[Hoot Gibson]

My guess is vector, under the terms of his disability retirement, does in fact receive SSI payments from the government. Those will go on until he actually reaches retirement age and then said payments will automatically roll over into regular SS benefits.

As with anything associated with the US government, if one gets some form of personal funding there will be compliance actions attached to those payments. That, like the dirge of a speech on CV-19 Biden delivered last night, is a form of control; and let's face it. If Dems are about anything they are about control.

Social Security payments used to be an earned entitlement based on how much one paid into the fund. Those payments are therefore rightly referred as an 'entitlement.'    In the same way the worker is entitled to his paycheck each week. faithful Americans who worked and made their families self sufficient social units across their entire working lifetimes, also contributed the taxes on which this nation was built. That was the arrangement-- we contribute money while we work and Uncle Sam reciprocates when we are old and incapable of working, by supplementing our financial situation with payments drawn out of the SS fund that our taxes created.

But people who do not/did not work across their lives and have not contributed to Social Security, still get paid. And to confuse the situation Dems wrongly refer to those payments as entitlements. They are not entitlements. Call them gifts, awards, or whatever, but they are welfare based on need without benefit of contribution. IN FACT, it is my expectation that many of those who do not work but are nonetheless financed by Dems, are more securely entrenched in their entitlement status than the elderly who actually worked their whole lives. As with everything else they like, by relabeling welfare as being entitlements, things become a little hazy and thus easier to defend. Because after all, "that's who we are."

What I said was the elderly have already done their part and then some. Working in bad conditions, breathing contaminated air and exposing themselves to myriad threats shortened many a life. But I understand some older folks don't live on the edge, and may be invested or otherwise comfortably healed still having substantial incomes. So does the 'pay your fair share' principle apply for everybody, or just those without much of a voice? Given our present climate those more wealthy seniors should be taxed, I agree. So what's fair? Bracket the federal income tax collected from old folks. Their medical costs are over the moon, and yet they are expected to pay for the free ride of black people in Kentucky according to our governor. Pension amounts (if one is lucky enough to have one) are not adjusted for inflation. Vehicles for example, cost twice the amount they did at the time of my retirement. Food, utilities, insurance, property taxes, absolutely everything including paper towels have  nearly doubled. It is immoral for the US Congress and State Congresses to continue to slam old people the way they do for taxes. Therefore. Set up the taxation brackets for the aged similar to the stimulus brackets. Limit taxes for two people who make up to 150 thousand; and progressively open the rate up for those who make more.

Let's honor those who are poor. But let's not extort what little money seniors have in order to do so. If we had taken .9 of the 1.9 trillion dollar liberal bail-out wish list, and supplemented SS and SSI and whatever else libs use to bribe people, it would have served the US far better, and for far longer.

Well said. I understand very well that, on the rare occasions that a Soviet comrade agrees with our posts, the motives for their agreement is almost always something very different than ours.