Will SS be there

[NoOneGetsIt]

While we are not counting on it so our plan is without it...but what is the general consensus on whether SS will be available to those of us retiring in the next year or so at 50

 

[Unpaintedhuffhines]

I cannot imagine that it won't be here in some form. Unfortunately, too many people depend on it, and view it as their retirement program (very few on this board I would suspect).

 

[GrayHare]

SS is not going away, but I believe inflation will be allowed to eat away at the real value of the payouts.

 

[daylatedollarshort]

I think most of it will be there but we have cushion in the retirement plan in case it is less than currently expected.

 

[pb4uski]

For those 50 or older, I believe that we will received 95-100% of the promised benefits.

 

[gindie]

I've watched several shows on Social Security and the worst case described by any of them is that payroll tax receipts will still fund 75% of benefits goimg forward.

Find things written by Mary Beth Franklin. She is a guru on the subject.

 

[NanoSour]

I have no doubts that it will be there as is for those 40 and over. Having said that, I do believe that there will be changes coming to the younger generations. I suspect they will move the FRA and do away with the ability to collect early, yet reduced payments. This will happen slowly so as to not upset the voting populace too much.

 

[heeyy_joe]

No worries. But I hope you have your 40 credits by age 50.

 

[Rustward]

No worries. But I hope you have your 35 credits by age 50.

35 credits will get you five quarters away from qualifying for a benefit.

 

[heeyy_joe]

Corrected post on required number of credits, but the point remains the same.

 

[freebird5825]

I'll let you know when I cash my first SS check in 7 years and 6 months when I am eligible to collect at age 62.

I did not figure on SS as the baseline for my retirement funding and timeline to stop w*rking.

We shall see what we shall see...

 

[ziggy29]

No question, IMO, it will be there for the long run. The questions to me are, how much will benefits be watered down (means tested, raised eligibility age, reduced benefit) and at what age do people above it get spared from sharing the pain?

 

[Sirka]

No question, IMO, it will be there for the long run. The questions to me are, how much will benefits be watered down (means tested, raised eligibility age, reduced benefit) and at what age do people above it get spared from sharing the pain?

+1

 

[haha]

No question, IMO, it will be there for the long run. The questions to me are, how much will benefits be watered down (means tested, raised eligibility age, reduced benefit) and at what age do people above it get spared from sharing the pain?

Age will likely be the least important variable. It's all about redistribution, and income and assets are what that is about.

Also, the stealthiest things they can do will be done first. Moving to chained CPI is IMO a done deal. It will hurt everyone equally, though higher income people who pay 85% income taxes on SS benefits are in some ways spared, since some of the full benefit would have been taxed away. Also, it would be easy to go to 100% taxation of benefits, or even a tax surcharge on higher income people. We have to remember that the electorate is stupid, and has a very short attention span. Also, the electorate hates high income people, it’s the New American Way.

Ha

 

[bondi688]

You worried if social security will survive ? Hey, other people are suggesting this, as noted in another thread:
http://www.early-retirement.org/forums/f52/new-report-expand-social-security-66011.html

 

[HighRoller]

Probably... However, I do think (my opinion only) that the system will begin evolving very soon. To what and how fast, I don't know. (clearly, our elected leaders don't know either) My "guess" is for folks 55 (pick your number) or older, things may not change "too much or too fast". (maybe...) For those younger, there will probably be some adjustments. Hopefully whatever they do, it will phased in over many years to give people time to adjust, plan, accept.

 

[ejman]

My guess is that SS will be there for those folks for whom SS represents substantially all of their retirement income. Conversely, I think that thru a variety of methods, (means testing, CPI adjustments, additional taxes, God knows what else) a lot of folks that frequent this board may find that their plans of a nice fat payout at age 70 may not be quite so fat when the time comes. (Full disclosure I started SS at 62 a few months ago)

 

[ShortInSeattle]

I hope so, but I have no idea. (I am 34) A lot is going to change over the next 36 years until I'm eligible.

At this point we are planning as if we won't get it, but it would certainly reduce our risk if we do.

SIS

 

[SumDay]

I've heard people say they were going to take SS at 62. They're afraid if they wait until NRA or 70, that the rules will change and they'll be shut out (mainly because of means testing). Their theory is that is you're in pay-status, chances are better they won't take it away.

Anyone have an opinion on this theory?

 

[freebird5825]

I've heard people say they were going to take SS at 62. They're afraid if they wait until NRA or 70, that the rules will change and they'll be shut out (mainly because of means testing). Their theory is that is you're in pay-status, chances are better they won't take it away.

Anyone have an opinion on this theory?

I believe it is a derivative of the "grandather clause".

Grandfather clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[ERhoosier]

No question, IMO, it will be there for the long run. The questions to me are, how much will benefits be watered down (means tested, raised eligibility age, reduced benefit) and at what age do people above it get spared from sharing the pain?

+1

And don't forget taxation of SS benefits, which I view as functional (tho bureaucratically inefficient) means testing. I'm <10yrs from SS eligibility & I am not counting on a net dime. If I happen to get anything from the Program, I'll add it to my beer $ fund

 

[ERhoosier]

I've heard people say they were going to take SS at 62. They're afraid if they wait until NRA or 70, that the rules will change and they'll be shut out (mainly because of means testing). Their theory is that is you're in pay-status, chances are better they won't take it away.

Anyone have an opinion on this theory?

Tend to agree, but that's just my WAG.

 

[ejw93]

For those like me in GenX, SS will be there, but either with much later age requirements or much lower payout ratios.

Personally, I'm not baking it in to my retirement calculations.

 

[haha]

I've heard people say they were going to take SS at 62. They're afraid if they wait until NRA or 70, that the rules will change and they'll be shut out (mainly because of means testing). Their theory is that is you're in pay-status, chances are better they won't take it away.

Anyone have an opinion on this theory?

What is your opinion?

 

[SumDay]

haha, I'd love to believe that grandfathering would protect us, but I've seen things in the employee benefit/retirement world in the last 5 years that still cause my jaw to drop. I honestly don't know what to think. I will say we are seriously considering taking SS at 62, mainly for this reason. I work with actuaries who put this idea in my head.