or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Anyone NOT gettting a Social Security Number for their children?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Anyone NOT gettting a Social Security Number for their children? - Page 8

post #141 of 205
Hey, I'm about as anti-government as you can get.. but an ssn is one thing i agree with.
post #142 of 205
Bailey228, you also pay into WIC and welfare, plus medicare/medicaid. Do you think these should be funded by private donation?
post #143 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by bailey228
Velochic, I am very sorry that your mother only lives off of her paltry SS check. Her life choices made it that way. No one is to blame here other than your mother. She CHOSE not to save for her future. So please tell me, how is it MY responsibility to pay for your mother's mistakes?
Ummm.... no, I believe that in the 50 years that my mother worked to feed us she paid her own social security. You must be quite full of yourself to think that YOU personally are paying for my mother to eat in her last years on this earth.

And who, exactly are you to make such judgements, pray tell? Explain to me how she could save for her retirement when she has never even had health insurance. Life choices.... my mother is smart but nothing ever came her way to make a choice.
post #144 of 205
I am back in the US these last 5 or 6 years for the primary purpose of caring for my elderly Mom. To do this well, I have needed to buy into the whole system, lock, stock, and barrel. I hate the sacrifices this is costing my kids. I have had to give up homeschooling, work away from my kids all day, and force them into a system I don't agree with. Sorry to be blunt, but when she dies, we're outta here. She knows this, and is helping us plan and prepare for our next home - perhaps Peru.

I don't mean it to sound like I think I am a martyr - I love every day I have with my Mom, and I know I have made the right decision. But my Mom gets Social Security and VA benefits and still could not possibly live on that income. She did it all by the plan of the Great American Dream - worked all her life, lived reasonably frugally, tried to save. And, frankly, it just doesn't work.

I don't have more freedom here than I had in other countries I have lived in - in fact quite the opposite. My Dumplings and I are forced into a whole lifestyle I never planned. I have less privacy than I had in a tiny gossipy village in Mexico. There, if I paid my rent no one asked where my money came from. Here, to rent this apartment, I have to document income, provide references, act in certain ways, park in the right space, and on and on. For medical care here, insurance is essential because the prices are outrageous. In some other places I have lived, I could afford to simply go to a dentist if I had a toothache. Maybe $20 to have a cavity filled. I know that was beyond the reach of most of my neighbors, but it worked for me well enough that I could (and did) pay for my neighbor to get work on her teeth as well.

I don't mean to be ranting against America. It is a system that works for some people, not so well for others. But I am looking forward to checking out of this whole program when I can. The deeper I get entrenched in this system, the more complicated it will be to get out.
post #145 of 205
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Belle
Bailey228, you also pay into WIC and welfare, plus medicare/medicaid. Do you think these should be funded by private donation?
I can't answer for Bailey228, but I certainly do think that those programs should be funder by private charities, rather than garnishing the wages of those citizens who don't care to donate.
I would continue to donate what I can to charity, even if it wasn't stolen from my paychecks... in fact, I would have more money available for charities if I wasn't forced to give up a portion of my income to government 'programs' I may not wish to support.
post #146 of 205
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Belle
Well, since this topic has been bumped:



This is seriously one of the most insular comments I've seen on MDC. I'm not sure you understood how that would read to someone outside the US when you wrote it. It's fine to be a flag waver, but seriously, have you ever read the constitution? Are you aware that the US Constitution is a set of rights given to the government by the people and not a set of freedoms people are allowed to have by the government?

And please don't compare the US to the rest of the world with smug superiority. The violation of civil liberties that takes places routinely every day in the US is nauseating. You have very little right to privacy any more, and your right to due process is seriously being eroded. I've lived in the UK and Ireland for a decade, and let me tell you, I've been way more free in both countries than I ever was in the US.
Thanks so much for making this point. So many people seem to forget that our rights are not GIVEN to us by the government. The government cannot take them away without going contrary to the spirit of our Constitution and even the Declaration of Independence. That's the big difference, what makes our country special (or used to, at least).
post #147 of 205
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama
Bailey228, this is an outrageous statement. You know nothing about Velochic's mother's situation. Has it ever ocurred to you that there are people who literally cannot afford to save money for their retirement? That there are people whose entire income go to rent, food and keeping their kids clothed? That there are people who are alone in old age, with no relatives to take them in?

