How Long Do You Think Social Security Will Last?

[tsquared]

Regardless of what political party is in office what do you think of social security? Do you think it will be there when you retire or should we be allowed to handle our own fate? Would you be comfortable investing your own money so that you might have a bigger retirement?
Political party should not have anything to do with it as one party is just as bad as the other at taking money from one place to cover pork in other places.

[bell_peaches]

I know my DH and I are praying there will be ss we have no retirement or anything. His company he worked for never had anything like that and he thought he would have plenty of time ya right we are in dept can't save nothing so if not I will be in my wheel chair working at walmart.Or worse yet I will be the oldest telemarketer around LOL I wonder if people are nicer to old ladies???? :confused:

[buttrfli]

You know what irks the crap outta me?? The fact that my DH's ex wife can collect retirement benefits off DH's source just because they were married for over 10 years. She can also collect death benefits if he should die (God forbid). It dosen't affect his benefits (the amount), but I don't understand why ex spouses are entitled to that money?? Its not theirs. Once you are divorced that should be it!

This goes for ANYONE who was married for 10 years or more and are not currently married. The can get re-married, but as long as they aren't maried at the time they apply for benefits they are eligible... how nuts is that?? Can you imagine how much money is going to ex-spouses???

[stresseater]

No, I don't believe SS will be there when we retire. Yes I do want the oppertunity to invest part of my own money in my future. I would love to have a retirement plan modeled like the one the congressmen and senators have. They retire quite well off of it. ;) :D

[Aloha from paradise]

Nope, I don't think it will be there when we retire :(

[twinkiesmom]

when I turn 65, there will be no such thing as SS. I hate to say it, but I think they should recalculate how they give out benes. Many, many more ppl are living longer these days. And yes, being able to invest your share in an acct would be nice, but at the same time, will there be losses? There has to be a catch to this acct thing that Bush is proposing. I mean, if I paid in lets say 20K to this acct, w/all the losses investment stocks n stuff, is there a chance I'll only have 5K in the acct when I retire when I paid in 20K? Anyone know?

[irrelevant0]

i think they money you pay in should go into an account with your name on it. i'm sorry for those who aren't going to have any, but the government should prevent this from happening again. this country just keeps getting worse ...

[mistressB]

i think that they need to stop giving it to people so freely. i know people who have children with ADD that get it. i also know a guy who's over 65 but has a daughter that was 17 and she was getting it instead of him because he worked, and she would continue to get it as long as she was going to school. what is the point of that? there is a guy down the road that gets it because he's an alcoholic and can't work or hold down a job, even though he makes money on the side siding houses. it just doesn't seem right that it's being given to people who don't need it. it should be for people with legitimate disabilities or the elderly.

[nightrider127]

i think that they need to stop giving it to people so freely. i know people who have children with ADD that get it. i also know a guy who's over 65 but has a daughter that was 17 and she was getting it instead of him because he worked, and she would continue to get it as long as she was going to school. what is the point of that? there is a guy down the road that gets it because he's an alcoholic and can't work or hold down a job, even though he makes money on the side siding houses. it just doesn't seem right that it's being given to people who don't need it. it should be for people with legitimate disabilities or the elderly.

Thank you. You took the words right out of my mouth.

I got a SIL who collects it. Why? Because she is fat, that's why. When she was first awarded the Social Security, she got back in her lump sum check more than she had ever paid into it. And before anyone says she must have something wrong with her to be as big as she is, there is nothing wrong with her that staying away from eating a pound of bacon at a time wouldn't cure.

My hubbys cousin did collect it on both her children. Why? Because they are tongue tied. She wouldn't get it fixed because she would lose their checks if she did. I know one of her girls is still collecting it and the other one probably is.

It would help a lot if we stopped giving away money to all these other nations and putting that money instead into social security. Give the money to the people who it belongs to in the first place. Take care of the home front before you worry about the rest of the world.

