Home

Social Security: Call it What it is…Our Earned Retirement Program that We Funded Ourselves!

Leave a comment

Unknown Author

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A woman dies at age 65 before collecting one benefit check. She and her employer paid into the system for almost 50 years and she collected NOTHING. Keep in mind all the working people that die every year who were paying into the system and got nothing.

And these governmental morons mismanaged the money and stole from the system, so that it’s now going broke.
BEAUTIFUL! And they have the audacity to call today’s seniors “vultures” in an attempt to cover their ineptitude. DISGRACEFUL!

The real reason for renaming our Social Security payments is so the government can claim that all those social security recipients are receiving entitlements thus putting them in the same category as welfare, and food stamp recipients.
THIS IS WORTH THE FEW MINUTES IT TAKES TO READ AND DIGEST!
F.Y.I. By changing the name of SS contributions, it gives them a means to refute this program in the future. It’s free money for the government to spend under this guise.
The Social Security check is now (or soon will be) referred to as a Federal Benefit Payment ?
I’ll be part of the one percent to forward this. I am forwarding it because it touches a nerve in me, and I hope it will in you.

Please keep passing it on until everyone in our country has read it.
The government is now referring to our Social Security checks as a “Federal Benefit Payment.”
This is NOT a benefit. It is OUR money , paid out of our earned income! Not only did we all contribute to Social Security but our employers did too ! It totaled 15% of our income before taxes.(This should be enough for you to forward this message, If not read on.)

If you averaged $30K per year over your working life, that’s close to $180,000 invested in Social Security.
If you calculate the future value of your monthly investment in social security ($375/month, including both you and your employers contributions) at a meager 1% interest rate compounded monthly, after 40 years of working you’d have more than $1.3+ million dollars saved.

This is your personal investment. Upon retirement, if you took out only 3% per year, you’d receive $39,318 per year, or $3,277 per month.

That’s almost three times more than today’s average Social Security benefit of $1,230 per month, according to the Social Security Administration. (Google it – it’s a fact). And your retirement fund would last more than 33 years (until you’re 98 if you retire at age 65)! I can only imagine how much better most average-income people could live in retirement if our government had just invested our money in low-risk interest-earning accounts.
Instead, the folks in Washington pulled off a bigger Ponzi scheme than Bernie Madoff ever did (or Lyndon Johnson).

They took our money and used it elsewhere. They “forgot”(oh yes, they knew) that it was OUR money they were taking. They didn’t have a referendum to ask us if we wanted to lend the money to them … and they didn’t pay interest on the debt they assumed. And recently they’ve told us that the money won’t support us for very much longer. (Isn’t it funny that they NEVER say this about welfare payments?)
But is it our fault they misused our investments? And now, to add insult to injury, they’re calling it a benefit, as if we never worked to earn every penny of it. This is stealing!

Just because they borrowed the money, doesn’t mean that our investments were for charity!
Let’s take a stand. We have earned our right to Social Security and Medicare. Demand that our legislators bring some sense into our government.
Find a way to keep Social Security and Medicare going for the sake of the 92% of our population who need it.

Then call it what it is:


Our Earned Retirement Income .

Smoke and Mirror Phone Scams

2 Comments

Sam Jojola

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“On January 31, 2018, at 12:09 P.M. (PST), I received a 47 second message on my land line from a private number advising that a close family member they named was referred to their office for “legal action” including the “filing of a lawsuit or a “complaint” with “the court”. The articulate male caller said that “you” need to “immediately contact the legal department at (844) 744-7375 and reference file number 00-268”xxx. The caller concluded “this is a time sensitive matter” and “my calls are logged in, submitted as proof”.

“The court.” “The legal department.”… How stupid could they possible be?”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Summary

Phone scams are getting more sophisticated with bogus debt collectors, fraudulent IRS calls, charity fraudsters, and bogus computer technicians claiming “your Windows program is infected”. Having experienced these calls prompted me to share my thoughts on what I learned from them, my response and how I will contact both the FTC and the California Attorney General’s Office with the most recent event.

I am also contacting Congressman Ted Lieu, along with Senators Dianne Feinstein and Senator Kamala Harris and see if I get a response with any action they plan to take.

