Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Alex does not get any of my Social Security benefits. All that money that I have paid into the system - poof, gone.

Alex will not automatically get everything I own - 401(k), etc - even though he is the beneficiary, like he would if we had a legally recognized marriage.



Conservatives talk about fairmess - how is this fair?

How, if he's the designated beneficiary, does he NOT get the 401k?

AZGrizFan wrote:How, if he's the designated beneficiary, does he NOT get the 401k?

He will, but it is more of a pain, from what I have been told. Still looking into that. SS I know he will not get.

dbackjon wrote:Alex does not get any of my Social Security benefits. All that money that I have paid into the system - poof, gone.

Alex will not automatically get everything I own - 401(k), etc - even though he is the beneficiary, like he would if we had a legally recognized marriage.



Conservatives talk about fairmess - how is this fair?

Those benefits can go back into the system. Besides, the government can better spend them than Alex can. Every good Democrat knows that!












All kidding aside, I don't see why you shouldn't be able to leave your assets to whomever you please--married or not. There are a lot of things that are unfair in life...though a slow process, hopefully we continue to make progress.

dbackjon wrote:Conservatives talk about fairmess - how is this fair?

I don't think it is fair.

dbackjon wrote:Alex does not get any of my Social Security benefits. All that money that I have paid into the system - poof, gone.

Alex will not automatically get everything I own - 401(k), etc - even though he is the beneficiary, like he would if we had a legally recognized marriage.



Conservatives talk about fairmess - how is this fair?

It's not fair. Being forced to participate in SS isn't fair either. But that's another topic.

I pay into the system, am conservative, and am legally married to someone of the opposite sex. And when I die I don't expect that she'll get any SS money either.

My wife and I are paying into social security and we probably won't see any if it ourselves.....talk about unfair

Sent from the nexus of the universe

Rob Iola wrote:I pay into the system, am conservative, and am legally married to someone of the opposite sex. And when I die I don't expect that she'll get any SS money either.

I agree with this. Why should a bitch, gay or not, get survivor benefits?

That idea of giving the social security benefits to the spouse was designed by folks in the 50's, where one person would work and the housewife would stay home. There should be no spousal surviver benefits these days.

So, screw Alex...and others like him (or her).

Cluck U wrote:

Rob Iola wrote:I pay into the system, am conservative, and am legally married to someone of the opposite sex. And when I die I don't expect that she'll get any SS money either.

I agree with this. Why should a bitch, gay or not, get survivor benefits?

That idea of giving the social security benefits to the spouse was designed by folks in the 50's, where one person would work and the housewife would stay home. There should be no spousal surviver benefits these days.

So, screw Alex...and others like him (or her).

Cap'n Cat agrees.

HI54UNI wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Alex does not get any of my Social Security benefits. All that money that I have paid into the system - poof, gone.

Alex will not automatically get everything I own - 401(k), etc - even though he is the beneficiary, like he would if we had a legally recognized marriage.



Conservatives talk about fairmess - how is this fair?

It's not fair. Being forced to participate in SS isn't fair either. But that's another topic.

Agreed.

By the way, we breeders rule...

Then change the law so no one gets the benefits - as it stands now, we have inequality in the nation.

Rob Iola wrote:I pay into the system, am conservative, and am legally married to someone of the opposite sex. And when I die I don't expect that she'll get any SS money either.

This.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Cluck U wrote:

I agree with this. Why should a bitch, gay or not, get survivor benefits?

That idea of giving the social security benefits to the spouse was designed by folks in the 50's, where one person would work and the housewife would stay home. There should be no spousal surviver benefits these days.

So, screw Alex...and others like him (or her).

Cap'n Cat agrees.

+2

Maybe you and the Mrs can fill out a form waving survivor benefits.

dbackjon wrote:Then change the law so no one gets the benefits - as it stands now, we have inequality in the nation.

All over the place. Life ain't fair. Whoever told you that fucking lied. Equality is a myth, as much as freedom, liberty, justice. All myths to keep the rubes distracted while the real shit goes down.


















But, yeah, that's bullshit. Fucking religion, eh?

dbackjon wrote:Maybe you and the Mrs can fill out a form waving survivor benefits.

Where do we sign?! Of course, that means we don't have to keep paying, right?

Rob Iola wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Maybe you and the Mrs can fill out a form waving survivor benefits.

Where do we sign?! Of course, that means we don't have to keep paying, right?

Nope - you get to be equal to me - pay in, spouse gets nothing.

Jon, you have a long road ahead. Since Social Security is a federal thing, and same sex marriage is a state thing, how long do you think it will take to make the survivor benefits mesh?

dbackjon wrote:

Rob Iola wrote: Where do we sign?! Of course, that means we don't have to keep paying, right?

Nope - you get to be equal to me - pay in, spouse gets nothing.

That's what we currently have, so what are you fussin' about?

Rob Iola wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
Nope - you get to be equal to me - pay in, spouse gets nothing.

That's what we currently have, so what are you fussin' about?

Nope

CAA Flagship wrote:Jon, you have a long road ahead. Since Social Security is a federal thing, and same sex marriage is a state thing, how long do you think it will take to make the survivor benefits mesh?

If the SCOTUS strikes down DOMA, then for residents of those states, they should be able to get it. Then, the SCOTUS should rule that this creates inequality among the states and makes marriage legal everywhere.


This is what SHOULD happen, as DOMA, and gay marriage bans are CLEARLY unconstitutional. However, Scalia, Alito and Thomas don't care about the Constitution, only advancing their extremist agenda, so it will be up to Kennedy and Roberts to decide if the SCOTUS will be a just one, or looked at in the future like the Dred Scott Court.

dbackjon wrote:Then change the law so no one gets the benefits - as it stands now, we have inequality in the nation.

They're going to solve the problem by running SS into the ground.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:Then change the law so no one gets the benefits - as it stands now, we have inequality in the nation.

They're going to solve the problem by running SS into the ground.

SS is still taking in more than it spends.

And merely raising the earnings limit would keep it solvent for centuries