Article

2007-01-01 Home Front: Politix

Pending Secret Agreement - US Agreed To Pay Illegal Aliens Social Security In 2004

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-01-01 13:26|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11133 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Article: The Agreement with Mexico, like other totalization agreements, would allow workers to qualify with just six quarters, or 18 months, of U.S. coverage.

If they paid in, they should get bennies. But after 18 months of contributions? How do Americans get in on this deal?

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 13:41|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 13:41|| Front Page Top

#2 Scuse me ? If you are an illegal immigrant working and paying into SS, then you are a criminal, and should be deported. The only thing you get to bring back with you are the hairs on your ass.

Another thing; who made this secret agreement ? The SS administration ? What the hell is going on here ?
If some bureaucrat made this agreement, then I want his lifeless limp body hanging from his jail bars.
The reason this democracy works so well is that laws are debated and voted on before being dumped on the masses. We can watch this on CSPAN and CSPAN2. We must put an end to legislation which is added to bills without open debate.
Time to write your representatives again.

Posted by wxjames 2007-01-01 14:13|| 2007-01-01 14:13|| Front Page Top

#3 under whose name and SSN did the illegals pay in? This sounds like another loan to Mexico via the citizens to try and keep that kleptocracy afloat...talk about pissing me off

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-01-01 14:30|| 2007-01-01 14:30|| Front Page Top

#4 This is abso-fucking-lutely wrong!
Streamline USCIS procedures for legal immigration so it is not such a costly bureaucratic nightmare for many applicants.

But not this crap.

Posted by twobyfour 2007-01-01 14:35|| 2007-01-01 14:35|| Front Page Top

#5 wxjames: Scuse me ? If you are an illegal immigrant working and paying into SS, then you are a criminal, and should be deported. The only thing you get to bring back with you are the hairs on your ass.

I understand and sympathize with your point of view. If I had my druthers, we'd confiscate everything they own, give each of them twenty lashes with a sturdy rattan cane and imprison them for three years apiece before deporting them. Like Singapore.

But our current policy is to not confiscate their assets. I would consider what they've paid into Social Security their assets. If we're going to take that money, we should take everything they own as well. And I don't have a problem with that.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 14:42|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 14:42|| Front Page Top

#6 In 2040 when you're retired and eating tins of cat food - at least you'll know where the Soc. Sec. money went.

Posted by DMFD 2007-01-01 14:45|| 2007-01-01 14:45|| Front Page Top

#7 DFMD: In 2040 when you're retired and eating tins of cat food - at least you'll know where the Soc. Sec. money went.

If you're relying on Social Security to furnish your retirement income... Let's just say that that you're better off spending 10% of your paycheck on Lotto tickets. Nobody wants to hear it, but saving for a rainy day is always the best policy. And retirement means decades of rainy days, given today's life expectancies. Start saving today, because the government will inevitably have to renege, either by dropping benefits or raising the eligibility age.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 15:42|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 15:42|| Front Page Top

#8 Good to see the PR Newswire is on top of things.

Posted by Shipman 2007-01-01 15:58|| 2007-01-01 15:58|| Front Page Top

#9 Zheng Fei - or the government can tax the hell out of our kids and place a hefty tax on the assets of anyone who had the foresight to save for retirement.

Posted by DMFD 2007-01-01 17:22|| 2007-01-01 17:22|| Front Page Top

#10 DFMD: Zheng Fei - or the government can tax the hell out of our kids and place a hefty tax on the assets of anyone who had the foresight to save for retirement.

I would bet on reneging - even the Euros are cutting benefits. And Euro politicians are pretty insulated from taxpayer displeasure. Plus - even if they place a 50% tax on your retirement assets, you still have 50% left.* 50% of nothing is nothing. Like I said, nobody wants to hear it, but the only prudent thing to do is to accumulate savings *today* for your retirement - they're the equivalent of rainy decades.

* To date, I've only ever heard of taxes on gains, not on the assets themselves. Unless you're dealing with a tax-deferred IRA account. But that's a different story. You gotta pay taxes sometime.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 17:36|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 17:36|| Front Page Top

#11 To date, I've only ever heard of taxes on gains, not on the assets themselves.

They're called property taxes. It's actually a very fair way to tax.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-01-01 17:38|| 2007-01-01 17:38|| Front Page Top

#12 NS: They're called property taxes. It's actually a very fair way to tax.

