<![CDATA[Haley2024 the Movement - Blog on Social Security]]>

<![CDATA[Haley2024 the Movement - Blog on Social Security]]>Mon, 04 Mar 2024 11:10:36 -0500Weebly<![CDATA[Detailed Explanation of the Transition from Social Security and Medicare]]>Sun, 20 May 2018 03:10:26 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-social-security/detailed-explanation-of-the-transition-from-social-security-and-medicare

The Haley2024 plan is simple. After a responsible transition from Social Security and Medicare, citizens are mandated to save or plan for their retirement. This page is to explain the transition and what is mandated.

The federal government made huge commitments that they should never have made; however, the government made those commitments, and the first step needs to be to stop making additional commitments! After the transition, the taxes, benefits, and commitments will cease!

The government made the commitments, and that commitment will be satisfied with government funds deposited into individual retirement accounts. The big question many will wrestle with is how much government should deposit into people’s accounts.

Politicians over the last 80 years made bad economic decisions by disastrously putting the retirement plan on a ‘pay as you go’ system. There are now tens of trillions of dollars of unfunded commitments. The transition will gradually improve most individual’s as well as our country's financial situation.

Because of the disincentives, created by collecting taxes, the government should minimize the amount of taxes deposited into IRA’s. To that end, only people over the age of 50, should have taxes funding their accounts. Since Social Security did not save any money, the money will come from bonds. If one wants to contend that Social Security saved money in government bonds, the results are the same. When a citizen reaches the age of 50, they will be exempt from paying the tax on those bonds.

Over one year, every person will have an individual analysis. Every citizen over the age of 50 will have government deposit money into their IRA based on age and FICA taxes paid. People already on Social Security will have enough to maintain their monthly benefits. Funding will gradually and consistently diminish until funding reaches $0 at the age of 50.

Every person under the age of 50 will not receive any funding and will have to pay the specific tax to pay off social security bonds until they reach the age of 50. People above the age of 50 stop paying that specific Social Security bond tax.

The goal here is not to tax anyone that government is funding and not to fund anyone that government is taxing. It is foolish to tax people to fund their own account. There are not good reasons to have administration costs and the disincentive created by the tax, to have government tax a person to fund that person’s IRA account.

This reform idea does not analyze actuary tables, insurance, statistics, accounting and other tools to determine if the age of 50 is the most ideal. When this idea receives greater acceptance into the arena of ideas, many studies from diverse perspectives could push this age of demarcation a few years; however, the principals of not funding below and not taxing above that age is the Haley2024’s method of keeping tax rates as low as possible.

The commitment from the government to provide health care to the elderly was not wise. That commitment meant the government was providing, thus in charge and controlling that service. That commitment is socialism of healthcare for everyone above the age of 65.

Free enterprise is far superior to socialism. That commitment is fulfilled by simply depositing the same dollar amount into IRA’s in the same proportion and manner as Social Security. Government monopoly of elderly health care and health insurance inhibited free enterprise advancements and solutions. Without government provision, new business models will emerge.

There would be a goal of a 50-year bond payoff. Please look at Haley2024’s Debt page. On the Debt page, the states acquire the debt burden in proportion to their share of GDP. On the Debt page, the states acquire the debt burden in proportion to their share of GDP.

The states take over the debt because the federal government has proven their irresponsibility. Having fifty different models allow for experimentation where valuable lessons are learned.

It took many decades to acquire this much debt and will take many decades to pay off this debt. One of Haley2024’s tax principles is to have the broadest base for taxation, thus not having any exemptions.

Exempting everyone above the age of 50 seems to violate that principle. However, the exemption within this tax is because the transition team accounted for this and it lowered the needed amount for debt. This exemption stopped the government from taxing those same people they are funding.

The Rating Systems for Family Law, Financial, Insurance, Healthcare, Identification, Human Resources, and the Charities Sectors will send representatives to make a retirement planning board. This board will analyze all proposed retirement planning arrangements and set floors to reduce the number and severity of people falling on the mercy of society.

This Rating Floor requirement infringes liberty. However, all liberties need limitations when they infringe on the liberties of others. The liberty at issue is that society at large has decided that all citizens should show a certain level of responsibility not to become a burden on society.

A greater burden on society means a greater limitation of liberty because members of society need to care for the greater burden. There is righteous anger at those that under-plan and expect others to care for them.

There are already many businesses that try to educate consumers on the best path forward. A Salesmen’s main job is to educate; however, their goal is also to make the sale. Consumers are always wise to discern. The Rating Agencies that individuals have grown to trust will be valuable. Having input from the many Sectors that are involved will allow a customized retirement plan.

Putting money in a bank and withdrawing a certain amount each month in retirement is certainly a known model. Annuities have helped the problem of living longer than in individuals bank account. Relying on children in the elderly years has been a long-standing practice. Without government taking over a large part of retirement planning, it will be exciting to see new models emerge.

