitled to draw benefits directly from those investments.

The other programs (paid for by general revenue taxes) are not entitlements. They are charities. Doles. Congress decides whether I have access to those. But congress cannot limit my access to Social Security and Medicare. To do so would be theft and fraud.

The news media is conflating "entitlement" and "charity" in its reporting. This is being done in order to facilitate theft from our payroll deduction entitlement programs of Social Security and Medicare. Stir them in with the general revenue programs and then reduce the lot. I could make second graders understand this with a set of blocks.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 04 Nov 13 - 10:35 PM

Entitle means "to give claim to". Through legislation, Congress gives people claim to certain benefits. That's what entitlements are. And, as we see in the case of Food Stamps, what Congress gives, it can also take away.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 02:06 AM

I think that the meaning of "entitlement" has evolved quite quickly over the last few years. In the original sense of the word, "entitled" meant that a person had earned the benefits.

Then came the use of the term "sense of entitlement," meaning that somebody acts like he or she were entitled to something that was NOT earned.

And I think because of that "sense of entitlement" phrase, people (prodded by propagandists) began to understand "entitlements" as NOT earned.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Greg F.
Date: 05 Nov 13 - 09:41 AM

Yup, Joe, that's RepubliClown Orwellian new-speak for ya.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 04:03 AM

It may seem a fine distinction, but rather than being "earned", as a wage or salary might be, entitlements have historically been granted as a consideration for a service--usually military service--and tended to consist of land, an annuity, and, literally, a title, as in "In consideration of heroic service to the King of Someplace in defeating the King of Someplace Else, we proudly grant thee 20,000 Gold Somethings a year for life, 200,000 acres and the title, "Grand Duke of a big chunk of what used to be Someplace Else."

If you were smart, you gave your soldiers each a chunk of land, a Gold Something every year, and hoped to Hell that was enough to keep them from signing up with the King of Someplace Else's brother.

It worked like this, more or less, from time immemorial, up until the end of World War One(in the US, at least), when someone decided to just give the returning soldiers train fare home and a couple bucks pocket money. The returning doughboys, who felt that they were "entitled" to something,made a big fuss and were rewarded with a "bonus" bond scheme that wasn't going to pay anyone anything for another 20 years.

When the depression hit, the a "Bonus Army" camped out in Washington(or near, anyway) demanding that the bonds be paid off early. The army that they once served in was sent out against them, and there was a huge mess. In order to avoid another big mess after World War II, Congress came up with the "GI Bill", and entitlements were back on track.

Those who receive entitlements are encouraged to believe that they have earned them:
"In consideration of working for a lifetime without saving enough money to take care of yourself in your old age, we proudly grant thee $1250 a month and affordable health insurance" or, "In consideration of raising a family of five with out the benefit of matrimony, we proudly grant thee $875 a month stipend , Food Stamps, and a townhouse in a HUD owned development, and affordable health insurance".

In truth, entitlements tend to be granted in order to avoid huge messes of one sort or another. They always have been, and they always will.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 09:53 PM

So it appears that for some, when people who've never been unable to work because they're too badly disabled get any help from the public purse that's charity rather than a right.

I can't imagine any decent person thinking that. In fact that would be a way to identify the people who weren't decent people. Too many of them around, I fear. Even here.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Songwronger
Date: 06 Nov 13 - 10:20 PM

No decent society should turn its back on those who can't help themselves. If people need food stamps, they need food stamps. I don't mind if the money to pay for something like that comes out of my taxes. Better that than spending for war or some other things.

But the news media in the U.S. has been merging this "charity" aspect of giveaways with what I described earlier, the programs we pay for through payroll deductions. The government takes money from our paychecks and TELLS us it will be invested in our Social Security retirement fund. So, I have a right to expect that money back when I retire. I am entitled to that.

Not so with food stamps. Those are paid for out of the general revenue taxes, dispersal of which is up to the whim of congress and the president. Actually I'm surprised anyone in America gets food stamps. Obama promised austerity, said he would "cut waste," and the other party is even more austere.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Elmore
Date: 07 Nov 13 - 04:03 PM

Don't worry Songwronger. When Cruz takes over he'll abolish Social Security, thereby ending your problem. Don't forget to watch Alash, the throat singers of Tuva via Concert Window tonight at 8 p.m. Be there or be square.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 07 Nov 13 - 06:35 PM

Actually SW, Social Security is not really pension plan, it is insurance, and what you pay is not a payroll deduction,it is a tax. It was set up to keep people who were too old to work from out of poverty, and the benefits payments are skewed to favor low income people. The benefit amounts are not calculated based on the earnings from you paid in, they are keyed to the cost of living.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Nov 13 - 03:36 PM

"The benefit amounts are not calculated based on the earnings from you paid in, they are keyed to the cost of living."