Cancer Charity Fraud

Google “cancer fraud telemarketers” and a disturbing series of pages appear that chronicle untold millions of dollars scammed from innocent victims:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/05/20/187-million-cancer-charities-scam-5-reasons-why-it-took-the-feds-so-long-to-catch-on/?utm_term=.dca79f762c55

My experience with a telemarketer claiming to raise money for cancer several years ago led me to contact the California Attorney General’s office with a detailed complaint after I obtained very specific information from the low level fraudster who told me too much about who was behind the fund he was working for, including who was running the scam and the address where they really lived and where they were calling from. I Googled the name of the cancer fund they represented and a host of fraud reports appeared that prompted me to follow through with my complaint.

Many weeks later, I did receive correspondence from the California Attorney General’s Office regarding this fraudulent organization and what action was taken.

Bogus IRS Treasury Tax Scam and a link to report IRS scam calls More

ALL 2017 SALES TAX RATES ARE GOING UP IN THE GREAT LATE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

4 Comments

new-logo251_002Author,
Chuck Frank

ca-tax-burden-photo1

So where are the protests? Is it just “politically correct” and “tolerable” for all of the lower 1/3 to pay more excessive taxes to Jerry Brown who is now the self appointed, deputy/controller and King of the great late State of California and will he later be
running for President of California if it becomes a new nation? This kind of idea has a very distasteful flavor and has a ring to it which is likened to our beloved KGB director/dictator, Valdimir Putin of Russia, doesn’t it?

Yes it is true. Jerry Brown likes taxing everyone down to the bone for his poverty stricken Utopian, welfare state, while living up to his Alma Mater standard. After graduating from St. Ignatius High School in 1955, he then entered Sacred Heart Novitiate, a Jesuit seminary. He later attended the University of California, Berkeley, graduating in 1961 before earning a J.D. at Yale Law School in 1964. Karl Marx would have been be proud. But let’s not forget, it’s not just the lower 1/3 who is footing a tax bill to cover a 179.5 billion dollar budget which is also meant to also cover 2.4 million government employees on “glorified welfare.”
More

Sustainable Cowboys or Welfare Ranchers of the American West?

4 Comments

Source:  THE DAILY PITCHFORK

Report analyzes taxpayer bailout of U.S. public lands ranching [Part II of a series on ranchers]

by Vickery Eckhoff

Cliven-Bundy-on-Horseback-e1423775080754-620x264 Public lands livestock operators each cost taxpayers nearly a quarter of a million dollars in subsidies over the last decade. (AP Photo/Las Vegas Review-Journal, John Locher)

Five hundred million dollars[1]. That’s what 21,000[2] ranchers who graze their livestock on America’s iconic western rangelands are estimated to have cost US taxpayers in 2014 — and every year for the past decade. This averages out to an annual taxpayer subsidy of $23,809 per rancher — approximately a quarter of a million dollars each since 2005. So why does this small subset, representing just 2.7% of US livestock producers, protest the “welfare rancher” label?

 The public lands grazing program is welfare.

That $23,809 — and it’s a lowball figure — is a form of public assistance similar to other welfare programs. The only difference is, it doesn’t arrive as a check in the mail. It instead represents a loss covered by taxpayers: the very large difference between what public lands ranchers pay in fees to the US government and what public lands grazing costs taxpayers every year. But it’s still a subsidy, as a newly updated economic analysis, Costs and Consequences: The Real Price of Livestock Grazing on America’s Public Lands, makes clear. And the recipients aren’t low income; a large number are millionaires and some are billionaires and multi-billion dollar corporations. Cattle barons, if you will.

Public lands ranching costs western ecosystems, wildlife and taxpayers.

“Several federal agencies permit livestock grazing on public lands in the United States, the largest being the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Agriculture’s United States Forest Service (USFS).

The vast majority of livestock grazing on BLM and USFS rangelands occurs in the 11 western states of Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.

Rangelands are non-irrigated and generally have vegetation that consists mostly of grasses, herbs and/or shrubs. They are different from pastureland, which may periodically be planted, fertilized, mowed or irrigated.”

READ THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE HERE.

Internet Sales Tax Bill

2 Comments

strip bannerInternet Sales Tax Bill

Invoice# 7463
Dear Internet User,

The Federal Government has calculated the sales tax owed on your internet purchases for 2013. More

If You Want To Keep Your Doctor, Change the Senate

1 Comment

strip bannernew-logo25Jane M. Orient, M.D.