On security holdings? Don't know any place stateside that has them.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 17:54|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 17:54|| Front Page Top

#13 And a Federal property tax would be a new and interesting phenomenon.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 17:55|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 17:55|| Front Page Top

#14 I can see the Feds taxing your retirement income easily. They already tax the regular [earned] income of the productive segment of society to give [unearned] to the unproductive segment (welfare). Its a simple step to taxing the [earned] retirement savings of those who saved for their retirement to give to those who didn't save for theirs.

After all people shouldn't be denied the 'good live' during their retirement simply because they chose (of their own free will) to spend their income rather then save it.

Posted by CrazyFool 2007-01-01 18:22|| 2007-01-01 18:22|| Front Page Top

#15 CF, Social Security retirement benefits are already taxed as income by the FEDS.

Posted by Deacon Blues">Deacon Blues 2007-01-01 18:32|| 2007-01-01 18:32|| Front Page Top

#16 CF: I can see the Feds taxing your retirement income easily. They already tax the regular [earned] income of the productive segment of society to give [unearned] to the unproductive segment (welfare). Its a simple step to taxing the [earned] retirement savings of those who saved for their retirement to give to those who didn't save for theirs.

Income and savings are two different things. There are no taxes on savings today, only income from savings. Say you have $1000 in a savings account. The government doesn't tax you on the $1000 principal - it taxes you on the interest income generated from the $1000. Could the government start taxing savings? Sure. But let's look at this rationally. Which demographic group is most inclined to vote, and which demographic group has the most savings? It's not young people. Wherever Social Security funding is coming from, it's not coming from a tax on savings.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 18:46|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 18:46|| Front Page Top

#17 The capital markets can deal with capital gains taxes and dividends taxes. What it cannot deal with is a tax on principal. The Thai stock market went down 20% in a single day because the central bank decided to try out an indirect tax on the principal itself. I can't see federal policymakers doing anything so self-defeating economically, not to mention fatal to their political ambitions.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 18:50|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 18:50|| Front Page Top

#18 I'm as much of a hard-shell Republican as you'll find around here, but if G-Dub signs this abortion, I'LL support impeaching his ass!

Posted by Ricky bin Ricardo (Abu Babaloo) 2007-01-01 18:53|| 2007-01-01 18:53|| Front Page Top

#19 "On security holdings? Don't know any place stateside that has them."

Florida taxes security holding assets. Tax-deferred retirement funds are exempt.

Posted by Hupeger Creamble4059 2007-01-01 18:56|| 2007-01-01 18:56|| Front Page Top

#20 I see your point ZF. But I think you are asking the wrong question. We should be asking which is the larger demographic group - those who saved for retirement or those who didn't. Its not old vs young but those who planned ahead and saved enough vs those who didn't save enough or depend entirely on SS. I'm not sure which is the larger demographic group.

Most of the retirement funds these days are done 'pre-tax' in that it is not taxed when it is earned and placed in the fund but when it is withdrawn - this is usually when you are retired and have a smaller income (and lower tax rate). I'll eventually have to pay taxes on that $100 I placed in my 401K last month but it will be at a lower tax rate - since I will (presumably) have a lower income.

Posted by CrazyFool 2007-01-01 20:10|| 2007-01-01 20:10|| Front Page Top

#21 HC: Florida taxes security holding assets. Tax-deferred retirement funds are exempt.

Florida taxes principal? I've looked it up and don't see it. Besides, retirees wouldn't flock there if it did. In fact, I don't see that Florida taxes either capital gains or dividends.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2007-01-01 20:18|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com]">[http://timurileng.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 20:18|| Front Page Top

#22 Here ya go, ZF. Apparently it's been repealed, but Florida did assess a tax based on the value of assets like stocks, bonds, etc. I first ran across this when we applied for a mortgage. We had to pay a one-time tax based on the value of the loan.

BTW, the retirees come here for two real reasons, neither one of them the lack of a state tax. Sunshine and early bird specials! ;)

Posted by Swamp Blondie 2007-01-01 23:22|| http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com]">[ http://azjetsetchick.blogspot.com] 2007-01-01 23:22|| Front Page Top

23:47 USN, ret.
23:44 gromgoru
23:40 gromgoru
23:37 USN, ret.
23:35 JosephMendiola
23:23 JosephMendiola
23:23 gromgoru
23:22 Swamp Blondie
23:16 JosephMendiola
23:16 BA
23:13 JosephMendiola
23:12 gromgoru
23:05 JosephMendiola
23:03 JosephMendiola
22:59 JosephMendiola
22:54 CrazyFool
22:51 JosephMendiola
22:35 phil_b
22:33 Free Radical
22:29 Barbara Skolaut
22:21 Barbara Skolaut
22:09 Pink Panther
22:07 Old Patriot
21:55 djohn66
Merry-Go-Blog