recently regarding a comment made to the WaPo by Steve Goss, the boss
at the SSTF. Goss confirmed that as of 2007 SS had collected as much as
$240b from undocumented workers. That blew my mind. I knew there had to
be money, big money. But I did not think it could be that high. The
number has grown since 2007, and the whole ball of wax is earning
interest. So where is this money going to go? I’ll refine the issue:
A person comes illegally to the US and illegally obtains a fake SS and
using that fake # finds work. This person stays in the US continuing to
work illegally for many years. During that period this person has SS
payroll taxes deducted from their paycheck. This person returns to
(Mexico) and at age 62 applies for SS retirement benefits.
Well, I got this wrong. So did all the people I asked (including a
lawyer). How about you? The answer is that an illegal worker using an
illegal SSN has the same rights to SS benefits as a legal worker with a
legal SSN. The only difference is that the person who worked illegally
must receive those SS benefits outside of the USA.
In 2006 the Ensign Amendment was drafted to eliminate this interesting
treatment. The bill was defeated in the Senate by a 49-50 vote. Senator
Leahy (D.Vt.) said at the time:
"We
should not steal their funds or empty their Social Security accounts.
"That is not fair. It does not reward their hard work or their financial
contributions. It violates the trust that underlies the Social Security
Trust Fund."
Goss put a number of $240b as of 07 out there. I took that estimate and
extrapolated where it might be today. I came up with 1/3 of a trillion.
What might be the future liabilities of SS regarding this? About $500b.
Should that be the result, that amount MUST be paid (and spent) outside
of our borders. This makes no sense to me. None of it does. But that is
the way it is.
My original post was bashed to pieces at another site, Angry Bear. There
were some interesting comments that I participated in. A lady that
works for SS made some important contributions. She had a fair bit to
say. She explained how the SSN’s are illegally obtained. She describes
her role in facilitating payments to beneficiaries who worked in the US
illegally and that used fraudulently obtained SSNs. The AB site does not
like me and what I write. Neither do their contributors. The lady who
made available the clarifying information does not like me much either.
Her final thoughts:
Sir, give this up. It is dishonest, misleading and wrong to do what you are doing. I am finished writing to you on this subject.
The entire discussion can be found here. Some cut and pastes from the comments section:
SS does
not keep track of benefits paid by beneficiary immigration status. That
is because as far as the program goes, it doesn't matter. Earnings in,
benefits out. To emphasize, it is perfectly legal for a person to
receive SS benefits on wages earned while in the country illegally as
long as the person receives those benefits outside the US. It has always
been legal as far as I know. I was hired as a bilingual speaker of
Spanish to process these claims and did so personally or in a
supervisory capacity.They (SS) hired me to take claims from people who were insured for
benefits, illegal or not. Then, of course, people can go home and get
checks. This is LEGAL. Believe it or not, perfectly legal. If Congress
had intended to, it could have passed a law making all those quarters of
coverage disappear. But, they didn't and they haven't and I'd be
surprised if they ever do.
Again, the real kick in the pants is that the money MUST be paid out of
the country. Who says America does not have great legislators and great
laws? No wonder we are becoming second rate.
Meaning you would put people in labor prisons, wouldn't you.
I'm not surprised, but I still feel this sense of shock. Some people really are that evil.
.. put people in labor prisons ...
thes - the crime is not the work. The crime is entering the country illegally. You keep trying to make the discussion be about working. The discussion isn't about working.
actually i wish the discussion was about working. it would appear "somebody got up on the wrong side of the benefit bandwagon this morning."
thes - please focus on what the real issue is here. Countries have a right (obligation) to say who can cross their borders. This is a logic issue. If a country did not enforce the right to say who can cross their border, there would in effect be no border. No border, no country.
Most countries have a process whereby people can request permission to cross their border. I used to drive into Canada for the day all the time, but I had to have permission from Canada to do it. There is a separate process whereby people request permission to cross the border and stay for a period of time - student visa; work visa. That is all part of the country enforcing their right to say who can cross their border. Enforcing that right is what actually creates the border.
It is against the laws of most countries to simply cross the border into the country without asking permission. This is what you are addressing when you say you are not for criminalizing immigration. You miss the point. Immigration occurs only when you have asked for and received permission to cross the border. No country criminalizes immigration. They criminalize those who cross their border without requesting permission. That is part of the country's way of maintaining borders. Another word for crossing without permission is invading. Wars get started when borders are invaded.
