Thank-you for doing this Karl. I think we all realise that this is a gift from you. Much appreciated.

that fake wage slip thing has been going on in the UK for ages, slightly different angle though, you will see a billboard saying something like "lost your wage slip, phone this number for a replacement", obviously getting a "new" one that reflects what you want it to, these adverts as I said were on public roads!

You're absolutely right on entitlements, if you mean people flying, walking, hurling themselves over the border then expecting emergency room health care, free schooling, in state college tuition benefits, etc. I just hope you're not including social security and medicare in your analysis. I haven't been reading your site long enough to know if you have stated an opinion on this
topic.

Did try a search poster Genesis, message social security, no hits.

"entitlement mentality"-Thanks for that. I've been looking for a good term to replace leech**** when I discuss what's wrong with our country to the PC crowd.

Storm, actualy, I am when it comes to both.

Medicare? Exactly why are you entitled to free medical care? Because you get old? How come I can't have it now?

thanks mate.

Just another voice of appreciation from downunder.

Like many non-USA readers, have tried to sign petitions, but inelgible. Kind of a*****-off, as what the US govt does has a major impact on our lives down here too (awaiting the worldwide swoon to reach down here in an atmosphere of blissful oblivion).

Karl,
Just joined your forum. I agree with much of what you say. Sadly I'm a UK citizen so can't sign your petition. Things are indeed going to get a lot worse. Over here we have just had the Northern Wreck Bank fiasco - the first UK run on a bank for 150 years.

As a day trader with a succesful strategy the volatility is heaven sent, but the thought of spiralling deflation is appalling, and nobody in positions of authority seems to have the ability to deal with the problems that are looming. One can only hope that "Cometh the hour, cometh the man". The only way to get to a wider audience is through TV.

Attached is the url of a programme by Jon Moulton a venture capitalist at Alchemy Partners, which we have just seen on UK TV. The first truthful explanation of the mess in the finance markets. Worth a viewing. More such programmes need to be made.

http://www.onthebox.com/program/1584060/....

Genesis

I pay $430 dollars a month for social security tax
over $100 dollars a month for medicare

While I'm paying $850/mo for medical insurance for my wife and child, most of mine is covered by my employer

That over $500 dollars a month for nothing in the present, this is INSURANCE ?in case? I get old and by some miracle some crooked politician doesn't find a way to means test me against my 401K

In what way do you perceive this as "freebe" ENTITLEMENT means insurance that I bought and paid for and should be invested for the future not scammed into the general fund.

See this is where the tin from Paul comes shining through, he wants to relieve the children of this burden so they can save for their own futures and pay for the currently "entitled" by closing the empire, and re-opening the federation with guards at our borders instead of Syria, Iraq, Afgan. You can disagree with the foreign policy aspect but it sure would go a long way toward funding the insurance legitamately owed to the people who actually paid.

No Storm, you're wrong.

As I've said several times this has been litigated and decided at the USSC.

You have not purchased insurance. You have paid a tax. Period.

That you think differently doesn't change what happened, nor the outcome.

You better get your arms around this, because the facts are what they are and it doesn't matter whether you like it or not.

Quote:

this as "freebe" ENTITLEMENT

Well you got part of it right. It's a "freebe entitlement" for the people sucking on the tit right now, but if you think it will be there in 20 years I've got some great swamp land you might be interested investing in for the long haul too.

Are you talking about SS or MC or both, in any case then that is fraud, and it is then being misrepresented to the American People and all the more reason to cut people loose as is the only equitable suggestion. Again what your saying on its face is just another example of abuse. I pay taxes for all kinds of things where I expect results, property tax to school my child and provide for police and fire services, should I also consider that a freebe. I mean maybe the 40% or more of our incomes that we pay in taxes regardless of the catagory should just fund the leeches in government and their ( )-industrial complex kicken back buddies.

How can you call $530/mo not including my employer match "FREE",

Just because I may never collect something I've paid for you can call it a, tax, fee, an obligation, you can call it a banana if you like (McCain on Amnesty) but the one thing you can't call it is FREE. Given the recent events I have no doubt we're being scammed, front door, back door, through the roof, sheds a whole new light on the "Greatest" does it not.

INCOME REDISTRIBUTION = FREE to somebody, but not "FREE" to the people that pay it, like ME.

Look at the "entitlement" chart of the FED budget, roughly 80% goes to INCOME REDISTRIBUTION. Here I'll post it for you.

I know just cause its in wiki doesn't mean it's gospel, my point is how it's being sold to the public. It not just what I think its an expectation of at least a poverty level existence in the event that the fools at the FED inflate our savings to dog food. I have no doubt the geniuses at the USSC would rule in favor of the State, surprise surprise. Which way have they ruled on naked shorts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_secu....

Social Insurance
Main article: Social insurance
Actuaries define social insurance as a government-sponsored insurance program that is defined by statute, serves a defined population, and is funded through premiums or taxes paid by or on behalf of participants. Participation is either compulsory or the program is heavily enough subsidized that most eligible individuals choose to participate.

In the U.S., programs that meet this definition include Social Security, Medicare, the PBGC program, the railroad retirement program and state-sponsored unemployment insurance programs.[

Quote:

Are you talking about SS or MC or both, in any case then that is fraud, and it is then being misrepresented to the American People and all the more reason to cut people loose as is the only equitable suggestion. Again what your saying on its face is just another example of abuse. I pay taxes for all kinds of things where I expect results, property tax to school my child and provide for police and fire services, should I also consider that a freebe. I mean maybe the 40% or more of our incomes that we pay in taxes regardless of the catagory should just fund the leeches in government and their ( )-industrial complex kicken back buddies.

