Okay, I know that we have problems with Social Security here in the US. Being that I am all most 30, I have already given up hope of ever seeing the money that I pay in, but this is ludicrous:
"Pushed by the Mexican government, the Bush administration is working on a Social Security accord that would put tens of thousands of Mexicans onto the Social Security roster and send hundreds of millions of dollars in benefits south of the border. "
"Mexican President Vicente Fox has been pushing President Bush to sign a Social Security agreement with Mexico as something of a consolation prize to make up for Bush’s failure to pursue promised immigration reforms… "
Does anyone see anything good coming from this???
I do not want to even pay SS tax now, much less pay for persons in another country.
The problem this is attempting to solve is the many Mexican workers who were here legally, worked legally, and had Social Security withheld.
This is absolutely just and fair. The agreement is not designed to provide benefits for just anyone, but rather to permit workers who have accumulated them receive them.
Not to sound like a bigot here, but won’t the ones that get SS coverage draw far more than what they paid in?
The low estimate is $720 billion a year paid over 5 years:
3.6 trillion in total over 5 years.
Now assuming that a person today pays in $3500 about a year (making $60000 a year), and works for 5 years in this country, then they would have been short changed $17500 in that 5 year period.
Now today, SS benifits, just cash alone equeals about a $1000 a month. (ruff estimate from here 62 years old and making $60000 a year: http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/calculator.htm )
So if the said person paid in a total of $17500 in the five years of working here, then gets a $1000 amonth for five years ($60000) in Mexico, then there must be one hell of a cost of living increase.
Keep in mind that these are very rough estimates. Why doesn’t the Gov pay them their withheld holdings plus inflation?
The same reason they don’t pay us back our withholdings plus inflation.
We already do this for 20 other countries. Of course it is going to cost more for us to do it for Mexico. There are more Mexicans workers in the US then from any other country. But, if it is fair for us to do it for the European countries then it is fair for us to do it for Mexico.
Because that’s not the deal the government made with them. See, the government said “Hey there, amigos! Come work in America, and we’ll take a portion of your earnings, and in return we’ll give you all these benefits. Cool deal, huh?” You know, exactly the same deal you get when you pay into the SS system. So what’s your beef?
As has been said, (1) it is already being done with many other countries and (2) it is reciprocal which means US citizens who worked abroad can claim the same benefits from the foreign government.
I am afraid that is exactly what you sound like MrTuffPaws. Can you explain to me in simple words why you believe a US citizen should get higher benefits than a foreign national if they are both doing the same job and paying the same taxes?
Maybe my issue is that the SS system does not make sense. How can someone pay so little and reap huge ass rewards is beyond my logic. In my eyes, far from a sustainable method.
As for a foreign national and a citizen not getting the same benefits, I am not even going to comment on that trap.
MrTuffPaws, if you have an issue with the SS system as a whole, that’s one thing but that is not what the OP is about.
>> As for a foreign national and a citizen not getting the same benefits, I am not even going to comment on that trap.
Well, that’s the whole point of your OP so it seems you propose something and then fail to support your own position. It seems like you really see it is indefensible.
MTP:How can someone pay so little and reap huge ass rewards is beyond my logic.
I’m not sure I’d call SS benefits a “huge ass reward”, certainly not in the case of low-wage workers who receive the lowest benefit level—and note, as CBE says, you have to pay FICA taxes for the equivalent of 10 years before you are “vested” in the system and eligible to receive benefits.
In any case, I think the reason you’re confused by this is that you’re thinking of SS as some sort of personal savings system, whereas really it’s a social insurance system. The payroll taxes you contribute are not salted away for you personally: they act as insurance premiums that entitle you to benefits if/when you need them, just as in health or life insurance plans. Some people pay in comparatively little and receive benefits for several decades; others (like my dad who died before he was 60) pay in for decades and never see any benefits.
That’s how all insurance systems work: you’re not putting a certain sum aside for your own future use, you’re contributing to a common pool of assets out of which contributors are paid a certain set level of benefits when and if they qualify for them. It’s not an investment, it’s insurance. (And don’t worry about never seeing any benefits from it. Sure you will, if you live long enough to retire (and pay FICA taxes long enough to get vested). Remember where a lot of the doom&gloom predictions about the lousy future of SS are coming from: people who stand to make a whole lot of money if SS funds get redirected to privatized savings plans.)
My question to the OP stands: Can you explain to me in simple words why you believe a US citizen should get higher benefits than a foreign national if they are both doing the same job and paying the same taxes? To me that would be the definition of bigotry: to believe you are entitled to more than a mexican guy just because you were not born Mexican. Pretty disgusting.