______________________________________________________

• The outlook for the survival of representative government in this country is so dismal that lifelong Democrat and veteran talk show host Bob Just has called on Democrats to boycott the election. It’s the only way to wrest control of his party from radicals with a Marxist worldview, he believes.

__________________________________________________

ObamacareHurtAlthough the Administration’s unilateral changes in the law have postponed many painful features of ObamaCare until after the election, it is already very unpopular. The White House public relations/media juggernaut is in high gear to suppress the bad news and trumpet any benefits. Millions more privately insured Americans will soon see their policies canceled; the individual mandate penalty/tax will kick in; the crushing burdens of new taxes on businesses, medical devices, and insurance premiums will reverberate through the already stalled economy; and more and more independent physicians will have to close their practices owing to new requirements.

My favorite bumper sticker for this campaign season is “Keep your doctor, change your senator.”

Monica Wehby, M.D., pediatric neurosurgeon, is trying to unseat a one-term Democrat in Oregon. Dr. Wehby has been very active in the American Medical Association, trying to change its pro-ObamaCare stance. More

Internet Tax Moratorium Held Hostage by “Dirty Harry ” Reid

Leave a comment

Editors Note:  Please join the effort to make “Dirty Harry” Reid bring the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act up for a vote in the Senate.

Americans for Tax Reform

Go here to sign the Petition: ATR Petition

Follow us: @taxreformer on Twitter

______________________________________________

Without further Congressional action, states and localities will begin taxing Internet access as soon as December 11th. A permanent moratorium, the Permanent Internet Tax Freedom Act, has passed the House with a simple voice vote, demonstrating bipartisan agreement about the importance of a tax-free Internet.

Unfortunately, Senate Democrat Leader Harry Reid has refused to introduce the bill to the Senate, preferring to hold out for a remote sales tax increase through the so-called “Marketplace Fairness Act” (MFA), a highly controversial issue. Polling shows Americans overwhelmingly oppose Reid’s scheme to tax online sales, but a large majority of Americans can get behind a permanent continuance of a tax-free Internet.

Nonetheless, in a classic show of divisive politics, Harry Reid has held hostage the freedom of the Internet to pass a tax increase on Americans that buy products online or over the phone.

No American wants to pay more taxes, but taxes on access to the Internet is bad economic growth policy, not just tax policy. Here are the top four reasons why a permanent Internet tax moratorium is necessary to stop this.

1. Keeping the Internet tax free encourages online innovation and digital entrepreneurship. Online investment and tech startups would be disincentivized to the point of obscuring the open and inventive Internet we all know and love. The United States is a global tech leader due to our private development and deregulation of online ventures. A tax moratorium also promotes innovation in cost-defective expansion of broadband access. An Internet access tax would be another cost paid by customers and Internet Service Providers (ISPs) that would ultimately turn companies away from creating new developments in the tech space. Taxing Internet access would serve to hamper this industry in much the same way other great American industries (auto, manufacturing) have been hamstrung by government interference.

2. Taxing the Internet would have a harsh impact on lower income families. This is the demographic that a tax-free Internet serves to help and assist in seeking employment. Raising the cost of the Internet through a usage tax would diminish the overall number of users. A recent study predicted that a 10% increase in price can be expected to illicit a 15% reduction in adoption. This negative growth is the antithesis of a free Internet.

3. An Internet access tax would raise the costs of all Internet-related business. Whether it be the price of ISPs the cost of running and maintaining a website, or transaction fees of e-commerce including online shopping, a usage tax would hurt all Internet users in much the same way that rising gasoline prices are felt throughout the economy, raising the cost of using the Internet would be seen by all online participants.

4. Access taxes would be yet another permanent part of the government shakedown. If the moratorium expires, state and local governments will be able to tax access to the Internet. If the ban is allowed to expire and governments start taxing access (which they certainly would), these funds would be built into state budgets with vested interests devoted to keeping these taxes in place. As every previous tax has proven, you can’t put the toothpaste back in the tube.

Permanently extending the Internet Tax Freedom Act is a crucial step in safeguarding long-term American Internet prosperity and continued online growth. Americans for Tax Reform, Digital Liberty, and supporters of Internet freedom throughout the country endorse a permanent moratorium on Internet access taxes.​

 

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: