This should outrage us all

[ccvirgo911]

Got this in an e-mail,haven't seen it anywhere, and if I'm breaking any rules, please let me know:
Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during election years. Our Senators and Congressmen/Women do not pay into Social Security and, of course, they do not collect from it. You see, Social Security benefits were not suitable for persons of their rare elevation in society. They felt they should have a special plan for themselves. So, many years ago they voted in their own benefit plan. In more recent years, no Congressperson has felt the need to change it.
After all, it is a great plan.
For all practical purposes their plan works like this:
When they retire, they continue to draw the same pay until they die. Except it may increase from time to time for cost of living adjustments.
For example, former Senator Byrd and Congressman White and their wives may expect to draw $7,8000,000 with their wives drawing $275,000 during the last years of thier lives. This is calculated on an average lie span for each of those Dignitaries. Younger Dignitaries who retire at an early age will receive much more during the rest of thier lives.
Thier cost for this excellent plan is $0.00. Nada....ZILCH...
This little perk they voted for themselves is free to them. You are picking up the tab for this plan. The funds for this fine retirement plan comes directly from the General Funds; our tax dollars at work. From our own Social Security Plan, which you and I pay (or have paid) into, every payday until we retire-we can expect to get an average of $1,000.00 per month after retirement. Or, in other words, we would have to collect our average of $1,000.00 monthly for 68 years and 1 month to equal Senator Bill Bradley's benefits!
Social Security could be very good if only one small change were made. That change would be to jerk the Golden Fleece Retirement Plan from under the Senators and Congressmen. Put them into the Social Security plan with the rest of us...then sit back and watch how fast they would fix it. If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe good changes will evolve.
And let's not forget those Senators who recently voted against giving our troops (regular and reserved) a one-time $1,500.00 bonus for their efforts in the Persian Gulf.

[theivoryqueen]

1. arrggghhh

It is mind boggling that more citizens don't demand at least equal treatment from their elected officials - and hold them accountable for lapses. But conversations with the general public have convinced me that most Americans don't know squat about their government, it's policies and preferential treatment loopholes.

[Sinistrous]

2. I believe you are confusing retirement benefits with Social Security.

They are in no way the same and are computed using entirely different criteria.

As a rule, well paying jobs have well paying retirement benefits. That's a fact of life, and hardly grounds for getting upset.

[Wickerman]

3. Do you read what you post?

Complaints directed against Byrd and Bradley? Those are Dems. What about Helms? Graham, etc.? Yeah, the plan is as described here is a travesty, but please don't do the job of the Freepers for them by posting stuff that is real old and obviously targeting Democrats.

edit - Snopes alert see below

[phaseolus]

4. Not true. Always check Snopes when you get things like this...

Full article at http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/pensions.htm , with more info on congressional pensions at http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly68.htm .

I don't think you broke any rules, but ALWAYS check snopes.com's "Inboxer Rebellion" when suspicious emails arrive.

on edit - corrected malformed URL

[ccvirgo911]

7. Thank you

I am so new at this, and still learning. I would never dream of posting anything that is inaccurate, if I knew it was. Please forgive me.
Thanks phaseolus, for setting me straight. I will try to be more careful in the future.

[drdigi420]

8. You have to be careful

You might have made it by without getting your topic locked THIS time.

But watch out! The rule police are everywhere!

[ccvirgo911]

11. I'll just stick to reading

No more posts for me, unless they deal with something I really know about from personal experience.

[Wickerman]

12. Nah, keep posting, DU needs goodd stuff all the time

everyone screws up now and again - some of us more than others. :D

[calimary]

16. Oh no you don't! Step up and weigh in! It IS appreciated! Sincerely!

And welcome to DU, by the way! Looks to me like you're doing fine.

Do keep posting as you feel it, by all means!

And by the way - I have made some outrageous doozies of mistakes not only just generally in my life, but CERTAINLY here, too!

What it shows a reader/poster like me is that - here is a newcomer who actually gave a damn enough about an issue that is CERTAINLY worthy of discussion and our awareness, AS WELL AS being worthy of addressing and rectifying. Don't you think we'd ALL be better off, not only as DUers, but as COUNTRYMEN/WOMEN, if more of us brought up these things like you did? Rather than letting them fester or remain on "ignore" while people are suffering/struggling/facing a grossly uneven playing field?

Yes, it does single out a prominent Dem or two. But look at it this way - not only was this probably some crap generated by a rethug with an eye toward yet another smack at Dems, but - hey, who's in control in the House and Senate, these days ANYWAY??? Seems to me we can and should point out that the majority party here is just as much at fault, if not more so. And for every Byrd and White you've got a Hatch, a Lott, a McConnell, (and what about the Helmses and Thurmonds, who were there a LOT longer than anybody, especially those two, deserved to be), a DeLay, a Dreier, an Issa, a Thomas, a McCrery, a Blunt, and MORE. There are more of THEM feeding at the pig trough than there are of our guys.

Your input is greatly appreciated, and I for one (and many more of us DUers) are GLAD YOU ARE HERE!!!!!!!

[ccvirgo911]

20. Thanks

I truly appreciate your kind words. I am very grateful for the things I am learning here at DU. And while I am nowhere near as informed as most of you, I am trying very hard to learn as much as I can, in the limited time I have. I made a mistake by posting this, obviously, and I will be very careful in the future with anything I post, if I do.
Thanks again for saying what you did, I feel much better.:hi:

[Richardo]

10. Good on you, ccvirgo911. Now - one more assignment...

...hit "reply all" on the e-mail you received and send the snopes URL to everyone that got the original crap. :thumbsup:

and welcome to DU! :toast:

[eyesroll]

5. This was debunked on Snopes:

On Congressional pensions:
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/pensions.htm

[Richardo]

6. Total bullshit. See snopes

A small taste:

Origins: This piece has been circulating on the Internet since April 2000. So much of it is outdated, inaccurate, or misleading, it's difficult to know where to begin.

It is not true that Congressmen do not pay into the Social Security fund. They pay into the fund just as everyone else does.

Full write up: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/pensions.htm

[EdgarFriendly]

9. They shouldn't be paid at all

We should go back to the way this country started where the lawmakers were part time and were required to have a primary job. Not even the president was paid.

[Qutzupalotl]

13. Why?

To abolish the income tax?

[EdgarFriendly]

14. everyone should pay...

a "fair share"

just because you make more than $100K/year you should be required to pay 40%+ of you income when someone makeing $30/year only pays 20% and someone making < $30/year is nothing more than a leach on the system and puts nothing in.

If we were to cut all the FAT in the system there would be a lot more money to educate the kids, help those that CAN'T help themselves, and pay of medicare and SS.

[Qutzupalotl]

15. Progressive taxation does help those who can't help themselves.

>someone making < $30/year is nothing more than a leach on the system and puts nothing in.
Well, they shine your shoes and deliver your paper and wash the dishes at your restaurants. Those are needed services they provide. I don't think we can move them to the upper brackets anytime soon. We have to look at ability to pay.

>If we were to cut all the FAT in the system...

Like corporate welfare? Offshore loopholes?
Edited to add: Lucrative no-bid contracts to employers of the vice president?
:evilgrin:

[EdgarFriendly]

17. responce

>>Well, they shine your shoes and deliver your paper and wash the dishes at your restaurants. Those are needed services they provide.<<
You have my agreement on this.
>>I don't think we can move them to the upper brackets anytime soon.<<
Your right, you are paid based on how much competetion there is for your job. There are lots of shoe-shiners out there so the competition for that position is fearce, the competition for Linux Certified Tech's is not near as fearce because there are so few. So the Shoe-shinners have problems charging a lot for their services where the Linux guys can because there are so few of them.

>>We have to look at ability to pay.<<
20% of $10K is $2K
20% of 100K is $20K
Seems "ability to pay" is irrelevant when you use % instead of set amounts. Someone making $10K/year should be just a capable to pay $2K as someone making $100K is to pay $20K. The biggest problem is that people are trying to live like they make $100K/year when they only make $20K/year and are in debt up to their eyeballs.