[dv8grl]

The main problem with social security, I feel, Is that people are living way longer than they did 60 years ago. Then again, the population has increased so much.

[brooks45]

hmmmm!! my opinion on this is..Ok! You know when you buy a cd or bonds and you draw interest on these right...ok..while they are locked down for 10 years..what do you think the bank is doing with that money for you to draw interest..you got it..they are investing it. although..hmmmm they are federally insured! right.. and this is unheard of..and of course i could be wrong :rolleyes: turn it around...I have a feeling that this SS plan bush has come up with is pretty much the same..sure invest your money meanwhile the government is invested it also..not that it hurts anything.. (I hope anyway) everyone could come out a winner..but but i smell a rat and i dont like this plan and u watch and see this is going to be a mighty upset country before its over with..here in calif there was already a senior picket/riot type thingy :eek: and i dont blame them..my poor father,rest his soul would roll over in his grave if he knew this was going on..he was a union worker for 40 years and paid into his social security so he could retire drawing his SS now my mother draws off of it as well as his union pension and thats the way it should be cuz my father paid into it like so many in this country has. Do i think ill be able to draw my SS when its time..NO! And its a shame that the gov is so messed up! :confused:

[buttrfli]

How is ADD a disability? I had no idea people received SSI for that :confused: My DD has ADHD but she also has a mental disability. Yes, she receives SSI, but I need it for what her medical won't cover and once I pay for that, there MIGHT be $20 left. I don't understand what someone need money for for ADD?

I am not even going to begin to start on my feelings of the government.... we'd be here all day an dI would prolly start a fight lol

I am just surprised that people can get SSI for just having ADD. Its funny, the people who REALLY need it have to fight for years to get it and some people break a fingernail and get it immediately. My grand-daughter has ADD, but has no other health (physical or mental) problems. I would never in a million years file for her to receive SSI. Her meds run me about $30/ mo. and other than that I have no other expenses. Big whoop! Having only ADD/ADHD is NOT a medical problem IMHO.

I think a lot could be done as far as our social security goes... but nothing will be done, social security won't be there for me or my children when they are older. Thats why when I pay the min amount the gov has set when I file taxes (we are self employed so we can put more in) I have paid the min for the last 7 years. Then I turn around and put money in an IRA account. Its mine and no one but DH and I can get that money. I'm sorry if I am selfish, but I agree with another poster who said that everyones money should be used on them persoanlly and not distributed. That goes back to me being irked that DH's ex wife can collect JUST because she was married to him for over 10 years and the woman has never worked a day in her life.

Ok.... I'll shut up now :D

[bribella]

My husband and I just had this same discussion last night. And I also think that each person who pays in to SS should have that money put into a personal account meant just for them. Its our money we should be able to insure that we get that money back.

I don't have a problem with people being able to take a portion of their SS and invest it however I think that there should be regulations on what you can invest the money in. I personally don't think it would be wise to invest it in stocks. But I think we should be able to put a portion into a IRA or some type of mutual fund. I just think it is too risky to invest your SS in the stock market. JMO

[Kelsey1224]

Definitely an interesting subject. My husband works for Social Security and I work in the pension field as a financial analyst.

First...at this point...it is estimated that Social Security is fully funded through 2040 (approximately...I don't remember the exact date, i.e. 2043). So...if you won't be collecting any benefits within the next 35 years or so...then you are right to say that it MAY not be around for you.

Second, Social Security was NEVER designed to be one's sole source of retirement income. It was meant to supplement what people saved toward retirement. Unfortunately, over the years people have stopped saving like they used to. As others have posted before me...there are also many people who now receive benefits...surviving children, those on disability, etc. who weren't in the original design as well.

Third, while people assume that they have paid thousands and thousands of dollars into the system, most people will have withdrawn what they paid in after about 5 or 6 years of collecting a benefit. (Again...I'm not sure of the exact number of years...but it is really small number when compared to how many total years most people draw a benefit.)

