Omega Trust Prosperity Program Funds
Mar 20, 2017 Savage, Morgan, Omega, and Freedom. The largest trust is Freedom. PROSPERITY PROGRAM(S). Explanation of the St. Germain Trust, Global World Settlements, Prosperity Programs. The Farmer Claim Program. Gillian on Omega Prosperity Packages URGENT. Omega Trust was a fraudulent US. Anyone here remember the Omega Prosperity Program? Omega Prosperity Packages URGENT!!!! October 7, 2012 Colleen Banking C K Rich Currencies Discussion of Events Finance Gifting Global Funds Monetary Omega Funds Prosperity Program PP St Germain / Saint Germain Trusts.
Omega Trust Prosperity Program Funds Login
A Facebook making the rounds in 2017 lists several purported “fun facts” about Social Security aimed at countering arguments that the United States’ government-run retirement program needs to be scaled back in order to balance the federal budget:Social Security Fun Facts:. Social Security and Medicare are paid for with a separate tax. They add NOTHING to the national debt. Social Security has a $2.5 trillion SURPLUS. Congress has “borrowed” trillions from Social Security to pay for government spending.So when the GOP says we need to cut Social Security in order to balance the federal budget they’re lying.Click Yes & Share If You Want Government To Stop Messing With SS!Were it only so clear and simple. Unfortunately, many aspects of the Social Security system are misunderstood by the public and misrepresented by politicians, so it behooves us to put simplistic statements like these to the test.BackgroundFirst, a little history: The concept of Social Security grew out of the perceived necessity to address economic changes brought about by the industrial revolution and the increasing urbanization of American life in the early 20th century, former Social Security Administration (SSA) historian Larry DeWitt:Earlier forms of economic security reflected the nature of preindustrial societies.
In preindustrial America, most people lived on the land (and could thus provide their own subsistence, if little else); they were self-employed as farmers, laborers, or craftsmen, and they lived in extended families that provided the main form of economic security for family members who could not work. For example, in 1880, America was still 72 percent rural and only 28 percent urban. In only 50 years, that portrait changed; in 1930, we were 56 percent urban and only 44 percent rural (Bureau of the Census 1961).The problem of economic security in old age was not as pressing in preindustrial America because life expectancy was short. A typical American male born in 1850 had a life expectancy at birth of only 38 years (a female, only 2 years longer). But with the dawning of the twentieth century, a revolution in public sanitation, health care, and general living standards produced a growing population of Americans living into old age. Company pensions came into existence in the late 1800s, but for most Americans working in the new industrial economy they were an option:The biggest problem with company-provided pensions was that the percentage of workers anticipating an employment-related pension from their company or their union was tiny.
Indeed, in 1900 there were a total of five companies in the United States (including Dolge) offering their industrial workers company-sponsored pensions. As late as 1932, only about 15% of the labor force had any kind of potential employment-related pension. And because the pensions were often granted or withheld at the option of the employer, most of these workers would never see a retirement pension. Indeed, only about 5% of the elderly were in fact receiving retirement pensions in 1932.The times were ripe for “new forms of social provision,” writes DeWitt.
National social insurance was an idea Europeans were already experimenting with by the 1880s, though it took the United States another fifty years to jump on the bandwagon, first in the form of some experimental state initiatives enacted between 1930 and 1935, then finally on the federal level with the of the Social Security Act of 1935.Per the wishes of its greatest champion, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Social Security was conceived from the outset as a program:On the financing issue, President Roosevelt insisted that the program be self-supporting, in the sense that all of its financing must come from its dedicated payroll taxes and not from general government revenues. He viewed the idea of using general revenues as tantamount to a “blank check” that would allow lawmakers to engage in unbridled spending, and he feared it would inevitably lead to unfunded future deficits.
