Watchdog says ex-Nazis got $20.2 million in Social Security

[jackanapes]

this report shows up America for what it is a society which is sadly lacking in cohesion in all its departments taking in all those Nazis at the end of world war two without checking their id.s was not only a gravemistake but showed that America was quite prepared to take anybody in regardless .I know thy took scientists from Germany that were involved in rocket science and various other fields because it suited them at that time ,but to pay social security benefits to 10,000 ex Nazis that is something else.

[stevenl]

Rather ironic to be talking about Nazis who deceived the Social Security folks given that the American government itself lied to its people for decades about all the Nazis imported after the war to work in important positions in intelligence, defense and research under the Project Paper Clip program. Researchers have shown in the last decade or so that the govt. knew that many people brought in to work in positions that were very sensitive were loyal and in some cases ardent Nazis. It has been shown too that govt. staff colluded to re-write these guys' histories to make them seem safe to be bringing to work for the U.S. in the cold war against the Soviet Union.

That is not entirely fair. President Truman was very clear in his position that no known Nazis were to be allowed in. President Eisenhower had an even stronger position particularly since he had seen the bodies of murdered US POWs and had been to the concentration camps. The military and vociferous "anti communists" did much of their concealing without the full knowledge of the US Congress. It can even be said, that these people misled both the President and Congress.

Things did change when JFK was elected. Despite all their "liberal" talk, they didn't care about the Nazis. Interesting that Truman the WWI trench war veteran and plain speaking democrat, and Eisenhower the conservative yet progressive Republican WWII vet had significantly greater integrity and sense of decency than the kennedy clan of philandering drunks and misfits.

I am convinced Truman and Eisenhower knew quite a few Nazi's were entering the US and were even quite often asked to come to the US.

They just did not care as much as their words indicate. And in those times it was easily possible to get away with things like that. Would be a much different story now.

[DogNo1]

Are any WW II Japanese veterans living in the US? Are they drawing any social benefits? Are any WW II veterans revered in Japan? In Germany? In Italy? Those were the three Axis powers.

[Jingthing]

You know, relative to the morally messy stuff that happened in WW2 from all sides, I think the USA welcoming some post war Nazis is on the rather trivial side. Certainly of academic interest but hardly earth shattering big news (or news at all really). To my POV, while the evil deeds of the Nazis and atrocities of the Japanese are clear, the most interesting moral open questions from that era are whether "total war" big city bombings by the allies were really necessary to win the war (personally I think so) and also were the nukes on Japan really necessary (I think not).

[DogNo1]

The nukes on Japan certainly saved a lot of Japanese and allies' lives. After all, the terribly destructive fire bombing of Japanese cities, especially Tokyo, didn't weaken the Japanese will to prosecute the war and the cost in human lives to bring the war to the Japanese main islands would have been horrendous. Have you ever seen the photos of what was left of the cities? Not much. I can envision Japan mobilizing even the youngest to defend the homeland. Remember the German battalions of youth and the elderly?

[Jingthing]

The nukes on Japan certainly saved a lot of Japanese and allies' lives. After all, the terribly destructive fire bombing of Japanese cities, especially Tokyo, didn't weaken the Japanese will to prosecute the war and the cost in human lives to bring the war to the Japanese main islands would have been horrendous. Have you ever seen the photos of what was left of the cities? Not much. I can envision Japan mobilizing even the youngest to defend the homeland. Remember the German battalions of youth and the elderly?

That's the American propaganda version I was taught in school, yes. But suggest you dig a little deeper into what was happening in the wider region at that time. Anyway, off topic here.

[redsox44]

In order to get SS one has to earn 40 quarters of income. Gov doesn't pay out SS it's earned.

[Jingthing]

In order to get SS one has to earn 40 quarters of income. Gov doesn't pay out SS it's earned.

Well, that's true to a point.

You earn the right to be eligible for the S.S. elderly benefit but it's not your own account and many people collect a lot more than they paid in (and vice versa).

There is also the S.S. disability benefit.

Edited June 6, 2015 by Jingthing

[lostoday]

Looking at numbers from an Urban Institute study, the AP found that a married couple retiring in 2011 after both spouses earned average income during their lives paid total Social Security taxes of $598,000. They can expect to collect $556,000 in benefits, if the man lives to 82 and the woman lives to 85.

http://business.time.com/2012/08/07/social-security-now-takes-more-than-it-gives/

How much would the average family have gotten if they had been allowed to put the money in a mutual fund or in an interest bearing account in the bank?

[DogNo1]

SS account holders receive money based on what they paid into THEIR OWN ACCOUNT. That's why it's called a social security ACCOUNT. Some people draw more than they paid in and some don't. It is predicated on an account holder's relative wealth. Poorer people get a better deal; wealthy people don't. Given the fact that most people don't save much over their lifetimes, it and Medicare are lifesavers for older people.

Given the poor rate of return on savings and the uncertain return of mutual funds, there is no guarantee that money invested there would pay as much as SS. Remember when W Bush was urging that people be allowed to invest their own money instead of paying SS tax? That was followed by the terrible crash of 2008 and many people would have lost a lot, possibly leaving them destitute in their old age. That's exactly the situation that SS was set up to avoid!

[thaibeachlovers]

My goodness! How far do we want to carry vengance? There are varying degrees of culpability in regard to the participation in fighting on German's side in WW II. Many people from other countries were recruited or drafted into the SS or the Vermacht. Many people in the German armed forces were desperate to find a way to end the war before Germany was totally destroyed and wanted to make peace, especially with England and America. BTW, the present government is not Nazi even if some of their methods are strong-armed. Also, so far as brain-washing and employing ruthless policies goes, have you been following what is going on in the middle east? We have more urgent problems these days than starving a bunch of elderly German servicemen! Incidentally, should we be searching out former members of the Japanese WW II military and expelling them and revoking their SS benefits?

starving a bunch of elderly German servicemen!

You make them sound like a bunch of Sgt Shultz clones ( I know nothing ).

They are not- they are a bunch of murdering scum that managed to get away with it- starve nothing, execute them.

[thaibeachlovers]

You know, relative to the morally messy stuff that happened in WW2 from all sides, I think the USA welcoming some post war Nazis is on the rather trivial side. Certainly of academic interest but hardly earth shattering big news (or news at all really). To my POV, while the evil deeds of the Nazis and atrocities of the Japanese are clear, the most interesting moral open questions from that era are whether "total war" big city bombings by the allies were really necessary to win the war (personally I think so) and also were the nukes on Japan really necessary (I think not).

Von Braun and his co nazi scum rocket designers were directly involved in the death of 9,000 British and indirectly involved in the death of 12,000 forced workers ( Wikipedia ).

That's more than Bin Laden killed on 9 11. By your logic Bin Laden should have been welcomed to go live in the US in exchange for helping them design better ways of killing people.

[Jingthing]

Ignoring the off topic bait, I think the logic of the time was twofold:

-- That some of these Nazis could be very useful to the new conflict the USA was entering, with Russia (possibly defensible)

-- Fascist elements within the USA that were supportive of some aspects of Nazi ideology (not defensible)