Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-28-2012, 12:22 PM   #21
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustward View Post
Would you mind posting a reference or link to your source of this information?
Sure. Here it is. Note the 1st paragraph in the Introduction. It mentions being able to pay only 76% of the estimated benefits. What will actually happen is, of course, something we will know in the fullness of time.

https://www.socialsecurity.gov/polic...v70n3p111.html
__________________

__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 08-28-2012, 12:34 PM   #22
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
Sure. Here it is. Note the 1st paragraph in the Introduction. It mentions being able to pay only 76% of the estimated benefits. What will actually happen is, of course, something we will know in the fullness of time.

https://www.socialsecurity.gov/polic...v70n3p111.html
What everyone has to understand is that the statement "Social Security Board of Trustees projects program cost to rise by 2035 so that taxes will be enough to pay for only 75 percent of scheduled benefits.."...... That doesn't mean that benefits will be cut at all. This is a political football in its entirety.

Military pensions have even less taxes coming in to pay for benefits currently. Heck, the whole Defense Dept. doesn't have enough to pay for its expenses either.

That's what treasury Bonds are for...To finance government excess expenditures. However, if you are against Social Security on a ideologue basis, you first have to convince the masses that it's in trouble, then you can fix it (Which means eliminate it!) The reality is that Social Security is still running a surplus, and is the ONLY Government Program that is.
__________________

__________________
Cut-Throat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:03 PM   #23
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckanut View Post
Sure. Here it is. Note the 1st paragraph in the Introduction. It mentions being able to pay only 76% of the estimated benefits. What will actually happen is, of course, something we will know in the fullness of time.

https://www.socialsecurity.gov/polic...v70n3p111.html
I kinda get that you may believe there will be a 75% across the board cut in all benefits. But it just does not say that at all. 75% cut in total benefits paid out, maybe, "If trust fund assets are exhausted without reform, benefits will necessarily be lowered with no effect on budget deficits."
__________________
Rustward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:06 PM   #24
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustward View Post
75% cut in total benefits paid out, maybe, "If trust fund assets are exhausted without reform, benefits will necessarily be lowered with no effect on budget deficits."
Nope, doesn't even say that !.... It says nothing at all about cutting benefits!

All, it says is that the program will be running a 25% deficit. Which is still less than the rest of the Government!
__________________
Cut-Throat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:15 PM   #25
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kerrville,Tx
Posts: 2,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksr View Post
Whenever I play with Firecalc, I run multiple scenarios: best case, worst case, and what I think is the most likely case. For whatever reason, I had it in my head that the SS reduction would result in 70% of benefits, so that's what I've used for my "most likely" scenarios. I suspect that there will be a reduction of some sort, although it may not be as blatant as a reduction in benefits. It might be more taxes and/or a means-tested medicare cost, but either way I expect to see somewhat less than 100% of my projected SS.
Note that medicare is already means tested for part B all be it at fairly high income levels. above 85 k for singles and double it for married you pay $40 /month more, above 107k you pay $100/month more and above 106k you pay $160/month more. So what you may mean is that the trigger levels will be adjusted downwards. Part D is also means tested as well.
__________________
meierlde is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 01:15 PM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
I use 0% Social Security for planning purposes and still get a 100% success rate out of Firecalc, so if anything does show up in 9 years, it will be drinking money.
To be sure we'll be OK, we inflate our budget with lots and lots of padding. Then we exclude SS, pension, portfolio earnings and other savings. If we're still 100%, then we figure we'll have plenty of margin for "drinking money" when it turns out we do have SS, pensions, portfolio earnings and savings to spend on our actual lower budget. You can't be too conservative in financial planning!
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2012, 09:59 PM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Kerrville,Tx
Posts: 2,710
Quote:
Originally Posted by meierlde View Post
Note that medicare is already means tested for part B all be it at fairly high income levels. above 85 k for singles and double it for married you pay $40 /month more, above 107k you pay $100/month more and above 106k you pay $160/month more. So what you may mean is that the trigger levels will be adjusted downwards. Part D is also means tested as well.
Make that above 206k
__________________
meierlde is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 10:34 AM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Chuckanut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: West of the Mississippi
Posts: 6,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustward View Post
I kinda get that you may believe there will be a 75% across the board cut in all benefits. But it just does not say that at all. 75% cut in total benefits paid out, maybe, "If trust fund assets are exhausted without reform, benefits will necessarily be lowered with no effect on budget deficits."

I simply used the information on that link as the source for my reducing SS benefits to 75% in an experimental run of FireCalc.
__________________
The worst decisions are usually made in times of anger and impatience.
Chuckanut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 10:48 AM   #29
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Eastern PA
Posts: 3,851
IMHO, the reduction in planned future SS benefits are dependent on your age, and your personal ability to assume risk.

Nothing different than those who invest in the market (be it equity or bonds) for the future.

For me/DW (who are both less than a year away from SS FRA age)? We will keep with the 100% forecast.

If we don't make it? It will be a challange to be considered in our (much) later years.

However, I do agree with those much younger who are adjusting their plan based upon the possibility of reduced SS income. I/we for one/couple, don't think that will happen (heck, we both experienced and increase in contributions and an increase in FRA during our accumulation years), but you must plan for "your" future.

Just my/our simple POV...
__________________
rescueme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 02:43 PM   #30
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 920
Thats funny how many others in here also use 75% of estimate, that is my usual firecalc setting as well.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Gumby View Post
I use 0% Social Security for planning purposes and still get a 100% success rate out of Firecalc, so if anything does show up in 9 years, it will be drinking money.
Woah now, come on.
1. Food
2. Drinking Money
3. Rent

We're going extra safe and buying enough booze for the rest of our lives.
__________________
tuixiu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2012, 06:26 PM   #31
Administrator
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 10,137
Maybe I'll be able to upgrade from MD 20/20 to Bordeaux.
__________________

__________________
Living an analog life in the Digital Age.
Gumby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
ss 75%


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:11 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.