Removing the Fourteenth Amendment

[Balta1701]

LEGAL immigrants. Ones that actually pay into the system.

Actually a number of illegal immigrants pay into the system now, tot he tune of $7-$8 billion a year.

 

However, the key point there is...2k5's argument is that if we were to legalize current illegal immigrants through any fashion, Social Security costs would go up. The reality is...yes costs go up, but so do incomes, and the benefit of cutting the retirees/workers ratio winds up winning. Thanks in part to the Reagan amnesty and in part to the fact that crossing the border as a 65 year old and then working hard labor is pretty difficult...the current crop of illegal immigrants isn't exactly an elderly bunch.

[Jenksismyhero]

So because its not reality, we shouldnt strive to make it reality?

 

Why not start the process of moving towards a goal of eliminating illegal immigration?

 

You dont end illegal immigration by having bigger fences, or making it a felony, or whatever punishment you want to give it.

 

You end illegal immigration by making legal immigration so easy that it would be stupid to immigrate illegally.

 

Sure some people would still do it, but the vast majority would legally immigrate, which would be the first step to solving the problem.

 

Not everyone (including me) thinks American citizenship is just a worthless designation given to anyone that shows up to the border.

[Balta1701]

Not everyone (including me) thinks American citizenship is just a worthless designation given to anyone that shows up to the border.

You don't have to make people citizens immediately to set up a legal means to fill the demand for temporary and migrant workers. A decent number of people who come here for jobs would probably prefer to remain Mexican citizens if given the choice.

[southsider2k5]

You don't have to make people citizens immediately to set up a legal means to fill the demand for temporary and migrant workers. A decent number of people who come here for jobs would probably prefer to remain Mexican citizens if given the choice.

 

So no amnesty? I can't handle that.

[NorthSideSox72]

Actually a number of illegal immigrants pay into the system now, tot he tune of $7-$8 billion a year.

 

However, the key point there is...2k5's argument is that if we were to legalize current illegal immigrants through any fashion, Social Security costs would go up. The reality is...yes costs go up, but so do incomes, and the benefit of cutting the retirees/workers ratio winds up winning. Thanks in part to the Reagan amnesty and in part to the fact that crossing the border as a 65 year old and then working hard labor is pretty difficult...the current crop of illegal immigrants isn't exactly an elderly bunch.

And on this particular note, I agree with you - for those becoming legal, social security is not a concern to me.

 

[southsider2k5]

Actually a number of illegal immigrants pay into the system now, tot he tune of $7-$8 billion a year.

 

However, the key point there is...2k5's argument is that if we were to legalize current illegal immigrants through any fashion, Social Security costs would go up. The reality is...yes costs go up, but so do incomes, and the benefit of cutting the retirees/workers ratio winds up winning. Thanks in part to the Reagan amnesty and in part to the fact that crossing the border as a 65 year old and then working hard labor is pretty difficult...the current crop of illegal immigrants isn't exactly an elderly bunch.

 

Except that the lowest rungs aren't going to pay in enough to cover the costs for their benefits.

[NorthSideSox72]

Except that the lowest rungs aren't going to pay in enough to cover the costs for their benefits.

Im going to disagree with you here. As I understand it, SSI is paid in at a flat rate, up to an annual max (hovering somewhere around the 100k income mark, last I checked). Further, the benefit payout schedule is based on how much is paid in, so it slides on the same sort of scale. Therefore, this is really not an issue.

 

There are all sorts of other services that WILL have problems due to this - SS is not one of them.

 

[Balta1701]

So no amnesty? I can't handle that.

Well it depends...if you're going to adopt the idea that anything other than 100% expulsion by force = amnesty, then yes I'm in favor of an amnesty. Turn the population into a legal workforce with some measure of legal protection and give the offer of citizenship if they remain in good standing as taxpayers for x number of years and pay a fine (x approximately 10, give or take).

[Soxbadger]

Not everyone (including me) thinks American citizenship is just a worthless designation given to anyone that shows up to the border.

 

I think American citizenship is one of the most valuable things in the world.

 

Which is why I wont arbitrarily deny it to some one unless there is good cause.

 

Being poor is not good cause.

 

Just because you let people have it, doesnt mean you take away its value. In my opinion the more people we share citizenship, the greater the value it has.

[southsider2k5]

Im going to disagree with you here. As I understand it, SSI is paid in at a flat rate, up to an annual max (hovering somewhere around the 100k income mark, last I checked). Further, the benefit payout schedule is based on how much is paid in, so it slides on the same sort of scale. Therefore, this is really not an issue.