Now - thought experiment. Let's create a work permit card with a number on it - said numbers tied into the Social Security system. Any foreigner who wants a card can have one. All they have to do is ask. All border crossing stations have an ample supply of cards. How much of the rest of the world do you suppose would take advantage of that card? At what point of being overrun by the rest of the world would you say stop?
I'm actually in favor of such a card. But if you think it through, you will understand that it does not solve the problem. At least until recently, almost the whole of the rest of the world would come here if it were possible. At some point, there would not be a job available for the next person who wants to cross the border (marginal analysis). If the decision is made to let that person in, and all who follow, they will create a huge unemployment crisis. If you choose to keep that person out, and all who follow, you are right back to where we are now. How do you keep them out? And what do you call them if they come in without the required card?
It's a problem that has to be solved somehow, no matter how you slice it.
"At some point, there would not be a job available for the next person who wants to cross the border (marginal analysis). If the decision is made to let that person in, and all who follow, they will create a huge unemployment crisis."
Once the unemployment crisis hit, wouldn't it have the natural effect of deterring more immigration. People would realize that they're too late and there are not anymore jobs left, so they would decide to not come here. Eventually, if it was bad enough, people would start to leave until there was some sort of equilibrium in the labor market.
Also, something that I almost never see mentioned in the argument about taking jobs is that when you say immigrants create a strain on the number of jobs available, you're completely neglecting the possibility of immigrants creating jobs through entrepreneurship.
You are responding to something I said in my thought experiment. In that experiment, anyone in the world who wanted to come into the U.S. could get a card and come in. Under that condition, I expect many would come to the U.S. just to be here, jobs or no.
Note also that I said at some point there would be no job available for the next person wanting to come in. I said nothing about immigrants creating a strain on the number of jobs available. I was making a point. We have limited space here so words must be brief. I did not say this in my post but I agree with your point about immigrants creating jobs. That was a given. More mouths, more food and toilet paper needed. That alone creates more jobs. But the point of streamlining the workplace is that more and more people can be supported with fewer and fewer human workers. So it is possible to imagine a point where there is not a job available for the next person who wants to come in.
I can see how it looks like I deserved that, but, just because I'm not for criminalizing immigration does not mean I'm for forcing anyone into giving another person a hand out. Charity should never be forced. People who say they have a right to benefits, aren't thinking clearly.
Okay. I'll go with that.
You are the evil and ignorant one. MExico and most of the G-20 countries do not allow illegal aliens and actually send them right back, that means deportation.
You really are an uninformed moron!
so, therefore, we should copy them?
I don't see anything wrong in principle with paying benefits to people who contributed, regardless of the legality of their employment. If the SS doesn't question the legality of their employment at the time that it collects their contributions, it forfeits its right to question later.
How does the SS not know that they're illegals? Because it doesn't want to know. Illegal employment of aliens is a huge industry in the US, and there is no political force that disagrees with it. There are only populists who try to make hay by picking on the workers. Nobody wants to challenge the employers or even make it difficult for them.
From a politician's perspective, if you make it more difficult to employ illegal aliens, you anger an influential constituent, but if you make it more difficult for illegal aliens to go about their daily lives while illegally employed, and deny them access to public goods, that not only wins points with xenophobes, it helps keep illegal aliens in uneducated poverty and thus more likely to work shit jobs for dirt pay.
You guys are right, you've changed my mind. Labeling everyone who disagrees with you as a bigot, racist, or xenophobe has converted me. You boys sure do employ some sophisticated tactics.
on Tue, 09/07/2010 - 19:14
#568664
Arm and thesapian are bigots against reason.
Studying philosophy isn't a waste of time.
I call a bigot because that is the term used for a person that uses illogical arguments to attack people based on their race or beliefs.
You specifically agree that the immigrant is paying an insurance premium for SS. Then you proceed to state he is stealing SS services? Do you even realize how illogical your argument is.
You can argue against illegal immigration, there are legitimate augmentations. However, arguing that contributing to SS is theft is just plain stupid.
how about people like me who use ridiculous arguments? and i do care what you call me btw. i'm half martian and there are only 4 of us on the planet....so far.
