It's too bad that you do not allow attachments. Attaching a PDF file would be much easier than the insertion that I must now perform. Letter to AARP? ~ year 2000? (Initially proposed about year 2000. Revised several times since to add clarity.) DISCLAIMER:

I am a senior who obtains most of his income from Social Security. I have a valid reason for desiring a secure and stable Social Security System. This so called 1% increase from 6.2% to 7.2% is actually a change from 12.2% to 14.2% and the increase is not 1% but actually an sixteen and four tenths percent (16.4%) increase in the tax. It is an outright LIE to not include the "employer's" share of the tax.

The recent report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a RED HERRING. The tax cuts applied to Income Taxes NOT to F.I.C.A taxes. If there is a Social Security Fund, as we are told we are protecting, then there is NO connection between Income taxes and Social Security taxes. If there is NO fund, then those telling us we must protect this fund are LIARS. These attempts to increase the taxes for Social Security are nothing more than an attempt by selfish inconsiderate grabby seniors to steal from their offspring for their own convenience. Now we come to the real question How do we provide a retirement system that will start now and grow to reduce or eliminate the total payments of Social Security. It can be done with only one major change in Social Security, but we must accept the fact that Social Security is actually WELFARE.

It is NOT an insurance policy, or an annuity contract. It is WELFARE. Here's how we fix it and design a real retirement program.

• 1.) Lock in Social Security for those now receiving it.
• 2.) Establish a means test that is based upon net worth as well as on non Social Security income. a.) Social Security payments shall be reduced by $1.00 per month for each $2.00 per month that non Social Security income exceeds the annualized minimum wage. 1.) Income from ALL sources is to be included. b.) Social Security payments shall not be made to anyone whose net worth exceeds the annualized minimum wage by a factor of 30 or more. 3.) Create Supplemental Private Retirement Accounts to be established in parallel with Social Security accounts not as part of Social Security:
•      a.)   These private accounts will be established with pre-tax money.  The maximum contribution shall be limited to that amount of money which could have been paid under the maximum SS taxation amount calculated at the highest earnings level which is subject to Social Security tax. It shall not be limited to the actual earnings of the taxpayer. Disbursements from these funds after SS retirement age SHALL NOT BE TAXED until they have exceeded three times the annualized minimum wage.
•      b.) These accounts shall be restricted to a list of Mutual Funds that are approved by the congress and are reviewed by the congress for security every 5 years, or more often if deemed necessary.
•      c.) Withdrawal from these accounts will be subject to the same rules that apply to payments from Social Security, including tax liability, except that disbursements may not be so great as to generate a payout period that is less than actuarial life expectancy tables used for life insurance annuities. They may be smaller.
•      d.) Hardship, medical, or other emergency withdrawals will also be in accordance with Social Security rules for equivalent situations.
• 4.) Social Security shall remain as it is and shall be in addition to the Supplemental Private Retirement Accounts. Means test limits shall apply.
• 5.)These SPRA accounts shall not be used to disallow additional IRAs or 401(K) plans. When this is implemented, the expense for Social Security Welfare will be immediately cut a small amount by the means test. The amount of the reduction will increase as the SPRA is utilized by more and more persons.

As the demand for S. S. payments is reduced to levels below the tax collections, the payments of those receiving the smallest payments must be increased until there is no remaining payment level below minimum wage. Where SPRA income and SS is less than SS with the COLA adjustment, the difference shall be made up from SS funds, except that the SPRA income credited to the SS payments must be not less than that which would be paid if the payment were based upon total payout of the fund at the life insurance actuarial chart death age. This may be needed for early adopters of the SPRA accounts. SPRA income shall be counted against the means test for S.S. Payments.

If the owner of the SPRA chooses to not take the maximum withdrawal, the minimum amount that may be applied against the means test is that which would exist if the withdrawal were equal to the balance in the SPRA divided by the remaining life expectancy of the SPRA owner. (Remember that while the withdrawals from the SPRA have a limited exemption from income taxes, the balance which transfers to the beneficiary (ies) is taxed at the full amount for the applicable rate. Had this plan existed when I was starting my adult life, I should be means adjusted out of SS, by my own plan, and have a much better standard of living than I now have. Over time as the value of the SPRAs increases, they shall reduce the payments from the SS fund allowing a reduction in SS taxes or an increase in medical benefits, or both.

This plan not only protects the existing SS recipients from reductions, it will without changing SS law, again, lead to the elimination of SS by implementation of a better plan. The limitation on the maximum contribution is necessary to prevent someone like Bill Gates from passing his entire fortune through a SPRA to avoid income taxes. The means testing just may provide enough in savings from those who really do not need the income, to allow payment of at least annualized minimum wage amounts to all recipients of Soc. Sec. And let's be honest about it, Social Security plus allowable income before the means test cuts in and reduces Social Security payments will be over $35,000.00 per year. So let us fix the pending problem with a means test and a lock in without termination of the existing system. It can go on indefinitely, and may be needed in some cases although the costs will be greatly reduced. Properly it should be transferred to the States. Then let us create a new system that will be seeded with tax exemptions and has the possibility to eliminate most, if not all of the payments under the current system. Roosevelt's original idea was to allow the private insurance industry to provide these annuities, and as private business to make a profit. Then he erred. He decided that if the insurance companies could make a profit so could the federal government. He ignored the proven inefficiency of all governments. The final line should include the statement that Roosevelt's program also violated the Constitution in that it created a Federal Welfare Program. Nowhere in the Constitution is the Congress authorized to provide any specific Welfare Program.