 

There are all sorts of other services that WILL have problems due to this - SS is not one of them.

 

But there is a minimum. For example, people who have mental illness and cant' take of themselves don't pay a dime in and draw a lifetime of benefits. There is a minimum benefit that gets paid no matter how much is paid in. If you grant amnesty, there are going to be people who will be eligible to draw SSI, who may never have paid in because of their status as an illegal.

[Balta1701]

But there is a minimum. For example, people who have mental illness and cant' take of themselves don't pay a dime in and draw a lifetime of benefits. There is a minimum benefit that gets paid no matter how much is paid in. If you grant amnesty, there are going to be people who will be eligible to draw SSI, who may never have paid in because of their status as an illegal.

But, as I noted...the increased number of workers paying into the system still wins in terms of OASDI's help, especially if you expect that there's a bias in the population of people who come here as workers towards people who are able to work.

[jasonxctf]

balta/northsidesox are 100% correct in this.

Edited August 14, 2010 by jasonxctf

[kapkomet]

balta/northsidesox are 100% correct in this.

 

 

 

Of course they are.

 

Just remember what you ask for, you just might get it... and what you people don't realize is this whole agenda is not what you think it is. But thanks for playing.

[Texsox]

But there is a minimum. For example, people who have mental illness and cant' take of themselves don't pay a dime in and draw a lifetime of benefits. There is a minimum benefit that gets paid no matter how much is paid in. If you grant amnesty, there are going to be people who will be eligible to draw SSI, who may never have paid in because of their status as an illegal.

 

Is there a proposal somewhere to change the vesting requirements for SS? As it is now, you have to have 40 quarters of contributions to qualify. The Social Security website http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/de...vbll6cHFyN2s%3D offered this

 

There is no minimum monthly Social Security benefit, although for administrative reasons, we will not pay a benefit of less than $1. However, to receive any amount of Social Security benefits, you must have the minimum amount of work credits. Everyone born in 1929 or later needs 40 credits to be eligible for retirement benefits. Therefore since you can earn four credits per year, you will need at least 10 years of work to become eligible for retirement benefits.

 

If your example is correct, wouldn't teachers, who never paid in, receive benefits? Clergy?This would mean a "stay at home mom" at the age of 65 work a year and receive benefits? Or a teacher could work 40 years paying into their retirement, retire, than work a few months or year and receive benefits? If that is true, it should be changed.

[Texsox]

Except that the lowest rungs aren't going to pay in enough to cover the costs for their benefits.

 

I can't find that at the SS site either. I did find this

 

Receiving the maximum benefit.

Updated 03/03/2010 11:33 AM | ID #501 I worked for the last 10 years and I now have my 40 credits. Does this mean that I get the maximum Social Security retirement benefit? Probably not. The 40 credits are the minimum number you need to qualify for a benefit. The amount of the benefit, however, is not based on those credits; it's based on your earnings. We determine your average earnings over your working years and use a special calculation formula that is set by law. For most people like you who need 40 credits, we must average their best 35 years of earnings to figure the benefit amount.

 

Here's how we average those earnings and how we use the formula to calculate your monthly payment.

[Texsox]

Oops, it seems that SS's post disappeared. In response to some illegals would not contribute enough to cover the minimum SS benefit.

 

Special Minimum Benefit Tables

To be eligible for a special minimum benefit, a person must have at least 11 years of coverage. A person acquires a year of coverage by having a certain minimum amount of earnings in the year.

 

This form allows you to select a year from 1973 to the present. The special minimum PIA table that became effective in the selected year will be provided. For example, if you select 2008, you will get the table that is effective for December 2008.

 

Before 1979, the special minimum PIA amounts did not increase when benefit increases occurred. Legislation provided the PIA amounts for January 1973, March 1974, and January 1979. Automatic benefit increases, or cost-of-living adjustments, first increased the PIAs beginning with June 1979. Due to no cost-of-living adjustment for 2009, the table effective for December 2008 is the latest effective table.

Special Minimum Benefit Tables

"Special minimum" benefits are payable to certain individuals with long periods of relatively low earnings. To qualify for such benefits, an individual must have at least 11 "years of coverage." To earn a year of coverage for purposes of the special minimum, a person must earn at least a certain proportion (25 percent for years before 1991, and 15 percent for years after 1990) of the "old-law" contribution and benefit base. Tables showing the range of special minimum primary insurance amounts and corresponding maximum family benefit amounts are available for 1973 and later.