On the flip side...while it is correct to say that you will withdraw what you paid in within a few years...that doesn't take into consideration how much money there would be if your contributions had been invested wisely. (Hubby hates when I point that out...LOL)

Personally, I believe that we would all do better if the money was invested privately. However, I have a proviso to that statement. The money should be set aside for retirement ONLY!!! I do not believe it should be viewed as a little "slush fund" to be tapped when an individual feels a need. I think our NOT being able to touch our Social Security benefits until we are of retirement age is a GOOD THING!!!

I also know that, statistically, even when people have control over their retirement investments (i.e., 401K plans)...they typically do not do as well with their funds as they would have done if their investments had been directed by another. Most people...regardless of age and circumstance...are just too conservative with their money and thus, do not make the most of the investment opportunities available to them.

Regardless of the information that is provided to people...most just do not become as informed as they should regarding their retirement benefits or opportunities.

I can't tell you how many people take distributions of their pension plans each year simply because they have changed jobs and a distribution was now available to them. The tax ramifications of doing this are tremendous (i.e., owing the government upwards to 45% of the distribution in taxes.) This information is ALWAYS provided when the distribution is made...but most people are surprised when they file their taxes.

Needless to say...I practice what I preach and I will have several sources of retirement income when the time comes.

By the way...everyone "knows someone" who seems to be collecting benefits for some reason that seems ridiculous to the rest of us. However, as many people on this board have posted...getting disability benefits is very difficult. And while it may appear that someone is getting benefits for something insignificant, it is possible that you don't know the entire situation. For example, people with alcohol or drug abuse related problems used to be entitled to a disability benefit. However this changed several years ago. People can no longer collect disability benefits for alcoholism or drug dependency. When this policy went into effect, these individuals continued to have coverage for a brief time as they went through substance abuse programs...but all benefits were eventually cut off. I also believe that if someone had another problem, i.e., cirrhosis of the liver, which was the direct result of their alcoholism or substance abuse, then they couldn't collect disability because of that disease either.

Oh...and one final thought. Yes...if you were married to someone for more than 10 years, you can claim a benefit on their account. But, this only comes into play if any benefit you earned on your own would be less than what you would have on their account. This used to be more common when most women didn't work outside the home and therefore had never earned a benefit. However, most women (people) will have earned a better benefit on their own account anyway and will never apply for a benefit under a prior spouse's account. The tiny portion of the population that this would affect isn't going to make that big of a difference in the big scheme of things with the Social Security system.

You have to understand why this benefit was put into place. It wasn't uncommon for a woman to stay at home. Then...after many years of marriage, the husband would leave and these women would have nothing for their retirement. When they got married, the wife made a deal to take care of house and home and in exchange, their husbands would be there to take care of them. But, the husbands broke that deal and women would left with nothing. The 10 year mark was simply determined to be a reasonable amount of time that two people would have contributed to the marriage.

Okay...time to quit. This post has gotten too long as it is.

[buttrfli]

Wow Kelsey!!! That was an excellent post and I appreciate the "insider" knowledge. The information was great! :D

[redrig]

If they set up the personal retirement accounts like many companies do for 401k's, you could end up with a lot more than you ever put in (due to interest and dividends), but with a volatile stock market, obviously you could end up with less. But if (like a lot of 401k's) there are options on where you want your money to go, there is usually one called a Stable Value Fund (or words to that effect). That particular account is named Stable for a reason...it has an interest rate that doesn't wildly fluctuate according to stocks...you won't see returns of 10%+ on it, but a nice, steady 4-5%...and if you're not retiring for quite some time, that interest rate can yield a nice sum. Like many 401k's, it all depends on how much risk you're willing to take with your money. But the other poster is right, it shouldn't be used as a slush fund to dip into whenever you feel like taking a little vacation...it should be set up that the money is "loaned" to you (from your own account) for a proven hardship and you are required to pay it back.