Well put. I'm glad I returned to this article to check what others were saying. I'll sleep a little bit better now knowing there are some candles in the dark.
I support your anarchist sentiment. All these assholes junking your posts would think twice if they understood how much illegal aliens save them in food prices and various service prices, and how much they are counting on illegal aliens to fund their future SS benefits. Because in fact the vast majority of them don't go home to collect, they stay here and bequeath their benefits to everybody else.
Or maybe it would be better for the US to try to seriously reform its immigration system, to allow in a lot more qualified legal immigrants and make a serious effort to stop employment of legal aliens, which in my opinion could easily be cut by 90% if federal and local governments had any interest in trying. But I can see from the way they're all junking my post that they're not interested in that either.
And what exactly is the circumstance of the "fake" social security number?
a. SS is collecting payments on numbers that they never gave out? How can that happen?
b. The good news is you have paid in enough benefits to be eligible, the bad news is you have been deceased for 20 yrs?
c. The good news is you have paid into the system enough to receive benefits, the bad news is that it will be paid to the legal citizen whose SS# you used?
No, if someone uses your social security number you do not get the benifit from the money put into your account. If names, addresses or the like do not match the funds are forfited to the Government.
exactly. i think this "crime" is much harder to pull off than people realize. needless to say "the prime beneficiary is yet again THE FRIGGIN' GOOBERMINT."
It's easy to see the cracks from my experience. When I first came to the U.S. in 1998, I applied for an ITIN which is which is used like a social security number (9 digits, they tell you to use it whenever a SS# is asked for). I received two different letters with two different ITINs. I tried to get one taken away thru a dozen or so phone calls ( it may be out of the system but I don't know for sure).
When I received legal resident status, I also got a real social security number and I had the SS Admin move my ITIN info (wages, SS payment info) moved to my SS#. The thing is, the SS Admin had no idea that I had an ITIN number in the first place and you have to fill out numerous forms with the old #, what # your info should be moved to, and the reason for the move since most levels of the system have no idea if the 9 digit number is an ITIN or a SS#. They just know the name associated with the number. In hindsight, I didn't have to do it. I could have just started using the new SS#.
I don't know if ITIN accounts are eligible for benefits, but I can see people trying. A cousin tried to get me to sell my ITIN number to his friend who had stayed past his student visa term, but I couldn't go thru with it. I'm sure that is another loophole.
In the comments section at the link Bruce provided, the SSA person said that ITIN's don't accrue benefits.
Bruce I fail to see the logic of your argument; that is beside an underlying biggoted rant.
US Social Security was and is structured like an insurance product. If a person pays a premium he should definitely receive the insurance he paid for.
Furthermore, it is actually unfair for the immigrants. They are providing cash today to pay for benefits for current recipients. As we all know SS is bankrupt long-term. They are in effect helping to fund the US deficit and will be left hanging just like all other current SS contributors.
Contrary to your disingenious arguments, you should be mad at immigrants who do not get SSN's. They are getting benefits but not paying for them. Under your logic immigrants that get Tax ID's and pay income tax should also ostrascized (yes it is also possible)
Arm, you fail to address benefits that might be paid to someone who is using a false ID #
If you don't think it is happening, you probably have not worked in certain industries where it is a widespread problem.
ostracism is a worry for an illegal? lord knows an "unplanned pregnancy" must be way down on that list too. How about this solution: invade Mexico and make them all "Americans." Would that make you feel better?
Ok. So apart from showing you do not know the definition of ostracism (political exile / social rejection) what is your point?
Well if you invaded Mexico and made them all Mexicans. Would it make YOU feel better? Would it make them whiter for you? Would you then happily accept them as your neighbor?
Double post
Arm and thesapian are bigots against reason.
You are not correct in any wahy. They are NOT IMMIGRANTS. IMMIGRANTS COME HERE LEGALLY!!!! Illegal aliens come here and do nothing but make things worse!!!
Who Cares? They committed a crime. MEXICO will ship illegals off in a heartbeat, that is after bleeding all the money they can from them. Same for the rest of the G-20 nations, they do not condone illegal immigration, So SHUT THE HELL UP. You do not know what you are talking about!!!!
I "had" a younger brother, that was killed by a drunk illegal alien driver, with no license, and here sucking up all kinds of services, and dealing drugs. No license, no insurance, and it aged my parents.