Exactly how do you propose that such elderly people survive? Your arrogance is breathtaking.
Again, I won't try to speak for anyone else, but I can tell you that the point here, as I see it, is not that people who have hard luck should not be given help.... The point is, that help they receive should be from family, friends, and people who WILLING wish to help. At the risk of repeating myself from a previous post, it is THEFT to forceably take from others what you need, regardless of how much you need it. (And yes, it is forceable theft- that's why the IRS guys come with guns when you don't 'willingly' pay taxes.)

I agree that there are many, many people who have bad luck, or are victims of circumstance... and I think it is a very, very wonderful thing to help those you wish to help. I consider myself a very generous person, and I help people when I can all the time. BUT, that has to be a personal choice made WILLINGLY in order for there to to be any virtue in it.
post #148 of 205
I really never expected to find the "if yeeou don't likes this countree, well then getcha outta here thens" arguement on MDC. Maybe I am naive. I agree with much of what CaorlynRosa has said in her posts, and frankly, I thought many replies were really snarky toward her opinions on ssn's.

There are people out there convicted of raping children who spend less time in jail than people who evade taxes. This government is very powerful, very corrupt, and very ugly.

Regardless of that, I am still a citizen of this country and the constitution still affords me the right (somewhat) to speak my mind about my opinion of the state of this country. What suprises me though, is finding so many people (on here) who are so terrified of doing something that the government says they shouldn't or vice versa, and will openly insult and condemn someone who goes against the grain a bit (I am speaking of some of the sentiments against the OP).
post #149 of 205
Wow, I'm just really flabbergasted. I thought MDC was the last place I'd see people arguing against social welfare systems to support people living in poverty.

I can't even compose a reply because that's just so far outside my own thinking. I understand the POV, but I just can't get my head into that way of thinking.
post #150 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolynrosa
the point here, as I see it, is not that people who have hard luck should not be given help.... The point is, that help they receive should be from family, friends, and people who WILLING wish to help..
And if they have no family? Or if no one is "willing"? What happens then?

Surely you know that there are plenty of people in this world that no one is willing to help.
post #151 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Belle
Wow, I'm just really flabbergasted. I thought MDC was the last place I'd see people arguing against social welfare systems to support people living in poverty.

I can't even compose a reply because that's just so far outside my own thinking. I understand the POV, but I just can't get my head into that way of thinking.

:

I'm disappointed too To me, this attitude smacks of someone who's had a pretty good life with lots of good fortune (good fortune not meaning $$, but opportunity, love and security) It's sad, but I think there is a lot of bias that comes with a fortunate life ~ you overemphasize your own role in where you've gotten to, underemphasize the role that luck plays, and perceive that those with less fortune somehow worked less or deserve it less.
post #152 of 205
Um, just to clarify , I'm NOT referring to the attitude of Hells_Belle, but rather the attitude of those who feel that people living in poverty should have somehow prepared for their future themselves or looked to family members.
post #153 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Belle
Wow, I'm just really flabbergasted. I thought MDC was the last place I'd see people arguing against social welfare systems to support people living in poverty.
I'm not surprised at all. That attitude is a very Libertarian one, and there are lots of Libertarian types here. It's not an attitude I agree with, but it doesn't surprise me at all.

Namaste!
post #154 of 205
i have only made it to page 3, but has anyone checked the archives? i know we've discussed this here, but can't remember if it was pre- or post- crash.

ps carolyn, i get what you are saying, but i choose to fight the ss system without throwing up too many other obstacles in my path. it is easier to concentrate on being an activist while being a parent (for me) from the inside. if you choose the long road of civil disobedience more power to you, but i just wanted to point out that even if one doesn't opt out there are ways to still fight.

(good luck though, it's always fun to be treated as someone who wants old people to be exposed on a mountain because i acknowledge that ponzi scheme for what it is & want it privatized.)

susan
post #155 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hells_Belle
Wow, I'm just really flabbergasted. I thought MDC was the last place I'd see people arguing against social welfare systems to support people living in poverty.

I can't even compose a reply because that's just so far outside my own thinking. I understand the POV, but I just can't get my head into that way of thinking.

Me too. With so many injustices fueled by our tax dollars, people are arguing that ss dollars/welfare shouldn't be offered???!!! I am flabbergasted. Sad.
post #156 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by dharmamama
I'm not surprised at all. That attitude is a very Libertarian one, and there are lots of Libertarian types here. It's not an attitude I agree with, but it doesn't surprise me at all.

