Dorothy Day against Social Security

catholicbybirth

St. Louis, pray for me.
Aug 11, 2012
1,678
37
Western Kentucky
✟17,029.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
A Ponzi scheme is a scheme where early investors are paid off by the later investors. Charles Ponzi was the first to use such a scheme.

In Social Security, the early investors are paid off by the later investors. Under the circumstances it doesn't seem so odd that people would note it was a Ponzi scheme. Haven't heard Glenn Beck or Sarah Palin refer to it as such, but I'm sure that you would like it if they have since you consider them discredited. I have heard Gov Perry of Texas refer to it as a Ponzi scheme though and he's not a discredited source--he just calls 'em as he sees 'em.


And in every Ponzi scheme, the number of investors dwindles, as is our workforce what with the number of abortions in this country.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
And in every Ponzi scheme, the number of investors dwindles, as is our workforce what with the number of abortions in this country.

We have 13 million undocumented immigrants in this country, most of them young, every one of them I've met hardworking.

The solution to our temporary Social Security funding problem lies right before the eyes of everyone who isn't shortsighted and prejudiced (not to mention defiant of Church teaching).

Exactly what devil invented the idea that it would be better to send these workers back to devastating poverty in order to change Social Security into a stock market windfall (where some seniors might lose their shirts instead of securing their retirements).

Hey, could it be our least favorite former investment banker?
 
Upvote 0

catholicbybirth

St. Louis, pray for me.
Aug 11, 2012
1,678
37
Western Kentucky
✟17,029.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
We have 13 million undocumented immigrants in this country, most of them young, every one of them I've met hardworking.

The solution to our temporary Social Security funding problem lies right before the eyes of everyone who isn't shortsighted and prejudiced (not to mention defiant of Church teaching).

Exactly what devil invented the idea that it would be better to send these workers back to devastating poverty in order to change Social Security into a stock market windfall (where some seniors might lose their shirts instead of securing their retirements).

Hey, could it be our least favorite former investment banker?


Oh, so illegal immigrants should be allowed to become US Citizens, but the unborn of US Citizens are not guaranteed citizenship? Is that your answer?

Janice
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat

Oh, so illegal immigrants should be allowed to become US Citizens, but the unborn of US Citizens are not guaranteed citizenship? Is that your answer?

Janice

The correct word is "undocumented." There is no such thing as an "illegal" person.

There is a naturalization process for those who immigrate to the United States--but we would need to have an amnesty or quota increase in order to accomplish the task.

Currently the Constitution considers those born in the United States to be citizens.

One of the situations you posed requires only an amnesty. The other requires a Constitutional amendment.

That is not to say that both should not be pursued.

The other point is that naturalized citizens can save the Social Security system now.
 
Upvote 0

catholicbybirth

St. Louis, pray for me.
Aug 11, 2012
1,678
37
Western Kentucky
✟17,029.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The correct word is "undocumented." There is no such thing as an "illegal" person.

There is a naturalization process for those who immigrate to the United States--but we would need to have an amnesty or quota increase in order to accomplish the task.

Currently the Constitution considers those born in the United States to be citizens.

One of the situations you posed requires only an amnesty. The other requires a Constitutional amendment.

That is not to say that both should not be pursued.

The other point is that naturalized citizens can save the Social Security system now.


There is such a person as someone whose immigration status is illegal, therefore the term, illegal immigrant, only serves to distinguish those who enter the country illegally from those who enter the country legally. I'm not saying someone is illegally alive, just illegally immigrating.

We've tried "amnesty" before, it only encourages more illegal immigration.

Save the baby humans who are being slaughtered and the employers would have no need to encourage illegal immigration.

Janice
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
A baby born nine months from today won't be able to help save the Social Security system until 2030 or so.

I have seen how hard immigrants work--they put on a new roof on my house (they were a bonded and insured company paid by my insurance since my roof had hail damage). I have also seen how hard immigrants worked putting on rooves in other churches and businesses in town who suffered hail damage as well.

My daughter works in a restaurant and I see how hard the cooks work there--and even so, my daughter says they are always singing and laughing and being positive.

I also see how hard the immigrants in our local parishes work. I admire them quite a bit, and I believe they deserve a chance.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
The correct word is "undocumented." There is no such thing as an "illegal" person.
Snipped to portion being addressed. Longer post above.

She didn't say that a person was illegal (although a person can do something illegal.) She used a description of the type of immigrants they are--in this case "illegal" as opposed to "legal".
 