By tying expenditures to a dedicated revenue source, the program could never spend more than it could accrue through payroll taxation.However, there are a couple of well-known problems with the start-up of all pension schemes. Typically, pension system costs are lowest in the early days when few participants have retired and much higher later on when more people qualify for benefits. Funding a pension system on a current-cost basis thus would impose significantly higher taxes on future cohorts of beneficiaries. To offset this tendency, the CES planners proposed using a large reserve fund that could be used to generate investment income thereby meeting a portion of future program costs.Thus were born the Social Security trust, into which all program revenues go and out of which, by law, only benefits and administrative costs can be taken, with one important exception: any surpluses are to be invested in U.S. Treasury bonds, thereby accumulating interest revenue for the program and making the surpluses available for general use by the government.After 80-plus years, the system remains largely self-sustaining, though that cannot continue to be the case unless some major adjustments are made. What began as a contributory retirement insurance offering minimal old-age assistance to barely half of the existing workforce has grown into a massive provider of retirement and disability benefits to more than 90 percent of American workers and their dependents. An estimated 65.1 million people received payments from the Social Security Administration in 2015.
A total of $897.1 billion was distributed, an amount equivalent to 5 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (for comparison, U.S. Military spending was about $598 billion in 2015).The 2016 Trust Fund Trustees bluntly questioned Social Security’s long-term sustainability:The 2016 Trustees Report projects that the number of retired workers will grow rapidly, asmembers of the post-World War II baby boom continue to retire in increasing numbers. The number of retired workers is projected to double in about 50 years. People are also living longer, and the birth rate is low. As a result, the Trustees project that the ratio of 2.8 workers paying Social Security taxes to each person collecting benefits in 2015 will fall to 2.1 to 1 in 2037. Social Security is not sustainable over the long term at current benefit and tax rates.
In 2010, the program paid more in benefits and expenses than it collected in taxes and other noninterest income, and the 2016 Trustees Report projects this pattern to continue for the next 75 years. The Trustees estimate that the combined OASI and DI trust fund reserves will be depleted by 2034. Members of both the Republican and Democratic parties have called for reform of the Social Security system to rescue it before the reserves run out. When Social Security runs a fiscal deficit (that is, it takes in less tax money than it pays out in benefits), the shortfall has to be covered with Treasury funds, which critics say contributes to the national debt.
According to the Heritage Foundation’s Romina Boccia, this has been the case every year for the better part of a decade:Since 2010, the OASI program has taken in less money from payroll tax revenues and the taxation of benefits than it pays out in benefits, generating cash-flow deficits. The 2014 cash-flow deficit was $39 billion. Over the next 10 years, the OASI program’s cumulative cash-flow deficit will amount to $840 billion, according to the trustees’ intermediate assumptions. Most Snopes assignments begin when readers ask us, “Is this true?” Those tips launch our fact-checkers on sprints across a vast range of political, scientific, legal, historical, and visual information. We investigate as thoroughly and quickly as possible and relay what we learn. Then another question arrives, and the race starts again.We do this work every day at no cost to you, but it is far from free to produce, and we cannot afford to slow down.
To ensure Snopes endures — and grows to serve more readers — we need a different kind of tip: We need your financial support.Support Snopes so we continue to pursue the facts — for you and anyone searching for answers.Team Snopes Support Snopes.Boccia, Romina. “Social Security: $39 Billion Deficit in 2017, Insolvent by 2035.”Heritage Foundation. 29 July 2015.DeWitt, Larry. “The Development of Social Security in America.”Social Security Bulletin, 2010.DeWitt, Larry. “Research Note #20: The Social Security Trust Funds and the Federal Budget.”Social Security Administration. 18 June 2007.Novack, Janet. “Is the Social Security Trust Fund Real or Fiction?
Omega Trust Prosperity Program Funds Online
Who Cares?”Forbes. 6 July 2016.Pattison, David. “Social Security Trust Fund Cash Flows and Reserves.”Social Security Bulletin, 2015.Social Security Board of Trustees. “The 2016 OASDI Trustees Report.”22 June 2016.Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees.
“A Summary of the 2016 Annual Reports.”Social Security Administration. 12 July 2016.Social Security and Medicare Boards of Trustees. “A Summary of the 2018 Annual Reports.”Social Security Administration. 5 June 2018.Medicare.gov. “How Is Medicare Funded?”Accessed 3 July 2017.Social Security Administration.
“Fast Facts & Figures About Social Security, 2016.”August 2016.Social Security Administration. “Historical Background and Development of Social Security.”Accessed 2 July 2017.Social Security Administration. “Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance Trust Funds, 1957-2016.”Accessed 6 July 2017.