QUOTE: Originally posted by CSSHEGEWISCH SSI is not Social Security. They are funded separately and have quite different eligibility requirements. The confusion is caused by the fact that when SSI was established, the Congress decided that the Social Security Administration would administer it since SSA already had a nationwide administrative structure in place. The public also seems to have forgotten that Social Security was NEVER meant to be a sole means of support in retirement but as part of a plan that also included a pension from your employer plus personal savings.
QUOTE: Originally posted by CG9602 Not quite, John Lea. it also states that taxes haven't exceeded reimbursements since 1951. When RRB reimbursements exceed RRB taxes (like what is currently happening) money comes from SSI to RRB. That's why I placed emphasis on the bold print.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Sterling1 I used to live in a country (Singapore) where the social security was that the individual paid his/her own money into his/her own account, not a general pool. That money wasn't taxed before or after it was put in/taken out. The interest from the money put in could be taxed though. That money in each individual account could be used to pay for a home, car or anything within the law. When you died, upon your will (you could "pre will" it) to anyone that you wanted it to go i.e. family members, charities, etc. the government has no right to take your money even if you have no will; the money goes to your next of kin. If the government were to take that money as my mother puts it: there would be anarchy in the streets.
Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.