Upvote 0

catholicbybirth

St. Louis, pray for me.
Aug 11, 2012
1,678
37
Western Kentucky
✟17,029.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
A baby born nine months from today won't be able to help save the Social Security system until 2030 or so.

I have seen how hard immigrants work--they put on a new roof on my house (they were a bonded and insured company paid by my insurance since my roof had hail damage). I have also seen how hard immigrants worked putting on rooves in other churches and businesses in town who suffered hail damage as well.

My daughter works in a restaurant and I see how hard the cooks work there--and even so, my daughter says they are always singing and laughing and being positive.

I also see how hard the immigrants in our local parishes work. I admire them quite a bit, and I believe they deserve a chance.


Then let them become US Citizens the legal way.

If Roe v. Wade had not been decided the way it has been, there would be a lot more babies who would be adults now who would have been able to throw their money into the Ponzi scheme of Social Security.

Janice
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
A baby born nine months from today won't be able to help save the Social Security system until 2030 or so.

Snipped to portion being addressed. Longer post is above.

Oh so now you see how abortion has hurt us. And I guess now you see why Gov Perry calls Social Security a Ponzi scheme.
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I am interested in solving problems now.

Problems for the hardworking immigrants.

Problems for the Social Security system.

The past cannot be changed, but we can do something in the present--today--to help both hardworking immigrants and soon to be seniors like you, AMDG.

Or maybe you get Social Security already--I don't, because I am still working.

Yes, I'm a clearheaded, hardworking sixty-three year-old. I guess that's why I look at a problem, see a solution, and wonder why those already retired ignore it and choose to complain about a past that can't be changed.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

einhverfr

Newbie
Oct 14, 2012
9
1
✟15,134.00
Faith
Non-Denom
She advocated that it was the community's responsibility to care for the elderly and the poor, which is was the communist mindset in America during her time.

Having the government run a SS was her misunderstanding, but also that it would remove the community aspect of caring for the elderly and poor.

But that's not what SS was for. It was to give people a means of having a comfortable retirement. It was not designed as a safety net for the elderly.

Jim

Poor Dorothy Day, being confused with everyone from Ayn Rand to the communists.... I suppose the price of been a deep and free thinker is to be universally demonized and adored often by the same people.

I don't get that. I mean if Dorothy Day was a communist by that measure, I guess the Pope is a Buddhist.

Look, you can always find commonality between two groups but that doesn't make them identical. Day expressly advocated property ownership for the poor and that's enough to disqualify her from any sort of communist movement. The big difference there is that while communists of various sorts tend to argue that the workers should collectively (usually through some sort of government) own the means of production, the Distributists have always argued that private properly ownership is a fundamental right, and that it should be spread as widely as possible. In this way, individual workers should own their own means of production.

Moreover if you say that the mere idea that there is a collective responsibility to take care of the poor makes one a communist in that regard, then FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower were all communists.... At that point I don't think the term is very meaningful since it includes just about everyone except for Ayn Rand cultists.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
soon to be seniors like you, AMDG.

Or maybe you get Social Security already--I don't, because I am still working.

Snipped to portion being addressed. Longer portion above.

Social Security must be applied for. It is not automatic like Happy Birthday and here is your check. My husband receives Social Security. I *could* apply now, but I figure "why when the country is in such bad straits?" We don't need much (and we even try to help our children and those around us when we can.) We have God. I am fine living with my husband. So far, it's my choice and I'm taking it.
 
Upvote 0

Needing_Grace

Chief of Sinners
May 8, 2011
3,350
146
Los Angeles, CA
✟11,799.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Snipped to portion being addressed. Longer portion above.

Social Security must be applied for. It is not automatic like Happy Birthday and here is your check. My husband receives Social Security. I *could* apply now, but I figure "why when the country is in such bad straits?" We don't need much (and we even try to help our children and those around us when we can.) We have God. I am fine living with my husband. So far, it's my choice and I'm taking it.

If you paid into it, it's your money. Why are you denying yourself what is yours?
 
Upvote 0

JimR-OCDS

God Cannot Be Grasped, Except Through Love
Oct 28, 2008
18,399
3,327
The Kingdom of Heaven
Visit site
✟191,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Poor Dorothy Day, being confused with everyone from Ayn Rand to the communists.... I suppose the price of been a deep and free thinker is to be universally demonized and adored often by the same people.

I don't get that. I mean if Dorothy Day was a communist by that measure, I guess the Pope is a Buddhist.

