Social Security ....The monthly Check...yes or no

[Josh]

Where did this list come from? Who updates it?

It is from a FOIA request issued to SSA that was done in 2007. It does not get updated. The original context was some oddball conspiracy theory in right wing circles that Muslims were exempt from social security and Obama was somehow involved since he's secretly a Muslim and going to conspire to make it so Muslims don't pay taxes but charge the rest of us the jizya. Obviously, none of this was based in fact.

[Josh]

Not arguing here really, but consider-
We know that Social Security has no cash in a bank somewhere that funds beneficiaries. And that it currently relies on the payments of today’s workers to pay for today’s beneficiaries.
The birth rate of the average American woman in 2023 was 1.784 births per woman. So that seems to leave less than two workers (children, next generation) to fund their parents retirement.

The birth rate of the average Mennonite or Amish woman is what? 4? 5? Either way I’m sure it is more than 1.784. Some groups might be 10+.

It comes down to financial discipline. The demographics are favorable for the churches, so that isn’t the problem.

Swartzies and similar groups (Delano) 9.0, "strict shunning" Amish and ultra conservatives 7.0, Old Order Amish 6.0, moderate conservatives 5.0 (I beleive that number is out of date and it is closer to 3.0 now, though), Mormons and similar groups like homeschoolers are about 3.0.

So yeah your guesstimate is right on track.

[RZehr]

Not arguing here really, but consider-
We know that Social Security has no cash in a bank somewhere that funds beneficiaries. And that it currently relies on the payments of today’s workers to pay for today’s beneficiaries.
The birth rate of the average American woman in 2023 was 1.784 births per woman. So that seems to leave less than two workers (children, next generation) to fund their parents retirement.

The birth rate of the average Mennonite or Amish woman is what? 4? 5? Either way I’m sure it is more than 1.784. Some groups might be 10+.

It comes down to financial discipline. The demographics are favorable for the churches, so that isn’t the problem.

Social Security is also a government program like any other in which recipients are ENTITLED BY LAW to certain benefits regardless of how much money is or isn't in the fictitious social security trust fund. As such it is actually backed by the full faith and credit of the Federal Government which has the power to print and borrow money and raise taxes.

Very interesting to see that.
The reasoning of 1. ENTITLED BY LAW, and 2. full faith and credit of the Federal Government.

I would perhaps contrast that with the Biblical directive of 1 -
Honor widows who are really widows. But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and to repay their parents; for this is good and acceptable before God. Now she who is really a widow, and left alone, trusts in God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day. But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives. And these things command, that they may be blameless. But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man, well reported for good works: if she has brought up children, if she has lodged strangers, if she has washed the saints’ feet, if she has relieved the afflicted, if she has diligently followed every good work.
But refuse the younger widows; for when they have begun to grow wanton against Christ, they desire to marry, having condemnation because they have cast off their first faith. And besides they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not. Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully. For some have already turned aside after Satan. If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really widows.
1st Timothy 5:3-16

And 2 -
Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment with promise: that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.
Ephesians 6:2-3


The Federal Government roughly follows Pauls directive too. Don't give you people who can work benefits. And encourage childbearing.
Interesting to see that childbearing is mentioned in the subject of support. Young are needed to make this work.


Whom do we trust to faithfully carry out their respective directive? Law of America, or, Gods people? And which is more trustworthy, the "full faith and credit of the American government", or, the faith in God through His people?


And then there is 2 Cor 12:14b. which may or may not be applicable.

[Ken]

Not arguing here really, but consider-
We know that Social Security has no cash in a bank somewhere that funds beneficiaries. And that it currently relies on the payments of today’s workers to pay for today’s beneficiaries.
The birth rate of the average American woman in 2023 was 1.784 births per woman. So that seems to leave less than two workers (children, next generation) to fund their parents retirement.

The birth rate of the average Mennonite or Amish woman is what? 4? 5? Either way I’m sure it is more than 1.784. Some groups might be 10+.

It comes down to financial discipline. The demographics are favorable for the churches, so that isn’t the problem.

Social Security is also a government program like any other in which recipients are ENTITLED BY LAW to certain benefits regardless of how much money is or isn't in the fictitious social security trust fund. As such it is actually backed by the full faith and credit of the Federal Government which has the power to print and borrow money and raise taxes.

Very interesting to see that.
The reasoning of 1. ENTITLED BY LAW, and 2. full faith and credit of the Federal Government.

