Deborah
Venable
09/13/02
At
the heart of socialism there exists an antithesis to successful human relations
as well as the greatest enemy of freedom ever devised by man. It is, therefore, American Public Enemy #1. The foothold of socialism on American
society began with the establishment of the Social Security system. Decades later we find scars so deep in our
culture that healing of the wounds that caused them remains an impossible
task. All social problems existing in
America today could be improved with the abolishment of the Social Security
system. It is woefully inadequate,
wantonly negligent of individual needs, and criminally confiscating of every
working American. It also remains the
dreaded “third rail” of the political fast track. Few with any power and influence to affect the demise of this
socialist program are willing to touch it with a ten-foot pole.
The
program assumes that individuals are not capable of taking care of themselves,
that families cannot be woven of strong enough fiber to take care of their own,
and that charity will not prevail over selfishness to see that needs are met
without government mandate. Yes, ladies
and gentlemen, such assumptions are enemies to American culture, to freedom, and
to the future of every American citizen.
As
noted, this is a very sensitive subject.
Every politician that expects to make a mark in the political arena must
at least give the impression that he or she supports “saving” Social Security,
fixing the system, and convincing present and future recipients of benefits
that money will be there for them whenever they have need of it. By using such terminology as “locked box” to
describe the future “security” of these benefits, a politician can guarantee
support from a well conditioned public and sling mud at anyone else who would
dare try to point out the fallacy of this whole system or suggest that there
are certainly better alternatives to it.
As
with any other government program, this one is sorely mismanaged, blatantly
abused, and wholly inadequate. Who has
the right to define anyone else’s need when it comes to distributing funds that
have been commandeered from a lifetime of earnings? The very idea that such a system could ever be conducive to a
free society is ludicrous. The decision
makers in funds dispersal for disability claims make errors in deciding need
all the time. Anyone who feels secure
in the fact that if they should become disabled at some time in the future,
their Social Security benefits would be easy to collect is simply not tuned
into the reality of this absurd system.
You will have to jump through hoops and very probably receive one or
more denials of your benefits before you can even hope to convince these people
of your need. (That is unless you are
suddenly stricken with a politically correct enough disease or
disability.) Remember, this is a
government run program.
I
can cite a specific case here if you are having a problem believing what I am
saying. The identity and specifics are
withheld for obvious reasons, but consider if you will the following true case
scenario:
A Navy
enlisted veteran of 8 years from 12/66 to 12/74 with pride in a military record
that required many days and extra hours away from a young family who continued
to serve as a civilian in the civil defense industry after military service -
current age is 60.
The timeline preceding this veteran’s need for Social Security Disability
benefits is as follows:
9/01 - Laid off from job at a defense contractor. Efforts at obtaining other employment in the field of logistics,
even on a nationwide basis, proved futile as you might expect for a man
approaching his 60th birthday and in ill health. Unemployment compensation
helped but could not stem the cash savings outflow.
12/01 - After medical coverage had lapsed,
symptoms of a medical condition began to appear. A series of tests indicated a
kidney condition of some sort but further and more extensive tests were
indicated to determine actual cause. Savings were limited so he was
forced to turn to a VA Medical Facility. After establishing eligibility and
waiting for the tests to be scheduled, months passed.
3/02 - Diagnosed with Renal Cell Carcinoma
Cancer of the left kidney. In early April, kidney was removed under emergency
conditions and evidence of a second cancer - Large Cell B-Cell Lymphoma - was
found. Doctors think that all of the Renal Cell Cancer was excised in the
operation and began an aggressive chemotherapy treatment that is progressing
well and which should be completed in October.
4/02 – Moved with wife closer to family in
order to benefit from the emotional support of family in time of need.
5/02 - As savings deteriorated further and
life seemed to be spiraling beyond control, contact was made with the local
office of Social Security for advice and guidance. They were very helpful,
courteous, and assisted in making application for benefits under the SSA and
SSI programs.
8/02 - Initial claim was denied as ineligible
under current law, but caseworker encouraged an appeal of the decision with
additional medical information and a letter from the oncologist outlining
current condition and an estimation of the period and level of disability.
9/02 - Received notification of denial a
second time. (Both denial decisions appear to have been issued by a state
agency - DES.)
Continuing in
the veteran’s own words:
“This leads to
my first question.
1. Why is the eligibility for a Federal program such as SSA or SSI determined
by a local state agency? In both denial letters the reason given was that
experience was that people with my condition should be able to return to work
in less than a year and since I had to have been unable to work for that period
there was adequate time for me to recover and find work. Yeah, Right! Let’s see
them try in today's job market and with the health and mental stress of a major
illness.
2. Why must so much stress be put on
experience of other people with so-called similar circumstances in a personal
medical condition as a determining factor in award decisions? Don't individual
circumstances carry any relevance even when substantiated by competent medical
opinion? I hesitate to complain and it goes against my nature but if this set
of circumstances were on some other brother serviceman I would be mad as all
get out. The fact that I am facing them is surreal to say the least.”
This person is
now facing bankruptcy simply because government employees found him NOT to be
in need – not once but twice! His
personal savings are gone, due in part to the fact that too much of his
lifetime income was confiscated from him and his employers in the form of FICA
withholdings, so that his personal savings plan was inadequate to see him
through such a devastating medical emergency.
Where is the “security”? His
wife, who also worked and “contributed” to SS for most of her adult life is
permanently disabled and receives benefits equal to slightly over the cost of
the rent on their very modest apartment.
This is their only income, but it is too much to satisfy the decision
makers at the Social Security office that they have a need for his rightful
benefits – even on a temporary basis.
They have no property, own nothing of value, and have little pride left
because they have been forced to beg for assistance, which has fallen short of
meeting their real need – a feeling of security.
This man has
now been out of work twelve times longer than ever before in his life. (The next longest stint of not having to put
a tie on and go to work was his last thirty-day leave from military duty.) He is the epitome of a classic example of
whom this so-called “Social Security” system should help.
Don’t kid
yourselves! That is NOT its
purpose. Redistribution of wealth with
a false promise of security if the need is ever there – THAT is its
purpose. That and assuring that each
individual American citizen has a number by which they can be tracked from cradle
to grave. This was the evil intent from
the get go, and the wolf has finally shed its sheep’s clothing to bear that
out. Life without a Social Security
number, freely given to anyone who asks for it, in America today is plagued
with problems. Where is the “security”?
We cannot
continue to support socialism in any form.
Socialists do not appreciate the value of American liberties nor do they
care about individual security. When
are we going to start electing legislators and leaders who are not afraid to
say that to the public? Instead, we
keep making our judgments based on how much hollow “security” these people keep
promising. What have we become – a
nation of people afraid to stand alone and walk by ourselves into the future
that will judge each of us by our own humanity instead of how well we bend to
the yoke of social programming? Who
among us is deserving of “security” if this American veteran can be found
undeserving by this vile social program?
Home Rant
Page Feedback
Welcome!