Sorry but how do I opt out of social security?

Depends on one’s choice of career and the strength of the associated union.

For example, teachers (my career) are exempt from SS taxes because the state and national unions have negotiated some fairly lucrative retirement plans for their dues paying members; of course we pay retirement taxes relatively equal to those levied by SS, depending on state regulations, and have little say about how our dues are used to support political parties, messages and campaigns.

There are other professions with similar retirement structures and plans that also are exempt from SS taxes.

On August 29th, 2009 at 10:21 pm, chapoutier said:

Do you have any idea what you are talking about fulldroolcup? In your rush to try to contradict me, you contradicted yourself in that post more times than I can count.

Be careful my friends. Chap is laying a trap. He is trying to make the logically false conclusion that, since you are for Social Security and Medicare, which are socialist programs, you cannot reject Obamacare on the merits that it is a socialist program. That would make you a hypocrite.

This form of debate is specious. It creates a false equality with an item unrelated to the subject being discussed. It is best avoided by stating. “We are not discussing (insert program name here), and it is not germane to the conversation.”

But, if you must argue it, here are some details that may help your case:

1) I will agree with you that Social Security is an enacted socialist program. Since you bought it up, it was envisioned that we would be able to fund Social Security by a constant influx of funds that would always be more than the expenditures. Yet, a Democratically controlled Congress, under a Democrat president, voted to raid any surplus this fund may have had to pay for other “projects”. How will we prevent future elected officials from raiding health care funds, and thereby burdening us with ever increasing tax bills?

2) I will agree with you that Medicare is an enacted socialist program. Since you bought it up, when Medicare and Medicaid were enacted in to law, there was a CBO report that estimated how much the program would cost over a decade. At the end of the decade, actual costs were nearly 10 times greater that predicted. Today, the US National Debt Clock estimates that the unfunded liabilities for Medicare Medicaid, which covers approximately 30% of the current US population, is $39 Trillion dollars. Using those numbers, and giving factor for very expensive care generally not covered by a general “health insurance” plan, that places the actual cost for Socialized medicine in the US at an unfunded liability of $150 Trillion. This is well over the current estimates of $2.4 Trillion per year, or the estimate of @$10 Trillion in ten years. It also clearly flies in the assertion by Congressional Democrats that the program will pay for itself. While I understand that we expect the shift of current insurance funds to cover this, how do we realistically expect that either taxes will not raise, unemployment will not rise when employees cost employers too much, or that there will not be rationed care as we see in Canada, Cuba, The UK, and other nations (or some greater combination of the three)?

3) An independent study by the Kaiser Foundation found that, in 2004, Medicare and Medicaid expenditures per patient were, by average, $1700 more than that by insurance companies. How is it that we will expect that a government run entity will be cheaper than a privately run one?

4) If my insurance company makes a mistake, and refuses me for coverage or treatment, I can sue and seek remedy in court. If my provider makes a mistake in care or course of treatment, I can sue to the point of ad nauseum, which is why we ask for tort reform. (Remember, John Edwards made his millions by basically running Obstetricians out of practice in the South) If my government makes a mistake, such as the VA did giving patients Hepatitis, I am generally forced to accept the response they give, as suing is not an option. What will be my remedy if the appointed 29 persons on the Commission (who may or may not be providers, as they are Political appointees; and may or may not be of the specialty that can best speak to the treatment and it’s usefulness) determines that people of my age, gender, and race/ethnicity shall receive a pain pill in lieu of a joint replacement? (Yes, race/ethnicity does play a strong role in determining efficacy of treatment. Can you imagine the uproar when middle-aged males of African descent are denied angioplasty, as they have very high rates of post-treatment death due to continued issues with coronary artery disease?)

5) Today, if my insurance company does not cover my treatment, I can seek the treatment by other means, and with the doctors I choose. A recently deceased member of the Senate sought this option, which quite prolonged his life. The current Obamacare plan has wording that would prevent a hospital and/or a practitioner from considering such an option, under penalty of law. In fact, current Medicare law prohibits a provider from providing reduced rate and pro-bono work within the same location, or under the same business name, as where the Federally funded treatments occur. What remedy would an individual have if, while the patient and provider agree that the treatment option is the best course for the disease, the socialized care system rejects the treatment?

Not only that, but chapoutier conveniently leaves out the fact that the government TAKES YOUR MONEY, purportedly to plan for your retirement.

Uhhh…I didn’t leave out a thing there, Cochise. I merely provided a quote.

Unless you work under the table you’ll always have that $$ TAKEN from you.

Ya don’t say? I never knew that!

Ditto the Medicare taxes TAKEN from your paycheck.

See comment above. What point exactly are you trying to make? Or better question is: what point did your clouded little mind think I was trying to make?

When you reach a certain age under both systems, you can start GETTING BACK the $$ TAKEN from you and PUT INTO the SS system, and you become eligible for Medicare that you’ve been PAYING FOR your whole working life.

So as long as you get back something from a program, it’s okay in your book? If under “Obamacare”, you were allowed to see a doctor, not of your choosing, twice a year that would be okay? I mean after all, you are putting something in and getting something out, right?

So it’s not a matter of people not wanting socialism if it’s Obamacare, but wanting to keep it for SS and medicare.

Please tell me what, if anything this has to do with the quote I cited.

Chapoutier also ignores the fact that….

Again, hotshot, I did not ignore anything. I merely provided a quote by someone who obviously does not have a very good grasp on either the definition of socialism or social security.

Try to back your chubby, cheetoo-covered fingers away from the keyboard and take a couple deep breaths before you type. We will all be the better for it.

Sorry but how do I opt out of social security?

ECS

On August 28th, 2009 at 6:11 pm, happyscrapper said:

This is off topic, but I just have to say it…Some moonbat today said that the rain in Boston is God crying because of the death of Ted Kennedy. No.He.isn’t. He is spitting.

Right now it’s pouring; perhaps God is washing his creation clean of all the muck.

“SS is selective in its qualifications for participants and careers, and there is an opt out facet to it. Socialism is mandated and there are no choices.”

Not only that, but chapoutier conveniently leaves out the fact that the government TAKES YOUR MONEY, purportedly to plan for your retirement.

Unless you work under the table you’ll always have that $$ TAKEN from you.

Ditto the Medicare taxes TAKEN from your paycheck.

When you reach a certain age under both systems, you can start GETTING BACK the $$ TAKEN from you and PUT INTO the SS system, and you become eligible for Medicare that you’ve been PAYING FOR your whole working life.

So it’s not a matter of people not wanting socialism if it’s Obamacare, but wanting to keep it for SS and medicare.

Chapoutier also ignores the fact that BOTH SS and Medicare have unfunded liabilities of as much as 50 TRILLION dollars. So both programs have been utterly mismanaged by the same government that claims it will cut costs and run a deficit-neutral Obamacare program.

IOW chap is peeing down our legs and telling us it’s “really” raining.

Heh

It’s not the same thing, even though you seem to be suggesting it. Not everyone who wants SS is currently eligible or accepted to the program.

SS is selective in its qualifications for participants and careers, and there is an opt out facet to it. Socialism is mandated and there are no choices.