I think you are confusing COLA - cost of living adjustment with benefits. My SS statement is very clear that my benefit is based on earned income - since that is what has been taxed- AND when I decide to start collecting my SS benefits. The system was designed as a safety net for those who earned too little to save or invest and had no pension to fall back on. These days even those with a pension can lose it to bankruptcy... case in point- KODAK.

If you are poor, you stay poor. What will help keep the system solvent is to apply the SS tax to a higher income level. Look at the limits set & it's obvious that the rich (aka highly paid corporate executives, etc.) are skating thanks to the way that inflation has eroded the buying power of the dollar. Apply the tax to a maximum of 250,000 and see what would happen... besides the screaming of the "poor" 1 percenters.

this came from a bank website:

Social Security is based on a sliding scale depending on your income, how long you work and at what age you retire. Social Security benefits automatically increases each year based on increases in the Consumer Price Index. Including a spouse increases your Social Security benefits by 1.5 times your individual estimated benefit. Please note that this calculator assumes that only one of the spouses work. Benefits could be different if your spouse worked and earned a benefit higher than one half of your benefit. If you are a married couple, and both spouses work, you may need to run the calculation twice - once for each spouse and their respective income. This calculator provides only an estimate of your benefits.

The calculations use the 2013 FICA income limit of $113,700 with an annual maximum Social Security benefit of $30,396 per year for a single person and 1.5 times this amount for a married couple. To receive the maximum benefit would require earning the maximum FICA salary for nearly your entire career. You would also need to begin receiving benefits at your full retirement age of 66 or 67 (depending on your birthdate). This calculator rounds your age of full Social Security benefits to the next highest full year. If your birthdate is between 1955 and 1959 your actual full retirement age for Social Security is 66 plus two months for each year after 1954. Your actual benefit may be lower or higher depending on your work history and the complete compensation rules used by Social Security.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 08 Nov 13 - 08:02 PM

If you think about what ypu've posted, you'll realize that what I said is true--

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: sciencegeek
Date: 09 Nov 13 - 11:07 AM

maybe clear to you, but I fail to see how you can negate the earned income factor... and any skewing to lower income is consistent with current tax rates. The poor still come up short meeting basic needs.

My mom once worked for woman who had married a wealthy, older man... her survivor's benefit was quite nice, what my mom would take 6 months to collect... she used it to treat "the girls" to a monthly lunch at a posh restaurant.

And you failed to mention that the benefits are still taxed on between 50 and 85 percent of the gross distribution, depending on total income.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 09 Nov 13 - 01:49 PM

I'm not negating anything. I am just telling you that, according to the government, Social Security is an insurance program funded by a tax, etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Nov 13 - 02:54 PM

For those who seem to be blundering around in the dark, this is from Wikipedia:

In the United States, Social Security is primarily the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI) federal program. The original Social Security Act (1935) and the current version of the Act, as amended, encompass several social welfare and social insurance programs. Social Security is funded through payroll taxes called Federal Insurance Contributions Act tax (FICA) and/or Self Employed Contributions Act Tax (SECA). Tax deposits are collected by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and are formally entrusted to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, the Federal Hospital Insurance Trust Fund, or the Federal Supplementary Medical Insurance Trust Fund which comprise the Social Security Trust Funds. With a few exceptions all salaried income has a FICA and/or SECA tax collected on it. With few exceptions all legal residents working in the United States now have a individual Social Security card number. Indeed nearly all working (and many non-working) residents since Social Security's 1935 inception have had a Social Security number since it is required to do a wide range of things from paying the IRS to getting a job.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Nov 13 - 11:28 AM

""As for Songwronger, I am puzzled as to why you are outraged that they are cutting benefits you oppose.""

S'easy! He and his TEA Party mates wanted to do it themselves, after getting rid of the President.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Food Stamp Riots on November 1?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Nov 13 - 11:40 AM

""One could say that everyone is entitled to breatheable air, though.""

Only until the Republicans find a way to make everyone pay for it Ebbie. And then things will get really bad for the poor in the US.

Don T.