Home Page Hard Times Survival Hard Times Recipes Gourmet Recipes Healthy Recipes Gardening Tips Firearm Facts Economy Book Reviews
Wilderness Survival Christian Poems Bible & Prophecy Bible Truths Other Information Children Stories Product Links Search Website My Books

Your Social Security Account

 Copyright © October 1, 2021 by Robert Wayne Atkins, P.E.
All Rights Reserved.

Introduction

The Social Security System was created by the United States government in 1935.

The government began paying Social Security benefits to retired people in January of 1937.

Every payday 15.3 percent of your total gross wages is paid into your Social Security account.
  1. If you are self-employed then you pay the entire 15.3% into your Social Security account.
  2. If you work for someone else, then you pay 7.65% and your employer pays 7.65% into your Social Security account for a total of 15.3%.
15.3% of a person's gross wages is a lot of money. If you were able to invest this much money every year into a private retirement account, then when you retired you would be able to enjoy a significantly higher standard of living when compared to how you were living while you were still working and paying Social Security.

The money that you pay into your Social Security account is theoretically kept by the government of the United States for your future retirement and for your future medical expenses.

Unfortunately, since 1937 the U.S. government has been spending the money that was paid into Social Security each year in two ways:
  1. Payments to retired people.
  2. Anything else the government wanted to spend the money on.
If the managers of any other retirement organization did what the government of the U.S.A. did with your retirement money, then those managers would spend the rest of their lives in a Federal prison without any chance of a parole.

As long as there was more money being paid into Social Security each year than the amount of money that was being paid out to retired people each year, then there was money left over each year to spend on anything the government wanted to spend it on. However, this surplus is quickly coming to an end. In other words, the amount of money being paid into Social Security each year will soon be less than the amount of money the U.S. government has promised to pay to its retired people each year. When this happens then one of three things could happen.
  1. The government will reduce the amount of the monthly retirement checks that it pays to its retired people.
  2. The government will increase the Social Security tax rate on the people who are still working and who are not retired.
  3. The government will do both of the above.
If the government reduces the monthly Social Security check of a retired person and the person is not able to pay all their living expenses then:
  1. The person will slowly starve to death or freeze to death while trying to survive inside their tiny rented room or apartment.
  2. The person will become part of the homeless population and they will die because their bodies are too old to survive in this type of environment.
  3. The person will become a financial burden on their children or their close relatives. If this happens then the quality of life for everyone in the affected family group will decrease.
The government knows that if any of the above scenarios happens on a large scale then it will mean the political death of the political party that is currently in power. This assumes that the election process in the United States of America is honest and that the political party that is currently in power does not "stuff the ballot boxes" or "miscount the votes."

Discussion

In addition to Social Security, there are also a lot of people in the USA who are receiving welfare benefits of some type. This is also contributing to the financial problems of the government of the USA.

These financial problems are not unique to the USA. Socialist governments all over the world are having problems providing free benefits to their citizens. In other words, all the governments around the world are currently having serious financial problems and they cannot continue to pay out more money than they receive in tax revenues.

Some possible solutions might be:
  1. A person or a company could file for bankruptcy and the person or company may be able to survive if they have enough income to cover all their necessary expenses. But bankruptcy is not an option for the federal government.
  2. Hyperinflation could be a short-term solution. But it will result in the death of most of the citizens of the nation in the medium-term, and it would result in the collapse of the government in the long-run.
  3. Restructuring government expenditures and eliminating bureaucractic wastes can provide for a lot of interesting intellectual discussions but it is not a feasible option. The reason is because it would require the amputation of some of the unnecessary functions of the government and everyone in government believes that their job is absolutely necessary regardless of what they do. Therefore this solution could be discussed for years and years and years but it will never be successfully implemented.
  4. Balance the budget by reducing the total number of people who are receiving social security and welfare payments, but increase or stabilize the number of people who are working and who are paying taxes.
From a purely political perspective, the last option above may salvage the existing governments of the world if it can be achieved in a subtle manner without creating too much negative publicity for the various governments. Fortunately the government of most countries either control or significantly influence the media so they can probably do anything they wish without their citizens knowing about it except on a very small scale based on what actually happens to their family members and friends.

If it is possible, the new plan to "balance the budget" would need to systematically reduce the total number of people in all the following groups:
  1. Old people in assisted-care medical facilities who require constant care to remain alive.
  2. Old people who are receiving Social Security benefits and who have naturally weak immune systems due to advancing age but who are still able to take care of themselves.
  3. Younger people with chronic medical problems whose contribution to society is less than the cost to support them.
  4. People who are currently receiving welfare benefits.
If all the governments of the world could agree to implement a plan that would eliminate a huge number of the people in the above four groups worldwide, then the "day-of-reckoning" for those governments could be delayed a little longer as they continue to increase the size of their governments and become deeper and deeper in debt.

Since the new plan to "balance the budget" is based on the actual physical death of people in all four of the above groups, the plan would be more successful if the government could figure out some way to strategically reduce the total number of medical professionals nationwide.

However, if the die-off exceeds expectations, then the government should have some people on stand-by who are currently surviving on welfare benefits. These people should be physically able to do some of the necessary jobs of the people who were eliminated if they were given a little training. These people should also be content to earn whatever the government offers to pay them. And these people should be in some type of situation where they cannot complain to the government about anything. If these people actually exist then this plan would take these people off welfare and convert them into tax-payers. For this plan to be an ideal solution, these people should not have the legal right to vote and, if possible, they should also have a longer life expectancy than the people they replaced because they were not forced to obey the same health mandates as the people they replaced. (Note: Most of the medical professionals would not be replaced because this would reduce the die-off rate and this would be in conflict with the new plan.)

The plan would have a much higher chance of being successful if the government systematically targeted one group or sub-group of people at a time. This would allow them to get one group of people completely out of the way before they began attacking the next group or sub-group of people. For example, it would make good sense to eliminate as many people as possible in the first group above (old people who need daily care to remain alive) before moving on to the next group.

Conclusion

If you are still reading this article then you are probably a person with above average intelligence.

If you give the above matter a little thought, then perhaps you could come up with some suggestions on how the governments of the world could successfully implement the above new plan to "balance their budgets" by significantly reducing the number of people who receive retirement benefits and the number of people who receive "welfare benefits."

May God Bless.
Grandpappy.

Grandpappy's e-mail address is: RobertWayneAtkins@hotmail.com

Home Page Other Articles