[YankeeMary]

Any and all mental illness should be able to qualify for it. If one does then all should. ADD and ADHD is a very expensive illness, from meds. to monthly doctor visits, to counseling to behavioral therapy. If someone can not afford these services, only the children will be harmed. My son has ADHD and if we were eligible trust me I would get it for him. Its just like food stamps and welfare checks, if you qualify then you get it.

[aneisu]

I think there is a huge misconception about what social security is. It is not a retirement account - it is basically a tax. Saying the money should be put in your name and you get it all back is like saying the taxes you pay should only be used for your school, the roads you drive on, etc. It just doesn't work like that. People need to realize early in their work life they need to save for the future. Many jobs have a retirement fund or 401K - if yours doesn't you really need to open a separate account and put money into it. Yes the system needs to be reevaluated and reformed & yes there needs to be more attention paid to who gets the benefits. But everyone needs to remember it is essentially a tax - not a savings account.

[mistressB]

Any and all mental illness should be able to qualify for it. If one does then all should. ADD and ADHD is a very expensive illness, from meds. to monthly doctor visits, to counseling to behavioral therapy. If someone can not afford these services, only the children will be harmed. My son has ADHD and if we were eligible trust me I would get it for him. Its just like food stamps and welfare checks, if you qualify then you get it.

and that's why SS funds are being depleated.

[nanajoanie]

This subject has been tossed around for years. I thought SS would have been depleted before my folks retired, then at least me, and it will probably be here for my kids. I know there is fraud going on but that's always been and SS still survived. They are getting smarter tracking the guilty ones and punishing them by making many pay back the money they received under false pretenses and some do jail time. All I know is I'm not going to loose sleep over this topic. There is nothing I can do about it anyway and fretting causes more wrinkles. I'm just glad wrinkles don't hurt :D

[YankeeMary]

and that's why SS funds are being depleated.
No thats not why they are being depleated.

Unfortunatly I do not qualify for it but if I would qualify I would definatly apply for it. If no one likes that, its to bad. I have worked all my life as well as my entire family, we weren't bred on welfare nor any type of assistance. If My mom were to die tomorrow all that money she paid into SS would be gone. Seems fair? NOT! I would be terribly thankful to receive help for his meds and therapy. I was a single mother for 10 years, I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY HELP!!! Because I made to much money, which is crap, especially since his meds run about $300.00 a month.

What would make you people happy? The parents that have children with ADHD/ADD apply for welfare or food stamps, so they could afford meds? Then you would complain about what they were buying with it. Someone has to help people with disabilities if their families can't. So according to alot of posters these children should be just left untreated because their families can't afford meds and therapy? Someone HAS to help.

I have a fabulous idea lets just take all the money and send it to foreign countries to help their children. Then we won't have to worry about where the SS money is going to because we will know.

[nanajoanie]

Any and all mental illness should be able to qualify for it. If one does then all should. ADD and ADHD is a very expensive illness, from meds. to monthly doctor visits, to counseling to behavioral therapy. If someone can not afford these services, only the children will be harmed. My son has ADHD and if we were eligible trust me I would get it for him. Its just like food stamps and welfare checks, if you qualify then you get it.


Mary, I totally agree with you. Mur and Valinda are trying to get help for their son. He is ADHD and his meds alone cost nearly $300. a month. And his mental problems means he has to go to a private school for $400. a month. They tried mainstream school, homeschooling, church school. His mental health counselor recommened private school with about 20-25 other students just like him. He is 15 yrs. old and insurance has never covered any of this. And to top it all off, now that Mur is home, out of combat, out of a foreign country, his military pay has been drastically cut. He gave his eye to the government so they should give some help with his son. :mad:

[YankeeMary]

Mary, I totally agree with you. Mur and Valinda are trying to get help for their son. He is ADHD and his meds alone cost nearly $300. a month. And his mental problems means he has to go to a private school for $400. a month. They tried mainstream school, homeschooling, church school. His mental health counselor recommened private school with about 20-25 other students just like him. He is 15 yrs. old and insurance has never covered any of this. And to top it all off, now that Mur is home, out of combat, out of a foreign country, his military pay has been drastically cut. He gave his eye to the government so they should give some help with his son. :mad:
Nana I am so sorry. It is not easy on anyone, even with insurance. I really feel for them. Have Valinda go to nami.org they are a great source of information and support.