Namaste!
Yeah, I thought about that aspect, since it is pretty clear that's where the ideaology of some of this is coming from. In practice, it looks like economic Darwinism in tie dye to me. There's no way I can get on board with that.
post #157 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by laralou
people are arguing that ss dollars/welfare shouldn't be offered???!!!

'offered'? ss is not supposed to be the government's noblesse oblige; it is supposed to be the return of investments that were paid into it. no more, no less. it is not their/your money to 'offer'. you are attempting to turn the argument that money (forcibly & ostensibly) 'invested' for people's retirement ought to be given back to them, into 'you want old people to die!' there is a logical fallacy in there somewhere...

it has little or nothing to do with welfare (or should.). one argument at a time, por favor.

privatizing ss makes pols nervous, not because they are worried about old people, but because they would have to stop 'borrowing' from a corrupt system. (if you consider the monies are being borrowed to finance things like our nasty little war, does it click yet?)

is disparaging & mischaracterizing the political beliefs of a minority consistant with the UA? ad hominem arguments ('well, she's a libertarian- you know how THEY are') seem to be permissible, if you pick your target well. i wouldn't say rude things about democrats or republicans in general here, knowing & respecting many irl even if we disagree about a particular issue. i request the same respect.

susan
post #158 of 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by suseyblue
('well, she's a libertarian- you know how THEY are')
Since I am the only one who has used the word Libertarian, I'm wondering if this is directed at me. I never said anything disparaging about Libertarians. It's a set of political beliefs to which I don't subscribe, but all I said is that I am not surprised to hear a Libertarian view expressed on MDC.

Namaste!
post #159 of 205
I agree susey...people like to put people into little boxes where they define who they are with only little information about what they truly believe. I am neither republican, democrat, libertarian, etc... I am an AMERICAN, and as an American, I can subscribe to whatever belief system I choose, even if it doesn't fit into someone's pre-defined label of who I should be based on the things I believe.

I think the issue (well from where I stand anyway) is not that people mind paying taxes so much, it is that they have absolutely no control over where those taxes go. It is a modern "taxation without representation" situation, where people are paying taxes that fund things they are adamantly against -- all the while, the government restricts their rights as citizens, doesn't help them when they are in trouble (Katrina anyone?) and forces them to fund illegal wars in countries they don't belong in among many other things.
post #160 of 205
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zinemama
And if they have no family? Or if no one is "willing"? What happens then?

Surely you know that there are plenty of people in this world that no one is willing to help.
So, if you 'need' food, and your neighbor in not 'willing' to share with you, am I to suppose you think you have a 'right' to that food? Would you break into her home with a gun and take it, because you 'need' it?
Or are you saying that is different? Because when the government acts on your behalf and takes some of this person's income by force, that is the same thing, theft. And yes, it is you who who are initiating force, by asking the government to steal for you.

-and another thing-

People here seem to think I must be a rather negative person or something, like I'm against charity somehow or something. But what's really sad, is all of you who seem to believe that if people were not forced to 'help' through threats of violence and jail, that no one would help. That's a really sad veiw of the world.
And yes, look at Katrina. Who got in there and gave and helped the most, and with the least bureaucratic bullshit? Was it FEMA (who deliberately turned away people bringing food and water, and cut the local police communications lines so that they could have power over everything and everyone) or was is the generous average citizen, who helped not under threat, but out of compassion?
When I took in 12 people from the storm (and their many, many pets), I did not do that because it was my obligation or duty. I did that because they needed help and I WANTED to help. We were donated an extra apartment in town (free of rent) from a local man to 'wanted' to help. We were given meals from neighbors who 'wanted' to help. THAT is charity, and THAT is VIRTUOUS. I would not have accepted that help if there had been a metaphorical gun to their skulls.

It is in people's nature to help. It benifits us all to help one another when we can. (it the game of non-zero sumness) To assume that without the threat of violence, we would all sit around waiting for everyone else to die out is contrary to evolution. Yes, there is the theory of survival of the fittest, but you have to also take into account that we all have a biological drive to continue the species. If we did not help each other willingly, as we always have in the past, our species would have already died out.

Anyway. I realise that many people get very emotional when it comes to getting assistance for those who need it. But that is not an excuse for blurring the distinctions of 'right and wrong' to suit your needs. If you believe that is it ever okay to take something that does not belong to you, then please don't claim to be morally superior to those of us who don't.

-edited to add-
Yes, I have changed topics a bit. I am arguing about welfare programs. (Just for clarification to those who like to differentiate between the social security scheme and the welfare programs.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Anyone NOT gettting a Social Security Number for their children?