I am not asking you to donate to this Group and I am not running down anyone. As we ourselves are poor crippled up, older ones , spending our extra time, trying to help the voiceless ones in this World ourselves. I have relied on free blogs, paid by business adds, Thank You!!!!!!. But Heck, I even have a paid site that is not even working correctly ! lol That was a funny …. a total waste of money! Not a wise choice, let me say! A lesson learned for sure!
So I looked at this Group on line. To see — what are the ages of the real owners behind it or who works behind the scenes. Are they really all over 50 years of age? About…… http://www.aarp.org/about-aarp/
As with barely getting by myself, $5 or $10 is a lot of money to me! They ask for money all the time to fight all these Political Wars over every law passed. I guess it is to cover costs of …. paper, ink, computer parts, mail costs, phone bills, travel etc. ?????? So I can see that in working as a Group, if they really are all over 50 years of age, those are needs for the ones doing all the up front work. I can not see paying out for younger ones. If making a business off of older ones. No way!
So I was just taking a closer look. As I think,What? More money? Where are you guys getting your extra $$ yourselves, to do all this? Thanks for all the hard work, if it really is helping. Or is it just our voices and votes that are helping the causes?
Thought I would share my thoughts on this part/ chapter of ones life.
Dear______,
| We’re still 391 people short of our goal of 2,500 donors to ramp up our campaign to protect Social Security.
This is a fight we have to win. |
Cutting Social Security to fix a deficit it didn’t cause isn’t just unfair. It’s dangerous.
But it’s exactly what some senators are discussing as they prepare a bill that targets Social Security to balance the budget.
AARP knows just how dangerous these cuts would be for millions of current and future older Americans, and we’re not going to hold back in our fight to protect Social Security.
From targeted ads and phone calls to letters to Congress and meetings with key legislators, we’ll do whatever it takes to protect Social Security’s earned benefits.
____, can we count on you to stand with us and help protect Social Security?
Congress should be focusing on what really caused the deficit, but instead some senators are working on a bill that could include big cuts to the Social Security benefits seniors have relied on for 75 years.
That’s why we’ve launched an all-out campaign to protect Social Security – running powerful ads to educate the public and driving phone calls and letters to key members of Congress that make it clear we’re counting on them to defend Social Security, not cut it.
But to keep Social Security strong for today’s seniors and generations to come, we need you to join the fight.
Thank you for standing with AARP to keep Social Security strong.
Sincerely,
________ __________
Senior Manager, Grassroots
Redwood Forest 
Rumors of the death of Social Security have been greatly exaggerated. But if the misconceptions continue to spread, they could doom the program over the years to come, one program expert said Monday in a meeting with area seniors.
The pension program, celebrating its 75th anniversary, is not set to go bankrupt, not for another 25 years at least, said Nancy Altman, a longtime Social Security scholar and author of the book “The Battle for Social Security.” And, despite claims to the contrary, it does not contribute to the national deficit, she told a group of about 30 residents at the Nashua Public Library.
Many politicians continue to use these myths, among others, as they work to implement reforms that could threaten the benefits of thousands of senior citizens, widows and disabled workers in New Hampshire and across the country, Altman said.
In total, about 238,000 state residents receive Social Security benefits, including about 65,000 in Hillsborough County, according to federal figures.
“This issue about the future (of Social Security) is a political one, not a question of economics,” said Altman, who serves as chairman of the Pension Rights Center, a national nonprofit group.
“It’s a vitally important program. It’s efficient … and we can afford it,” she told the crowd. “The question is, do we want to?”
Federal lawmakers, concerned over the country’s $14 trillion deficit, are considering changes to the Social Security system, among other financial reforms. But because the Social Security program does not contribute to the debt, they are looking in the wrong direction, Altman said.
Restricted by federal law, Social Security administrators do not have the authority to borrow money, surviving instead on their own revenues, Altman said.
As it stands now, the program, which has raised surplus funds every year since 1984, runs a $2.6 trillion surplus. It is set to cover 100 percent of the benefit payments to eligible citizens at least through 2037. And even if lawmakers don’t do anything to address further funding, it will be able to cover about 78 percent of benefits from that point, Altman said.
“Obviously that’s not good enough, but it’s not this terrible, sky-is-falling situation that everyone talks about,” she told the audience.
Still, some legislators are determined to change the program’s funding to save costs.
A team of six lawmakers representing both major political parties is preparing to introduce a series of Social Security reforms, including changes in the funding formula and increasing the retirement age, that could mean millions of dollars in lost benefits, Altman said.
“It’s hard to imagine. Are we going to have people working until they’re 80?” Ed Dalton, a Windham resident and a volunteer advocate with the Granite State Organizing Project, asked after the meeting. “This is a promise that’s been made to people. We can’t take that away.”
Rather than reducing costs, lawmakers should consider expanding revenue sources to ensure the program’s future, Altman said. They could direct existing tax dollars toward the program, through the estate tax, among other options, she said. Or they could raise or eliminate the income limits subject to the Social Security tax.
Currently, residents are taxed on the first $106,800 of their annual earnings.
“There has to be something that can be done. People earn so much more than that,” said Carol Knieriem, 72, of Manchester. “It seems crazy.”