[buttrfli]

Any and all mental illness should be able to qualify for it. If one does then all should. ADD and ADHD is a very expensive illness, from meds. to monthly doctor visits, to counseling to behavioral therapy. If someone can not afford these services, only the children will be harmed. My son has ADHD and if we were eligible trust me I would get it for him. Its just like food stamps and welfare checks, if you qualify then you get it.

I see your point. We get free behavioral therapy for DD but not for my GD because she does not need it, so my only cost is GD's meds. I didn't really think that others have to pay for all of that. I just didn't realize that the government sees ADD/ADHD as a disability because I have never looked at it that way.

[mistressB]

when SS was created there were 16 people paying in for every 1 person recieving. now it's 3 people paying for every 1 person recieving. if paying into personal accounts means that money that i'm paying in isn't going to people that shouldn't be getting it, i'm all for it. most people that get SS for ADD and other pseudo disabilities arn't even using it for any kind of treatment, it's just another excuse to get free money from the governemt.

of couse i also believe that giving mood altering medication is wrong big time.

[buttrfli]

most people that get SS for ADD and other pseudo disabilities arn't even using it for any kind of treatment, it's just another excuse to get free money from the governemt.


How is it that you know that? There will always be someone who abuses the system one way or another, but how do you know that most people don't use it for treatment?

[YankeeMary]

of couse i also believe that giving mood altering medication is wrong big time.
I am very thankful that you were lucky and your child (and hopefully the one you are carrying) doesn't now or ever needs medicines of any kind. It must be a true blessing.
I think alot of things are wrong, one being if a child needs meds and their parents don't give them meds, well then that is called abuse.
I do not believe in people getting government help when they truly don't need it. But I know that they have guidelines, which aren't easy, if you qualify, then apparently you deserve it. I realize there are those that are able to "trick" the system but most are qualified.

[YankeeMary]

when SS was created there were 16 people paying in for every 1 person recieving. now it's 3 people paying for every 1 person recieving. if paying into personal accounts means that money that i'm paying in isn't going to people that shouldn't be getting it, i'm all for it. most people that get SS for ADD and other pseudo disabilities arn't even using it for any kind of treatment, it's just another excuse to get free money from the governemt.


The 3 people that are paying into it now, pay more than the 6 people paid back then. If my husband didn't have to pay into it, then we would have about 7 times the amount of money it takes to pay for my sons medical bills.

It must be nice to know what people spend the money for. I remember a thread here a bit ago about food stamps and how people spend it, you jumped on the mind your own business wagon then, thought people that get food stamps should be allowed to buy whatever they wanted. But when it comes to getting people monies, its a different story.

[mistressB]

i have ADD and i'm bi polar, dh has ADHD. we both manage just fine without meds. i don't believe that it's a real disability.

[buttrfli]

of couse i also believe that giving mood altering medication is wrong big time.

Without mood altering drugs, my youngest sister wuld not be able to function in a "normal" world. She would not be able to work a part time job and be able to hold on to a 4.0 GPA in school.

Without the mood altering drugs, she would probably be collecting SSI for the rest of her life for her disability. When she does not take her medication she suffers from a depression and anxiety so bad that she can't deal with everyday things.

[mistressB]

The 3 people that are paying into it now, pay more than the 6 people paid back then. If my husband didn't have to pay into it, then we would have about 7 times the amount of money it takes to pay for my sons medical bills.

