NLIC.org

Allan Said:

Good or bad? Rep. Rohrabacher Introduces No Social Security for Illegal Immigrants Act ?

We Answered:

Yes I do agree. That is the price they pay for coming here illegally.

Illegals Granted Social Security
http://www.senior.org/advocate/immigrati…

Excerpt: "Recent studies have completely debunked the theory that these Mexican workers are coming to the United States because they have no work in their homeland. In fact, there is much more that is drawing Mexican workers to the United States, and it includes better health care (funded mostly by U.S. taxpayers), superior education for their children, and the ultimate jackpot: Social Security benefits.

The biggest threat to the long-term security of our Social Security Trust Fund really isn’t personal accounts – despite the raging political debate where some critics of personal accounts claim allowing individual control of retirement accounts will bankrupt Social Security. In fact, the most significant threat to seniors receiving their monthly Social Security checks in the future is actually a normally non-controversial treaty arrangement presently sitting on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s desk between the United States and Mexico, called a “totalization agreement.”

These totalization agreements, of which there are currently 20 in place, have traditionally protected both U.S. workers assigned to work in other countries, and foreign workers with similar work assignments in the United States, from unreasonable requirements to pay into two government mandated retirement systems. Until now, totalization agreements have been non-controversial, and none of those sent to Congress for approval have been rejected.

But the proposed totalization agreement with Mexico has drawn the scrutiny of many in Congress, and significant problems with this agreement have been uncovered that document the proposed Mexico totalization agreement will likely provide a financial jackpot for currently illegal Mexican workers in the United States, and create a huge incentive for millions more to come to the United States to work.

The Center for Immigration Studies, an independent, non-partisan research organization that analyzes the impact of immigration on the United States, issued a report on the proposed Mexico Totalization Agreement that found four significant problems with the agreement:

1. One-sided. Unlike the 20 existing agreements, a totalization agreement with Mexico would be one-sided. Its beneficial effects to U.S. workers would be miniscule compared to those received by potentially millions of Mexicans. It is expected that the totalization agreement with Mexico would:

A. Provide only modest tax savings for American workers and their employers compared to other totalization agreements.

B. Entice Mexicans to remain in the United States for the 10 years it takes to vest for U.S. Social Security (versus 24 in Mexico) in order to maximize their retirement income. Under totalization agreement provisions, illegal Mexican workers could vest for benefits after just 6 quarters, or 18 months. The United States pays out far more to low-wage workers than they contribute to the system. In contrast, Mexico only pays out what was contributed, plus accrued interest.

C. Permit Mexicans to return home and have their spouses and dependents receive U.S. Social Security benefits they would not have been entitled to without a totalization agreement.

D. Permit partial Social Security benefits to be paid to those who worked in the United States as little as 18 months (six quarters).

E. Eventually compel the United States to pay out billions in retirement benefits to Mexicans for credits they acquired while using fraudulent Social Security numbers prior to obtaining legal status.

F. Lure even more Mexicans into the United States illegally in the hopes they would obtain amnesty, thereby making themselves and their families eligible to receive U.S. Social Security benefits once the worker returned to Mexico and reached retirement age.

2. Perversion of original concept. The anticipated totalization agreement with Mexico is a perversion of prior agreements, calling into question the appropriateness of such a pact. The norm in existing bilateral totalization agreements assumes employees of corporations are asked by their employers to transfer to the other country for a specified period of time. Employees and employers in both countries have been contributing to their respective social security systems. The dual objectives of existing totalization agreements were to secure tax savings for the employees and employers of both nations by eliminating double taxation and to guarantee an old age pension to those who contributed to both social security systems by “totalizing” the years worked in both countries. Employees legally enter the partner nation with documents verifying they are authorized to work.

Virtually all of the existing 20 totalization agreements are with developed nations whose social security retirement benefits are at parity with those in the United States, providing no incentive to stay and vest for U.S. social security. In contrast, most Mexican workers entered the United States illegally, were not affiliated with a corporation, previously lived in poverty, and paid no social security taxes in Mexico. There is no benefit parity for American workers in Mexico as it takes more than twice as long to vest for Mexican social security (24 years vs. 10 years in United States) and the benefits are far less generous than those in the United States.

3. Most Mexicans here illegally. None of the existing totalization countries accounts for even 1 percent of the U.S. illegal population and jointly comprise only 4 percent of the total number of illegals. In contrast, over half of the Mexicans living in the United States are illegal aliens. The size of the illegal population from Mexico more than doubled in the last decade and now accounts for 69 percent of the U.S. illegal population. To adopt a totalization agreement with Mexico would put the United States in the ludicrous position of offering Social Security benefits to potentially millions of Mexican workers who showed contempt for our laws by illegally crossing our border and by fraudulently obtaining the Social Security numbers (SSNs) needed to qualify for old age and disability benefits.

