Leave Social Security alone

Why isn’t anyone saying that the “payroll tax” which would be reduced as an immediate stimulus to the economy by the proposed American Jobs Act is actually the Social Security tax, which pays for Social Security benefits? Decreasing those contributions means there is less money from which to pay benefits.

Whenever Congress threatens to lower Social Security payments for senior citizens, we are urged to call our congressmen and tell them to “leave Social Security alone.” For decades we have heard that the Social Security system is “going broke” and our benefits would have to be cut as a result.

The Social Security system, from its beginning, has been based on equal contributions by employers and employees, most recently at 6.2 percent of wages. Wouldn’t it be logical to assume that if contributions were less each month, the Social Security system would go bankrupt more quickly?

The "one-year adjustment” for employees' contributions to FICA since January 2011 reduced payroll deductions from 6.2 percent to 4.2 percent, and provisions in the Jobs Act would reduce them to 3.1 percent without indicating how long this reduction would last.

In addition, the Jobs Act proposes to "stimulate the economy" by reducing or eliminating the employers' 6.2 percent contribution for "small businesses that hire new workers and expand operations."

How can the public continue to receive Social Security benefits if contributions continue to decline at such a rapid rate?

Is it time to tell our congressmen to leave Social Security taxes alone?

Frances Lodge, Minot

What do you think of this story?

Login to post comments

In order to make comments, you must create a subscription.

In order to comment on SunJournal.com, you must hold a valid subscription allowing access to this website. You must use your real name and include the town in which you live in your SunJournal.com profile. To subscribe or link your existing subscription click here.

Login or create an account here.

Our policy prohibits comments that are:

  • Defamatory, abusive, obscene, racist, or otherwise hateful
  • Excessively foul and/or vulgar
  • Inappropriately sexual
  • Baseless personal attacks or otherwise threatening
  • Contain illegal material, or material that infringes on the rights of others
  • Commercial postings attempting to sell a product/item
If you violate this policy, your comment will be removed and your account may be banned from posting comments.



Steve  Dosh's picture

Leave Social Security alone

. . 11.11.11
Yes ?
A : It is time to tell our congress men and women to leave it alone
Good letter
/s., Dr. Dosh , Hawai'i , u s a

Frank Lambert's picture

Leave Social Security alone

Social Security was not meant to be the only retirement pay an individual gets when retirement comes. People need to understand that and plan accordingly. Roth IRA’s, TSP’s, and other savings plans were meant to help in the retirement process. The Social Security Program needs to be fixed and should be done now. I know I am sick and tired of people whining and not wanting to fix the problem. If it is not fixed now there will not be a program in the future. I am planning for that occurrence and you should too. I do not make all that much money but I do know that you have to plan for retirement or suffer in the end.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Social Security also was not

Social Security also was not intended to be a welfare fund for drunks, drug addicts, slackers and fakers. I'm referring to the Supplemental Security Income program which also is, in great part, responsible for Social Security's demise.

George Fogg's picture

Do the math!

If one takes the amounts that SS takes from your pay and the amount that your employer has to kick in as well and if you do a compound interest tabulation for the years that you have worked you will find that you could now be getting nearly twice as much retirement money as the government is giving you. SS is a huge Ponzi scheme that has been foisted on the stupid public and we have been bought off cheaply. Wake the heck up and stop putting these scoundrels back in office term after term. An honest politician would have stopped this fleecing of the working people any time in the last 60-70 years it has been in effect.

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

The term 'honest politician'

The term 'honest politician' is an oxymoron.

Glen Lee's picture

Social Security

Have you ever really wander just how much monies are there for SS? Sometime awhile back I contacted our representatives about SS. I encouraged then to roll back SS to5% with no caps and to place SS in away that congress could no longer touch. I personally believe we are living month to month for recieving our cks. I personally do not believe that there no 1 month 5 years 10 years etc funds there. I believe its gone and hoping that revenues will be there to pay out.
Our so elected officals are not looking to to solve this problems. People we have another opprotunity to elect someone who will this coming yesr.Both Parties have ruined our SS. Apparently not really looking out for the citizens of this country.
PS sounds like someone else has read this OBamas Jobs bill, hes done a good job of not giving raises to the elderly but he has allow million to be lost Fannie and Freddie solyandra Beacon times what more could a good liberal want.

GARY SAVARD's picture

One of the problems with

One of the problems with social security is that when it was first started, life expectancy was about five years beyond retirement at age 62. Now many people live into their 80's and beyond, and their medical costs over the extended term coupled with the monthly SS checks are a fraction of what they paid into the system during their working years. This has been the case for years now, and until DC politicians have the nerve to face it head on, it will eventually blow up. To put this problem on the backs of younger workers struggling to raise families, though, isn't fair because today's retirees actually paid less in SS as a percent of their paychecks for many of their working years than do present day workers.

Jason Theriault's picture

Not only did the younger generation pay less....

But our forefathers saw fit to allow the politicians to spend their Social Security savings. Now, I can understand that with the Soviet threat might make that a lot less of a issue, but the fact of the matter is you let them get away with it. And to then shirk your role is Social Security insolvency is aggravating. I don't want retirees to end up living in poverty eating cat food, but I also don't want my generation and my kid's generation to bear previous generations bad decisions.

Joe Morin's picture

Such a hot button topic

SS is such a hot button topic. There needs to be reform but true insolvency doesn't happen for quite sometime... If I were a politician and were Republican I would push for reform that would be institued to affect 40 years old & younger but the Dems would accuse me of murdering the elderly and the sad part is half of them would believe it. The folks that are most affected by SS also seem to be the ones most confused and uninformed on what it is, how it works... and what a long term detriment it will become to our society if we can't atleast talk about it...

PAUL ST JEAN's picture

Frances, you have a clear

Frances, you have a clear understanding of what the politicians, oBAMa in particular, have been doing to Social Security. Good letter.

Wilma Turcotte's picture

Social Security

Leaving Social Security alone should have been done a long time ago and the mess they made has gone through both Republicans and Democrats without fixing it. SS should be meant for those that did work and pay into it and if you didn't pay in you don't get anything back period. When SS was put into a "general fund" it was available for their hairbrain ideas in Wash. to support their porkbarrel with things that might help their constituents and the rest have to pay for it. Now we are supporting those that aren't even from here not to mention those getting it that don't work, never worked or intend to work. Yes I know the economy is bad but there were jobs when I got mine and there were still people getting a free ride. You can't keep putting a bandaid on it. It has to go back to you don't get any if you didn't pay into it. The only reason they plan on giving us a raise in 2012 cause they already plan to take most of it for Medicare and again you got those that never paid to Medicare either that are using it. We have to stop trying to defend or support the whole world while some of our own(especially eldely are going without medicines or fuel to heat their homes. Funny how Congress has to check each area to see if the cost of living has gone up there but their cola's continue every year regardless of the economy. To all candidates if you are running for re-election don't call me cause your not getting my vote. Time for new blood from someone thats been out here in the real world.


Many people have said it ...

... but very few have listened. Why? Because the reduction was proposed by Democrats. If Republicans had pushed through the exact same thing, there would be 24/7 media "reporting" about the mean right kicking granny out in the snow.

Beyond that, we think we can have our benefits while someone else pays for them, and our pandering politicians on both sides encourage that delusion. Welcome to Greece.


Stay informed — Get the news delivered for free in your inbox.

I'm interested in ...