It must be nice to know what people spend the money for. I remember a thread here a bit ago about food stamps and how people spend it, you jumped on the mind your own business wagon then, thought people that get food stamps should be allowed to buy whatever they wanted. But when it comes to getting people monies, its a different story.

when people are taking money away from those that really need it, then yes i don't think that it's right. the people who get foodstamps spend it on food. the people who get SS benifits don't always spend it on what it's intended for. you can't compare the two.

the 3 people that are paying into it are paying more percentage wise than the 16 people were back then. then there weren't all these "ailments" that people could collect from. and a dollar went a longer way as well . now with so many people collecting they had to raise the percentage taken our the checks to meet the demand.

i don't understand how if your husband didn't pay into SS you guys would have 7 times the money to pay medical bills. they only take out about 12%. your medical bills must be pretty cheap.

[YankeeMary]

when people are taking money away from those that really need it, then yes i don't think that it's right. the people who get foodstamps spend it on food. the people who get SS benifits don't always spend it on what it's intended for. you can't compare the two.

the 3 people that are paying into it are paying more percentage wise than the 16 people were back then. then there weren't all these "ailments" that people could collect from. and a dollar went a longer way as well . now with so many people collecting they had to raise the percentage taken our the checks to meet the demand.

i don't understand how if your husband didn't pay into SS you guys would have 7 times the money to pay medical bills. they only take out about 12%. your medical bills must be pretty cheap.

No there isn't any difference between getting food stamps on food and selling them for money for other things then getting SS and not using it properly. I think that the people the complain the loudest about food stamps being spent on junk or that people on SSI shouldn't receive it are the ones that are actually jealous that they can't get it and instead have to work or do without. It is none of your business what people with SSI or food stamp do with their money or food.
We have insurance, now, thankfully, my DH pays in almost 7 times more then what we pay for medical for Steven. If we didn't have insurance, what he pays into SS wouldn't even cover it all. But the total we pay with copays and such we would have 7 times enough to pay (with copays we payout approx. $100-$150.00 a month). My DH pays into SS approx. $1200.00 a month. My son sees his regular doctor at least once a month ($126.00 to see the PA, $225.00 to see the doc, who is the only one that can write the scripts. His meds run approx. $400.00 a month, counseling and therapy are $150.00 an hour once a week, He has to have blood work every 3 months to make sure his liver is ok and it is approx. $300.00 all total.)
I can not imagine why anyone one HUMAN would want to deny another HUMAN something as simple as medical coverage. It totally blows my mind.
I know that you are pregant and hopefully with insurance and I hope what your insurance doesn't pay, isn't a hardship on your family to pay. But if you didn't have insurance you would have a "medical card" from the state, should you be denied the right to a doctor or hospital. since actually having a hospital birth isn't actaully necassary? Its much safer but not necassary. I would think that as a soceity you would be entitled to a safe, healthy pregancy and birth, but then again it goes back to the rightous ones that say they only have babies to get a bigger welfare check?!?

[YankeeMary]

i have ADD and i'm bi polar, dh has ADHD. we both manage just fine without meds. i don't believe that it's a real disability.
I think it is fantastic that you and your DH are able to control your lives without meds. Yet again you have truly been blessed.
Well I go to visit my Stepdaughter every week sometimes twice a week in a MENTAL HOSPITAL and I get down on my knees and thank the Lord for mood altering medications. I can not imagine where she would be or the rest of those people in there would be without the meds. Thank God your opinion is just that an opinion, I couldn't imagine a world with out these meds. No one would be safe. Maybe if one of those people were your neighbors or God Forbid your own child, you would be singing a different tune? I doubt that though, since you seem to have an argument for everything good or bad.

[Willow]

In my building there are three guys who live together that came from a group home. Everyday they have people that come and administer their "mood altering medication". I would hate to think of what they would be like without it. Sometimes I see them in the morning while I'm waiting for the bus with my son and they are outside smoking while waiting for their care workers to come. They are practically climbing the walls. Some people need those medications to live as normal lives as they can.