Storm, the Wiki is wrong.

Period.

This was litigated back when the "full retirement age" was changed, with exactly that argument - that there was an explicit contract of insurance present in FICA.

The court said no. Fica and Medicare are simply taxes, and entitlement programs - all of them - are the largesse of the government. Nothing more or less.

That's the beginning and end of it.

Don't get your information from the Wiki. Read the law instead.

I don't care if you like it or anyone else likes it.

Entitlement programs are not obligations of the government or "society" to you, they never have been, and this is a matter of settled law.

Those taxes are in fact just taxes.

Period.

That doesn't change the mis-representation as I said, I had no doubt you were right but personally it would appear the Supreme Court does not have the interest of the people in mind. What they rule may be "law" as interpreted, that does not make it just, look to the recent eminent domain rulings for evidence of this, if a municipality can garner more revenue from your property then they would expect you could pay in tax on that basis alone they can confiscate. Yeah, I get it the needs of the many supercede the needs of the few or the one. If you want to collect taxes from me for the general fund list them as "income tax" period. I don't know what's worse the "Inflation Tax" or "taxation without representation" which resulted in revolution or "taxation through mis-representation" The more you school me the more likely it seems that the "tin" about the US being more or less incorporated post FED for the purposes of representing itself as opposed to the people it governed are not the baseless claims they would appear to be. This is not the America I studied in school.

and just as a matter of opinion taxes should entitle the public at large to something, this isn't a Aristocracy or is it.

Anyways KD you are a wealth of information.

Government website mind you I'm NOT disputing the ruling your citing, its the BLATANT MISRERESENTATION, the public will be furious it won't fly. And the bums in office will either need to let the people opt out or they'll be voted out, no matter what the guys in dresses decided Roosevelt's actual intentions might be.

I know KD you play the hand you're delt, till when, where does it stop.

http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flas....

Before the 1930s, support for the elderly was a matter of local, state and family rather than a Federal concern (except for veterans’ pensions). However, the widespread suffering caused by the Great Depression brought support for numerous proposals for a national old-age insurance system. On January 17, 1935, President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent a message to Congress asking for "social security" legislation. The same day, Senator Robert Wagner of New York and Representative David Lewis of Maryland introduced bills reflecting the administration’s views. The resulting Senate and House bills encountered opposition from those who considered it a governmental invasion of the private sphere and from those who sought exemption from payroll taxes for employers who adopted government-approved pension plans. Eventually the bill passed both houses, and on August 15, 1935, President Roosevelt signed the Social Security Act into law.

The act created a uniquely American solution to the problem of old-age pensions. Unlike many European nations, U.S. social security "insurance" was supported from "contributions" in the form of taxes on individuals’ wages and employers’ payrolls rather than directly from Government funds. The act also provided funds to assist children, the blind, and the unemployed; to institute vocational training programs; and provide family health programs. As a result, enactment of Social Security brought into existence complex administrative challenges. The Social Security Act authorized the Social Security Board to register citizens for benefits, to administer the contributions received by the Federal Government, and to send payments to recipients. Prior to Social Security, the elderly routinely faced the prospect of poverty upon retirement. For the most part, that fear has now dissipated

This part

U.S. social security "insurance" was supported from "contributions" in the form of taxes on individuals’ wages and employers’ payrolls rather than directly from Government funds.

Completely contradicts the way the justices ruled. They ruled as if it's just a tax and as such just more of the governments funds, thus the allocation is on the basis of the Corporations discretion, totally against the spirit of the intent, a money grab by Exectutives of the Corporation.

I know it don't matter worth a damn what I think and the rest of the tax payer base thinks, cause for that to matter this would need to function like a democracy. It seems like the majority here get miffed when they screw with how your investments are affected, but the money that is removed from peoples checks under a false premise, somehow that's leechf*&k **** and so screw those people they deserve what they get.

Great

Whenever you see taxes described as 'contributions', you know you're reading propaganda.

Just a rule of thumb.

Awesome ticker!

Entitlements...FICA....love that little match I have to make of my staffs contribution...and I pay thier health insurance...what really*****es me off are those government loafers sitting in office collecting paychecks counting the days to retirement....there are exceptions, but very few....

There is no match.

All taxes are paid by people.

The "match" is a fiction. The employee pays the whole thing. How come? Because they'd get it if you didn't remit it as an employer.

Genesis.

Thanks for the Ticker entries. I enjoy what you write. To be honest with you, I don't watch the videos (only watched one or two of them), but I appreciate the costs involved in offering them for viewing. I support your decision to monetize it. Otherwise, it's a losing proposition.

I think the forums are great. The fact that they are free and it offers a wide range of people to share information is great. If it turns out that it becomes elitist (as some comments have suggested), you will be the first to know it from the reduced traffic. The free market talks.

I will be sticking around.
Keep up the good work.

From the perspective of the actuarial curricula, Genesis is spot on WRT Social Security as a "tax" and not "insurance." Furthermore, actuarial students are taught fairly early on that SS and Medicare are "social programs" where the benefits have no correspondence whatsoever to the "premiums" collected.

It's all pay-as-you-go. There is no SS fund balance. There never has been, and never will be. "Premiums" go into the General Fund, benefits are paid from the General Fund. The whole program could disappear, or change dramatically tomorrow, and you have no recourse.

When the financial burden outweighs the social benefit, it will be torn apart -- but we've got a long ways to go before that happens. There are too many retired voters out there.

KD,

What do you mean by "they would get it if I didnt remit it?"