4. Huge costs. It is extremely difficult to estimate the potential long-term drain of a Mexican totalization agreement on the U.S. Social Security trust fund, but it has the potential to dwarf all the other agreements combined. Serious questions have been raised about the assumptions made by the Social Security Administration (SSA) and the rigor of its analysis. Inexplicably, SSA projected its estimates based on the totalization experience with Canada. The estimated number of Canadians living in the United States is 820,000 (vs. 9.2 million Mexicans). Given the fact that a totalization agreement would cover not just Mexican workers but also their spouses and dependents, it is highly likely that over time, potentially millions of people would receive U.S. Social Security benefits and the cost would be in the billions of dollars.

Given these damning indictments of an apparently deeply flawed Mexican Totalization proposal, it is astounding that this agreement is being pursued at the highest levels of the Bush Administration, and by many in the U.S. Congress. Advocates for this Agreement, that include the Social Security Administration Commissioner Jo Anne Barnhart, provided testimony before the Congress that claimed the Mexico agreement would have a “negligible long-range effect on the Social Security Trust Fund” and estimated the costs to be about $105 million per year over the first five years.

The General Accountability Office (GAO), that acts as the public watchdog over government, was asked by the Chairmen of the House Judiciary and Ways and Means Committees to provide a report on how the proposed Mexican Totalization Agreement might impact the payment of Social Security benefits to potentially millions of illegal Mexican immigrants and their families and any impacts such payments would have on the long-term solvency of the Social Security Trust Fund. The GAO report directly contradicted the assumptions used by SSA in formulating their rosy financial projections and called into question whether any parts of the SSA analysis could be relied upon to support approval of the Mexican Totalization Agreement.

The hidden fatal bullet for the fiscal integrity of the Trust Fund in this calculation is the number of Mexicans who will flood into the United States in order to qualify for social security benefits. The Mexican government is actively encouraging it, and they know that two significant advantages accrue for every Mexican citizen who is able to qualify under the United States social security system. First, the Mexican social security system will not have to pay out any benefits to those workers. Second, the Mexican workers will return home to retire and the flow of money from the United States to Mexican retirees will be a huge boon to Mexico’s economy.

The Mexican social security system takes much longer to vest into, and the payments are far less than the guaranteed minimum benefit provided for under the United States social security program. It is literally a financial bonanza for Mexican workers who can work the required number of quarters to be vested into our system – even if they do so illegally and under a fraudulent social security number.

There aren’t many occasions when a United States Senator and a local City Councilman are voting on the same issue, but it’s happening virtually every day as Americans attempt to cope with the flood of illegal immigrants into the United States. For illegal immigrants, the majority of whom are Mexican citizens seeking a better life, the economic and lifestyle advantages are

Troy Said:

What do you think of this article about social security and medicare (link at the bottom)?

We Answered:

I don't care about Social Security and Medicare I have a pension plan from my job.I don't work at Taco Bell I have a real job.

Melanie Said:

Can you support a bill that stops Social Security to illegal aliens?

We Answered:

The amount they pay into social security doesn't begin to cover what it cost to educate, house, feed, or cover medical care. Pay for infrastructure repairs or improvements, natural resources used up.

Lets consider that money their (little) contribution to cover the welfare and other benefits they receive. *And for those who claim illegals can't bet benefits their anchor babies do and at this point there is an estimated 5 million.

Leona Said:

Title 2 of the social security act, who benefits?

We Answered:

A. Medicare

Valerie Said:

Are parents liable for 18 yr. old son who refuses to get auto insurance and is in an accident?

We Answered:

he is 18 it is his problem not yours
but if your name is on the title of the truck you could be sued for part of it

Jennie Said:

Suing ex landlord. Non-return of security deposit - No 30 day notice given - Month-to-month rental?

We Answered:

Well, to be honest, if he was letting the mortgage go he is in serious financial trouble. You may not get your money back even if you win at small claims. You have to recognize the reality - he was probably just warning you to get out and probably had no intent to refund your security deposit. You may be entitled but you may not get it.

With all due respect to the property manager, his statement to you could easily be construed as a message that you needed to leave. Any reasonable person would have thought the same way you did, and the thought would have been, "uh oh, I better find another place right away." Your agreement was month to month so you should consider that he did give you notice - you didn't have to move out that weekend. In hindsight, you should have asked him what you needed to do, or called someone for advice. But you panicked and are looking for him to pay. Get some local advice - here are a couple of links for local sources for you:
http://www.renters-rights.com/
http://www.hud.gov/local/il/renting/tena…
http://www.tenant.org/resources.php

Claire Said:

which health insurance program is designed to complement the retirement survivor and disability insurance act?

We Answered:

Medicare