My son has ADHD. He takes Adderall XR. It's a real disability. Sometimes in the morning if I get busy and don't give it to him right away he will ask for it because he does not like how he feels when he hasn't had it. He can't sit still or concentrate on anything. That must be an awful feeling to have. I agree with the other who have said it's abuse to not medicate your child when you know they have a problem. If your child is sick and needs an operation you wouldn't deny him that. Some people might say well ADHD isn't life threatening but it is when your kid has feelings of suicide and tries to hurt himself. Thankfully it doesn't affect my son that way but in a lot of kids it does. Then there are some kids who are very impulsive and will run out in front of a car without thinking. I will say that there are kids on medicine who probably don't really need it. Some parents or teachers might want something to calm the kids down so that they don't have to discipline them. Those kids probably don't need it but there are those that do. If my son was not medicated he would not be able to do his school work or anything else because of his attention span.

[sahmsfreeb]

Okay...time to quit. This post has gotten too long as it is.

good information like that is never to long!!! you taught me a thing or three!!! thank you!!!

[buttrfli]

Then there are some kids who are very impulsive and will run out in front of a car without thinking.

I was TOTALLY against medicating children until this very same thing happened with my DD. It wasn't a matter of my parenting skills because I was watching her, I was in fact holding her hand. She saw a frisbee in the Target parking lot, jerked her hand loose and took off. If it weren't for an attentive driver, she would have been hit. She had done other impulsive things, but nothing like that. I really didn't know much about ADHD or how much of her behavior was due to her mental disability, but her dr said she showed every sign of ADHD, but I wan't about to give her pills.... then the incident at the parking lot happened and her therapist said that the impulsiveness was a big part of ADHD and then I agreed to just try some medication and if I didn't like what it did to her, I wouldn't continue. DD is the exact same girl, she not a zombie or out of it on her meds. She plays great with other kids and I have to say that her school life has much improved since. I used to think that people who gave their kids medication were just trying to get out of parenting by keeping them on meds and like zombies, but I can say that I no longer feel the same.

Yes I am sure that there are some kids who don't REALLY need it, but I have come ot find that there are those that do.

[Willow]

I was TOTALLY against medicating children until this very same thing happened with my DD. It wasn't a matter of my parenting skills because I was watching her, I was in fact holding her hand. She saw a frisbee in the Target parking lot, jerked her hand loose and took off. If it weren't for an attentive driver, she would have been hit. She had done other impulsive things, but nothing like that. I really didn't know much about ADHD or how much of her behavior was due to her mental disability, but her dr said she showed every sign of ADHD, but I wan't about to give her pills.... then the incident at the parking lot happened and her therapist said that the impulsiveness was a big part of ADHD and then I agreed to just try some medication and if I didn't like what it did to her, I wouldn't continue. DD is the exact same girl, she not a zombie or out of it on her meds. She plays great with other kids and I have to say that her school life has much improved since. I used to think that people who gave their kids medication were just trying to get out of parenting by keeping them on meds and like zombies, but I can say that I no longer feel the same.

Yes I am sure that there are some kids who don't REALLY need it, but I have come ot find that there are those that do.


My son used to be really impulsive when he was younger. He will be 11 next Sunday and he's come a long way. I didn't like the idea of medication at first either but I couldn't sit by and watch him fail in everything. He used to be in a small classroom with only six other kids but a few months ago he was intergated into a regular classroom with 22 other kids. He's doing really well now. He does his homework without any trouble as before I would literally have to put the pencil in his hand and make him do it. He doesn't squirm in his seat or fidget at his desk and distract anyone like he did at one point. He just wasn't learning without the medication. He still has an IEP in place in case he needs to fall back on it but the teachers have said that they don't think he will. He's a totally different kid than he was before.