>>Like corporate welfare? Offshore loopholes? <<
there are MANY different ways the government waste money...and yes...that's one of them. I personally think the airlines and rail companies should not be helped, if they can't give the service with the money they get from tickets, then they should be in business, that's how it is with every other service out there. Let's face it, airlines and passenger rails are not a right, they are a convience(sp).

>>Edited to add: Lucrative no-bid contracts to employers of the vice president?<<
Okay, I haven't seen any obsolute proof of that...i would think that someone's head would roll if it were true.

[Qutzupalotl]

24. Flat tax?

Seems "ability to pay" is irrelevant when you use % instead of set amounts.
Ability to pay is quite relevant if you're one of those at the bottom. Flat taxes shift the burden of taxation to the poor. Those at the top would love a system like that.

Someone making $10K/year should be just a capable to pay $2K as someone making $100K is to pay $20K.
Give it a try and you'll see how possible it is.

Lucrative no-bid contracts to employers of the vice president?<<
Okay, I haven't seen any obsolute proof of that...i would think that someone's head would roll if it were true.
Not if that someone's head is Dick Cheney, who is probably the most protected person in this administration. Surely you've heard about Halliburton's no-bid contract, and Cheney's paychecks?

[patdem]

25. Those Linux Certified Tech positions are quickly being shipped to

India so I suggest you 'polish' up on some service job!!

[zbdent]

18. More fat - Republicans who scream about wasteful spending

voting for their pay raises AND TAKING HOME A PAYCHECK!

They always want to eliminate the Govt. spending, how many of them are willing to do the job for free?

When they start doing it for free, then I'll demand the Dems & Indies do so also. As I say - "Okay, you first!"

[EdgarFriendly]

19. More fat - Republicans who scream about wasteful spending

voting for their pay raises AND TAKING HOME A PAYCHECK!<<
yeah like I said, all congress-people should be required to do it without pay. Only pay for housing during the sessions and don't give them more than 1000sq feet of housing...just build an appartment conplex for them, something similar to the welfare housing in the inner city areas.

>>They always want to eliminate the Govt. spending, how many of them are willing to do the job for free?<<
That's what I want ALL of them to do. That's how it started and that's where it should be.

>>When they start doing it for free, then I'll demand the Dems & Indies do so also.<<
They all should

>>As I say - "Okay, you first!"<<
That attitude is why it will never happen.

[ProfessorGAC]

22. Enumerate the "Fat" Please

Easy to say we just need to cut the fat. Much harder to do in practice.

Don't get caught up in the completely false economic canard that government is more inherently wasteful than business. There are mountains of data to prove that's not true.

Also, take into account that EVERY DOLLAR THE FEDERAL GOV'T SPENDS is part of the GDP equation. So, taking those dollars down and spending it through private constructs will get you to a tautological result.

You need to think a little beyond two dimensions. When your thought process is flat, you end up arriving at overly simple conclusions and highly simplistic solutions.
The Professor

[fencesitter]

21. Hey, I got that too!

Came from an old friend who I reconnected with last year. I forgot she had right wing tendencies, but that's all she broadcasts. I noticed that Byrd and Bradley were cited as examples, (those liberal democrats, they must be responsible) I was going to post this also, under is this true?, but as I thought about it, it's a retirement plan and not that they don't pay into the system. I'm going to Scopes.com now to copy the rebuttle and hit the "reply to all" button. Do the same!

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[CBHagman]

26. One of my friends forwarded me that e-mail

Months ago I got the "members of Congress don't pay into Social Security" e-mail. I went to one of the urban legends sites and found an almost verbatim (and debunked) e-mail.

I then took the unusual step of notifying the woman who had mailed my friend the e-mail in the first place. I basically told her it was a hoax. Well, I got a BITCHY reply from her in which she defended her patriotism and huffed and puffed about members of Congress.

Unfortunately, the Internet is now the Great Gossip Fence, and we're going to hear all kinds of rumors. Good luck in sorting out the wheat from the chaff!

[Wickerman]

27. It is amazing that people assume such ownership of

a piece of shit like this that they casually forwaded. I have seen the get indignant thing, too. Ok, would you rather that next time I hit reply all? No, if you really were a patriot you would do that yourself and stop spreading maliscious half-truths and outright lies...