Look, you can always find commonality between two groups but that doesn't make them identical. Day expressly advocated property ownership for the poor and that's enough to disqualify her from any sort of communist movement. The big difference there is that while communists of various sorts tend to argue that the workers should collectively (usually through some sort of government) own the means of production, the Distributists have always argued that private properly ownership is a fundamental right, and that it should be spread as widely as possible. In this way, individual workers should own their own means of production.

Moreover if you say that the mere idea that there is a collective responsibility to take care of the poor makes one a communist in that regard, then FDR, Truman, and Eisenhower were all communists.... At that point I don't think the term is very meaningful since it includes just about everyone except for Ayn Rand cultists.

OH, but it's a fact that she at one time belonged to the communist party in America. Many Catholics hate to admit this, but they also misunderstood what the communist movement of her time was about. It wasn't Stalinist Communism, but a community based communism.

The problem with their ideals was that unless the entire community is dedicated to that ideology, if fails.


See her biography;
Dorothy Day : Biography

Jim
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Cosmic Charlie

The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated
Oct 14, 2003
15,506
2,380
✟71,886.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
We’ve grown depressingly accustomed to hearing our bishops speak of Social Security as something akin to a sacrament, despite the ever-worsening pattern of dependency that it has fostered, after only a couple of generations, on an ever-less solvent state. How refreshing, then, to read this:


Continued- http://otritt.wordpress.com/2012/05/01/dorothy-day-against-social-security/

I realize we're 54 posts into this but if I can go back to the beginning for just a second:

When did it become en vogue for political conservatives to challenge the Bishops ?

That's sort of ceding the high ground isn't it ?
 
Upvote 0

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Told you. It's my choice and I'm taking it--the country is in bad straits.

I hope you realize that you are refusing Social Security so that Mitt Romney (should, God forbid, he win) could give that money in the form of tax cuts to the 1%.

If you don't need Social Security you could use that money so that your son-in-law, whom you say works three jobs to support six children, could cut down to two jobs so that he could be a real, visible presence in his children's lives instead of just a breadwinner.

If you don't need Social Security how can you justify Mitt Romney's (if God forbid he wins) giving it away to the 1% while your grandchildren grow up with a father who can't spend any time with them?

On the other hand, you may be waiting until 66 so that you have no benefit reduction. I can understand that.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I don't know if you realize it or not, but a tax cut is what is norm--and when Obama takes it away, he's not "giving" a tax cut to the wealthy, he's simply raising taxes. Now Obama himself said (in 2007) that it is wrong to raise taxes in a recession (why? because it costs jobs and makes the recession worse). If the government was able to take 100% of all the wealthy (that's job creators, but Obama's father actually suggested that in his native Kenya) it wouldn't fund the government so the government would have to raise taxes on still others--like the middle class.
 
Upvote 0

AMDG

Tenderized for Christ
May 24, 2004
25,362
1,286
74
Pacific Northwest, United States
✟47,022.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
On the other hand, you may be waiting until 66 so that you have no benefit reduction. I can understand that.

Snipped to portion being addressed. Longer post above.

Good to know, but I figure that if I can live frugally with my husband (yes, I still help my children--you'd be surprised on how "creative" one can get when he needs to be) and don't *need* to apply, well it's a gift to someone else. (There is no "lockbox" for Social Security, since the government has borrowed so heavily from it--left IOUs--Social Security is going to go bankrupt in a matter of years, and as it is now everything comes from the general fund.) Social Security Bankruptcy is guaranteed because of the unintentional consequence of abortion--not enough folks paying for all the baby boomers retiring.

Honestly, IMO if people just took what they absolutely *needed* (as in the Savings and Loan in "It's a Wonderful Life") we'd be somewhat better off. Oh well, it seems that some folks have the "I need, I want, I gotta have". And there comes a point where other people's money does run out.

That reminds me, you know on the tax returns there is a space where a person can give to the government. Don't even have to wait until the tax rates are raised. Want to give more to government? A person can.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Fantine

Dona Quixote
Site Supporter
Jun 11, 2005
37,495
13,559
✟1,138,282.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
You should take your Social Security benefit and, if you don't need it, use it for some other purpose.

You could give it to a charity for low-income pregnant women. You could give it to your church.

Do you think the government knows how to spend it more wisely than you do?

(Especially if the Republicans win as you'd like them to--no way would I eat macaroni and cheese every night so that Jay Leno could buy another Lamborghini.)

Some people get emotional satisfaction out of suffering and martyrdom. I hope that you aren't one of those people.

Take your Social Security and decide how you'll contribute towards saving the world yourself.
 
Upvote 0