I would perhaps contrast that with the Biblical directive of 1 -
Honor widows who are really widows. But if any widow has children or grandchildren, let them first learn to show piety at home and to repay their parents; for this is good and acceptable before God. Now she who is really a widow, and left alone, trusts in God and continues in supplications and prayers night and day. But she who lives in pleasure is dead while she lives. And these things command, that they may be blameless. But if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.
Do not let a widow under sixty years old be taken into the number, and not unless she has been the wife of one man, well reported for good works: if she has brought up children, if she has lodged strangers, if she has washed the saints’ feet, if she has relieved the afflicted, if she has diligently followed every good work.
But refuse the younger widows; for when they have begun to grow wanton against Christ, they desire to marry, having condemnation because they have cast off their first faith. And besides they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house, and not only idle but also gossips and busybodies, saying things which they ought not. Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully. For some have already turned aside after Satan. If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really widows.
1st Timothy 5:3-16

And 2 -
Honor your father and mother,” which is the first commandment with promise: that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.
Ephesians 6:2-3


The Federal Government roughly follows Pauls directive too. Don't give you people who can work benefits. And encourage childbearing.
Interesting to see that childbearing is mentioned in the subject of support. Young are needed to make this work.


Whom do we trust to faithfully carry out their respective directive? Law of America, or, Gods people? And which is more trustworthy, the "full faith and credit of the American government", or, the faith in God through His people?


And then there is 2 Cor 12:14b. which may or may not be applicable.

By "entitled by law" I'm simply saying that there is an actual law which says that if you paid into the Social Security system X-dollars over Y-years into then you are entitled to Z benefits. The government (or other entities) cannot legally withhold this entitlement from you. And if they do, you can sue the government and get the court to restore your benefit. That is what I mean by entitled by law.

So if the government decided to cut benefits by say 20% because they ran out of money then social recipients would go to court around the country and demand that their full entitled benefits be restored. And the courts could very well order that this happens which would probably just add it to the deficit unless Congress passed other ways of funding said benefits, or if Congress passed a law to actually cut them.

Alternatively, the courts could also say, tough luck.

We don't actually know how the courts will reconcile these two conflicting laws absent action by Congress.

[RZehr]

Yep, that is what I understood it to mean. Maybe emphasis on it being Law, not simply on Entitled?

[Ken]

Yep, that is what I understood it to mean. Maybe emphasis on it being Law, not simply on Entitled?

Yeah. I think it is probably too late to change the vocabulary around this sort of thing at this point. These sorts of government benefits have been labeled "entitlements" for nearly 100 years now. As opposed to other benefits or government services that you might not have an actual legal entitlement to.

The law is what makes it an entitlement as opposed to just some sort of government service such as government predator control or firefighting services to cite a some random government programs from your part of the country that are not legal entitlements.

[Josh]

Well, Congress can pass a law creating an "entitlement". Such a law, then, gives the citizenry a right to file a lawsuit if they don't get what they're "entitled" to.

Congress could also pass a law removing the entitlement. Ken is right - if laws don't change, and the SS trust fund runs out, then SS recipients can indeed continue to expect to get paid the $$ owed, and they can sue the government to get it.

Since this isn't projected to run out of money until the 2030s, I imagine zero action until then.

"Entitlement" is a legal term meaning "something you have a title to". I'm "entitled" to SS benefits (well, assuming I have any) as in I have a good title to the value of them.

[Ken]

Well, Congress can pass a law creating an "entitlement". Such a law, then, gives the citizenry a right to file a lawsuit if they don't get what they're "entitled" to.

Congress could also pass a law removing the entitlement. Ken is right - if laws don't change, and the SS trust fund runs out, then SS recipients can indeed continue to expect to get paid the $$ owed, and they can sue the government to get it.

Since this isn't projected to run out of money until the 2030s, I imagine zero action until then.

"Entitlement" is a legal term meaning "something you have a title to". I'm "entitled" to SS benefits (well, assuming I have any) as in I have a good title to the value of them.

Entitlements aren't just about money though. It is really just a fancy word to talk about rights.

Some examples that aren't money are the right to own firearms and the right to join the church of your choice. People can and do sue when the government withholds those "entitlements" which are spelled out in law.

We could easily come up with a list of hundreds of nonmonetary entitlements. A lot of property rights fall into that category. Such as the right to fill in wetlands on your property. There was a recent supreme court ruling about that. That is an entitlement that derives from laws about private property.

[Josh]

Sometimes we say someone has an "entitled" attitude. That's part and parcel different from "entitlements".

[Jeff Altweg]

Not to stir the pot too much ,here , but it's noteworthy that admistrative law Courts (SS judges),have several times over the past decade ,ruled that if you are exempt ,from paying SS, you cannot then have IRA's or 401K's or any such retirement plan ......It plainly states on the form itself ,that you are opposed to any private or public retirement plan, whatsoever....So far ,they have only addressed this issue ,on a case by case basis, but it's well to remember they could swoop in and take that big IRA , since you're not allowed to have one, if you are exempt from SS......So that wouldn't be an issue for Amish, but perhaps for some on that list....