11 years service and their minimum is $36.90 for an individual $56.10 for a family. 20 years it goes up to $380. available at http://www.ssa.gov/cgi-bin/smt.cgi

 

So if someone becomes legal, works a minimum wage job for 11 years, they will be guaranteed $36.90 per month. I can live with that.

 

 

[southsider2k5]

Ok. So now lets see manditory health care.

[Texsox]

Ok. So now lets see manditory health care.

 

Dropping the SS issue? One thing before we move on, we all need to remain vigilant that your real fears are not materialized. I doubt the Dems would be stupid enough to somehow try to pass a change to allow credit for SS service while being an illegal. Only those years worked under their own SS# should count. Nothing retroactive. Any change to that should be met with extreme resistance IMHO.

 

On to health care and if you don't mind, every other government program.

 

Again, someone has to work these jobs. Whomever is working the job is eligible to receive benefits. The job and income, not nationality or citizen status, determines the benefits and taxes paid. Those benefits, in the case of our lowest earning jobs, are greater than the taxes paid. A documented, US citizen, is most likely to understand and apply for those benefits. That is one reason we have illegals, the government prefers illegals from a taxes paid / benefit model.

 

Attempts to increase mandatory minimum wages are usually met with GOP resistance.

 

And this also highlights how dangerous the decline in political debate has become in this country. You are an intelligent person, but your understanding of the SoSec facts were as off as mine. We hear from political leaders and others that this or that will happen, but the reality is much different. It's all about emotion and reaction. My gut tells me it must be a Dem political invention.

[shipps]

Hi Tex.

 

 

[NorthSideSox72]

 

Of course they are.

 

Just remember what you ask for, you just might get it... and what you people don't realize is this whole agenda is not what you think it is. But thanks for playing.

Please, tell all of us peons what we apparently don't realize.

 

[Texsox]

Please, tell all of us peons what we apparently don't realize.

One agenda is:

 

MEXICANS are going to steal your Social Security unless you vote GOP

 

But I'm guessing Kap has a different one

[jasonxctf]

Ok. So now lets see manditory health care.

 

Generally, you are eligible for Medicare if you or your spouse worked for at least 10 years in Medicare-covered employment and you are 65 years or older and a citizen or permanent resident of the United States. If you aren’t yet 65, you might also qualify for coverage if you have a disability or with End-Stage Renal disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or transplant).

 

Here are some simple guidelines. You can get Part A at age 65 without having to pay premiums if:

 

-You already get retirement benefits from Social Security or the Railroad Retirement Board.

 

-You are eligible to get Social Security or Railroad benefits but haven't yet filed for them.

 

-You or your spouse had Medicare-covered government employment.

 

 

If you are under 65, you can get Part A without having to pay premiums if you have:

 

-Received Social Security or Railroad Retirement Board disability benefits for 24 months.

 

-End-Stage Renal Disease and meet certain requirements.

 

 

 

So it seems pretty basic to me. Everything is tied to Social Security. So by proving that illegals cant get social security, you also prove that they cant access Medicare.

 

Now, where the grey line comes in, is what to do with someone who walks into an emergency room with say, a broken leg, who is not a citizen and has no insurance. (or nationwide, what to do about this, regardless of citizenship). Should the doctors say, no insurance means no treatment. If you die, you die?

[jasonxctf]

Is there a proposal somewhere to change the vesting requirements for SS? As it is now, you have to have 40 quarters of contributions to qualify. The Social Security website http://ssa-custhelp.ssa.gov/app/answers/de...vbll6cHFyN2s%3D offered this

 

 

 

If your example is correct, wouldn't teachers, who never paid in, receive benefits? Clergy?This would mean a "stay at home mom" at the age of 65 work a year and receive benefits? Or a teacher could work 40 years paying into their retirement, retire, than work a few months or year and receive benefits? If that is true, it should be changed.

 

 

I can tell you, that reading my wife's annual social security newsletter/statement, she does not get a thing unless I die. (she's a teacher) She worked part-time in high school and college and has some credits but is probably 5 years short of working full-time in the corporate world, from getting the lowest level of benefits, on her own, that's possible.

[kapkomet]

That's what pensions are for, right? (serious question - teachers are highly pensioned)

[Rex Kickass]

That's what pensions are for, right? (serious question - teachers are highly pensioned)

 

Some, not all.