[Kelsey1224]

Just some more information regarding Social Security which should eliminate some misconceptions that have been posted here.

The Social Security Administration administers four different programs. Each program has it's own budget. They are:

Retirement and Survivor Benefits
Medicare
Disability Benefits
Supplemental Security Income

Money that is taken out of your paycheck and matched by your employer is divided amongst three accounts...retirement/survivor, disability, and Medicare. Each one gets a set percentage of your deductions as established by Congress.

The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit is a welfare benefit which is funded by federal and state money. While it is something that is paid for by your federal and state income taxes...it is NOT coming out of the funds deducted from your Social Security benefit. It is administered by the Social Security Administration...but it isn't a Social Security benefit.

So...people receiving Disability Benefits are NOT taking money away from your retirement!!! People receiving SSI are NOT taking money away from your Social Security benefit. So...placing blame on people collecting these benefits is placing blame in the wrong place.

It is true that the preportion of those paying into the system as opposed to those collecting it has changed dramatically over the past years. Reasons are obvious. We have a population which is living longer. This problem will only get worse as the Baby Boom generation starts collecting a benefit.

The system has also been impacted by the establishment of survivor's benefits which weren't in the original design of Social Security. However...I personally have mixed feelings about that. I don't think it is a bad thing that we provide benefits to minor children whose parents have died. (I confess...I used to dream about ways to kill my ex-husband so that I could get a benefit for my daughter...whom he didn't help support. LOL).

[YankeeMary]

Just some more information regarding Social Security which should eliminate some misconceptions that have been posted here.

The Social Security Administration administers four different programs. Each program has it's own budget. They are:

Retirement and Survivor Benefits
Medicare
Disability Benefits
Supplemental Security Income

Money that is taken out of your paycheck and matched by your employer is divided amongst three accounts...retirement/survivor, disability, and Medicare. Each one gets a set percentage of your deductions as established by Congress.

The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit is a welfare benefit which is funded by federal and state money. While it is something that is paid for by your federal and state income taxes...it is NOT coming out of the funds deducted from your Social Security benefit. It is administered by the Social Security Administration...but it isn't a Social Security benefit.

So...people receiving Disability Benefits are NOT taking money away from your retirement!!! People receiving SSI are NOT taking money away from your Social Security benefit. So...placing blame on people collecting these benefits is placing blame in the wrong place.

It is true that the preportion of those paying into the system as opposed to those collecting it has changed dramatically over the past years. Reasons are obvious. We have a population which is living longer. This problem will only get worse as the Baby Boom generation starts collecting a benefit.

The system has also been impacted by the establishment of survivor's benefits which weren't in the original design of Social Security. However...I personally have mixed feelings about that. I don't think it is a bad thing that we provide benefits to minor children whose parents have died. (I confess...I used to dream about ways to kill my ex-husband so that I could get a benefit for my daughter...whom he didn't help support. LOL).
Kelsey thank you for your post. It sure clarifies things.
And about your ex..lol...I was the same way at one point..hehe.

[buttrfli]

Thanks for the info Kelsey, it sure clears a lot of things up! :)

[Kelsey1224]

Kelsey thank you for your post. It sure clarifies things.
And about your ex..lol...I was the same way at one point..hehe.

Thanks for your comment YankeeMary...LOL!!! I thought I would get flamed for my remark which was made in jest. (Well...kind of...LOL!)

[YankeeMary]

Thanks for your comment YankeeMary...LOL!!! I thought I would get flamed for my remark which was made in jest. (Well...kind of...LOL!)
No flaming here, since we might have the same ex...lol...or maybe they are twins...hehe.

[YankeeMary]

Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is a Federal income supplement program funded by general tax revenues (not Social Security taxes):

It is designed to help aged, blind, and disabled people, who have little or no income; and
It provides cash to meet basic needs for food, clothing, and shelter.
This is from the social security website.