A person might build up a substantial credit within the charity economy to be served later in life. Contracts within religious organizations to serve and to be served is likely. Without a one size fits all government regulation in many areas of regulations, many new planning models are possible.

There are undoubtedly many companies that want to manage money. Many organizations will advise individuals on the wisdom of different retirement strategies. All the CRA’s making up the Retirement Planning Board will likely send information on their preferences. In the free enterprise system, there is no shortage of information. The cooperation of all the businesses that each person chooses will likely result in the correct plan for that individual.

Freedom and liberty require allowing people to live their lives and make their choices. However, as a citizen of a compassionate society, individuals need to make reasonable steps not to become a burden on society. In this balance, some people will, through bad luck or poor and minimal planning, need assistance.

The Charity System will be the backstop that will not allow a person’s quality of life to drop below a certain level. Please read the Welfare to Charity page to understand why the government should not be that backstop.

]]><![CDATA[More Problems With the Current System ]]>Wed, 02 Sep 2015 13:42:59 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-social-security/more-problems-with-the-current-system

Social Security has one set of regulations and thus will not have the benefit of new reforms from which people can choose. Social Security existing as a welfare system for the elderly creates disincentives to work.

For so many, work is a highly relevant part of their lives and a part of who they are. Some elderly want to add to their income to have a higher standard of living. The regulations within Social Security discourages income as it is often deducted from their “benefits.”

People like to have control, and the government offers one system. Free enterprise offers many choices that allow all plans to be compared and continually improved. Corrupt and ineffective plans will vanish as individuals make decisions aided by the Rating System.

The government is committed to funding you as long as you live, over 65, and also in charge of approving new life-extending drugs and procedures. This gives federal bureaucrats and politicians perverse incentives. Governments claim to benevolence to the elderly is suspect when they have high political pressure to balance the budget.

]]><![CDATA[Means tested Social Security will be a disaster. People will not save for their own retirement so they can qualify for means tested benefits.]]>Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:42:40 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-social-security/means-tested-social-security-will-be-a-disaster-people-will-not-save-for-their-own-retirement-so-they-can-qualify-for-means-tested-benefits

There are many Republicans that want to ‘save’ Social Security because they do not see the numbers adding up over the long-term and there are studies now that show in the mid to short-term, the program is in real trouble. Some conservatives are trying to come up with solutions that will limit expenses.

The discussion here is ‘means testing.’ Means testing has genuine economic problems. Economics is the study of the change in peoples’ behavior concerning time, work and resources with changing circumstances. The significant circumstance change here is that if you save your money for your own retirement, you will also pay into the government system and not draw government benefits.

If you do not save personally, you will also pay into the government system, and you will draw government benefits. Instinctively, people will not save for their retirement or have the motivation to hide their wealth. This simple fact of dynamic changes in people's behavior is lost to many, and they statically do the math as if people will still endure greater sacrifice in their working years and end up receiving roughly the same funds a month as the person that did not sacrifice.

The person that saved would be drawing from their private retirement funds and means-tested out of receiving Social Security. The person who does not have any private funds would receive their money from Social Security. This also will create high incentives for people to hide their money from the government to not be means tested out of the system.

]]><![CDATA[Many New Retirement Plans, Just Get Above a Certain Rating]]>Sun, 16 Mar 2014 04:19:16 GMThttp://haley2024.org/blog-on-social-security/many-new-retirement-plans-just-get-above-a-certain-rating

The primary stated reason for Social Security and Medicare is that some people did not adequately plan for their retirement, so when they become elderly and lose their earning potential, they became a burden on society. Because a few did not save, government over-reached and made a disastrous plan for everyone.

Allowing a Thousand Blossoms to Bloom

All the retirement/ investment/ bank CRA's will just have to meet a specific minimum rating set by the rating agency sector board. Every person will be required to be in a retirement CRA. Ratings are dynamic and diverse.

Examples of Some Retirement Plans

There would likely be a plan that is similar to the current Social Security plan. Retirement plans would be less expensive if all remaining funds are kept by the plan at death. The plans that allow the funds to be willed to family members would be more expensive. In free enterprise, there are annuities that have all sorts of features.

Some plans will take into effect life expectancy, medical condition, among other factors. Some plans will be firm and not easily changed, while others will be very dynamic and easily adjusted to reflect circumstances. Many plans would work closely with company pensions and others not. Just like many retirement plans currently outside of government, there is choice.

Non-monetary retirement planning will also be available under a dynamic rating system. If you have family that is close and willing to legally accept responsibility for you, that could be your retirement plan. There might need to be a separate insurance plan for the small percentage of families that cannot fulfill their obligations. Many models would be tried and evaluated.

The charity economy could have its own ‘currency’ where you give hours while you are productive and build up ‘currency’ to be used when you are elderly. This is unlikely to be one hundred percent, however a part of your retirement plan. Your hours when you are 40 years old helping at the nursing home, would translate to others assisting you when you have to live there.

]]>