Don't lecture to me you moron!
Immigrant defines an individual who is moving into a new geographic area. It is has a precise definition and is NOT related to whether the person has a visa or not. But I do understand your attempt to dehumanize immigrants as "illegal aliens". It really is not that ingenious.
I'm sorry to hear about your loss. Would it make you feel better if it had been a native born American drunk driver? There are plenty of American drunk drivers out there. About 12,000 Americans die every year due to drinking and driving. Perhaps you should join a campaign against drunk driving instead?
SS is unfair to the immigrant. Would that be the immigrant in the country illegally and committing fraud by using a fake SS number? How about the resident with a real SS number that was out of a job...
Try pulling that shit in Mexico.
If the illegal immigrant could get a job, then why can't the legal resident get the same job?
Perhaps because they prefer to live off unemployment insurance and will not accept the jobs that immigrants take? Sorry, it's a depression you have to be willing to take whatever job, and for whatever pay you can get.
'cuz only a real person has a real SS? Why am I supposed to care more about the one stranger than another? I certainly do not care more about you than I do others, and your words aren't making me care more.
Well only one SSN per person, so I guess you are kinda correct that someone that is using someone else's SSN in a sense is not THE "real" person. Good arguement - I agree with you that the illegals are not "REAL" under your stated premise.
I just realized I wasn't even talking to a real person.
Better said and with more patience than my post.
You are a racist and bigot. You remind me of Hitler. Do you also hate Jews?
Turret's?
This one is easy, don't pay any SS benefits to the illegals.
Lost on Leahy's trust issue? They perjured themselves when they completed and signedthe W4, I9 and or W9 didn't they? If an individual commits perjury, they pay the tax and forfeit any future benefits as a result of their acts of perjury. Most of them are running 10 or 12 exemptions on FWH and file for a full refund every year anyway.
But it does not seem that there are not enough safeguards within the system to identify fraudulent SS numbers. Hmmmmmmmm......
What about spouses living out of the Country who didn't work. Can they claim it too? Or what about childrens benefits if the parent becomes disabled, retired or deceased? Who keeps track of this?
That was the point of Leahy's bill. That was the point of the Spanish SPeaking SS assistant. YES they ALL GET THE SAME BENEFITS as every other LEGAL AMERICNA CITIZEN
That is what ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS ALL ABOUT. GET HERE! GET STUFF AND MONEY!!!
A: Benefits to a dead person who is not claiming benefits because the worker is using an alias SS number to make himself look legitamate? Aint gonna happen and....
B: Our system will not make it that long anyways...
AC
It's disgusting that with all of the things wrong with this country, Americans are blaming immigrants for their American diseases.
hey, man. I'll take the free money too. Don't single me out as one of those "worthless working stiffs."
The people voicing opposition to your Soros inspired drivel are referring to ILLEGAL immigrants. Let's not stop at the border, let's also just go ahead and abolish property rights so we could make you happy. Then I can come over to your house and take a shit - I hope you don't mind, but then it won't matter if you do.
That slipper slope slides both ways equally, yo.
Why don't you just go further and stop anyone from ever entering the country again? Maybe shoot on the spot, too?
See?
Sorry, but morality isn't linear.
thesapein,
Again, person to person morality is not the same as legality. Legality is about the rights of the citizens of the country. Legislating morality can only be done if the population agrees on what is moral. No problem with something like murder. We all agree that killing a citizen is illegal because the right to life for the person killed as well as those who love him is violated. But what about petty theft of property
What if someone enters your abode when you are away and steals your pipe because he doesn't have one. Is that moral? Maybe he needs it. You would probably let him use it or help him get one if he came and ask. But he doesn't do that. He deprives you of your property and you have to go to the trouble and expense of replacing it.
Theft is generally considered to be illegal because technically property was taken and pursuit of happiness is guarenteed by the first amendment.
If someone immigrates from say, L.A. to Seattle, and takes a job, they are considered as joining the community. Each new laborer/trader/consumer is not considered a thief because they are not stealing anything.
Using your own metaphor, why would you let someone take an item from your house just because they grew up down the street?
I'm going to reply to this because you seem to be completely missing the point.
Unchecked immigration pushes the locals' wages down. Good for business, bad for the people.