Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-12-2007, 10:01 PM   #21
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 42
I am 21 and also don't (won't) count on SS.

That's partly pride, but mostly pessimism.
__________________

__________________
pj86 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 07-12-2007, 11:41 PM   #22
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
Those of you who think it won't be around when you retire, what do you think will happen to elderly without money or very little money? A good percentage of the elderly primarily live off of their social security.
I think the minumium age will be phased in to increase to 75. Possibly a phased withdrawl cap based on net worth. Or, we're going to be faced with higher taxes to cover the shortfall. Maybe all three or something entirely different.

Life expectancy in the 1930's was under 60 years old, I believe (or close to it). So, I would think that it was established with the idea that many wouldn't live long enough to collect and those that did would need it because they were no longer able to work.

With mortality tables now showing a life expectancy of 74 years, it just feels like something is going to have to give.
__________________

__________________
Webzter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 01:34 AM   #23
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: No Where for Very Long
Posts: 747
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
Those of you who think it won't be around when you retire, what do you think will happen to elderly without money or very little money? A good percentage of the elderly primarily live off of their social security.
I agree.

IMHO the end result of abruptly ending social security would be blood in the streets

Tweaking SS? Sure. Gradual privatization? Probably. Slow strangulation (30+ year phase out) Plausible...

For the life of me, I can't imagine millions of retired (and those nearing retirement) meekly saying "Oh goodness, no more monthly SS checks. But we don't mind, we'll just suck it up and do the best we can. After all, we never really counted on receiving SS anyway."

Yeah right...
__________________

Lancelot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 04:38 AM   #24
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,072
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webzter View Post
I think the minumium age will be phased in to increase to 75. Possibly a phased withdrawl cap based on net worth. Or, we're going to be faced with higher taxes to cover the shortfall. Maybe all three or something entirely different.

Life expectancy in the 1930's was under 60 years old, I believe (or close to it). So, I would think that it was established with the idea that many wouldn't live long enough to collect and those that did would need it because they were no longer able to work.

With mortality tables now showing a life expectancy of 74 years, it just feels like something is going to have to give.

SS also serve other purposes like disability income (SSI).

Continuing to raise the age much further has other implications. We have people that are living longer, but many will not be able to perform their work past a certain age. Many are unable to continue working due to health decline or just age related limitations for physical types of activity (i.e., lifting, manual labor). Imagine a woman in her 50's that has worked in a ware house, she decides to retire @ 62 or 65 because she has less physical capability. While working she made $35k/yr. Now she can no longer do that at say 63 because of age (just wearing down). She is not eligible for traditional disability (if SS is boosted to 74). All she can find is part-time work in a dept-store. Now she cannot earn enough to take care of basics. The part-time work + SS allows her to continue to afford the basics. Can you imagine a 69 year old roofer (not talking about the outlier)?

IMHO - Boosting the age only works to a degree. There is probably a ceiling that realistically can be attained today. We are living longer, but we are not always in a condition that enables us to continue our jobs (depending on what you do)... Plus, with age discrimination, more and more people are getting pushed out (It does happen more often that people think ). This is a very complex problem. If we do not watch it, we will be back in the 1800's with old people destitute and begging (not an exaggeration). I believe that SS or something like it is needed.
__________________
chinaco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 08:23 AM   #25
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webzter View Post
I think the minumium age will be phased in to increase to 75. Possibly a phased withdrawl cap based on net worth. Or, we're going to be faced with higher taxes to cover the shortfall. Maybe all three or something entirely different.

Life expectancy in the 1930's was under 60 years old, I believe (or close to it). So, I would think that it was established with the idea that many wouldn't live long enough to collect and those that did would need it because they were no longer able to work.

With mortality tables now showing a life expectancy of 74 years, it just feels like something is going to have to give.
Unfortunately, even though life expectancy has increased, most of the increase is from the early years. Less people die young. The increases in life expectancy for those reaching 60 has increased, but not substantially.

Chinaco has a lot of good points. A number of people retire just because they don't have the health to work in their job anymore.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 08:30 AM   #26
Full time employment: Posting here.
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
Unfortunately, even though life expectancy has increased, most of the increase is from the early years. Less people die young. The increases in life expectancy for those reaching 60 has increased, but not substantially.

Chinaco has a lot of good points. A number of people retire just because they don't have the health to work in their job anymore.
I never said anyone was retiring just because they felt like it. Although, my wife's 80 yr old grandpa who has retired from two jobs and now works part time at Home Depot for fun might disagree on people not living longer or being able to work longer.

I mentioned two other thoughts about what might happen. Do you disagree about the general thought that SS is in trouble? If not, what do you think the long term solution will be.
__________________
Webzter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 10:24 AM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
My guess is that most of the 'young' folks on this board will never benifit from SS. I'm not saying they won't get something, they just won't benifit. As the 20 somethings get older SS will be means tested, or/and a higher precentage will become taxable. As the taxable figure is not means tested, inflation will push all 20 somethings into the 85% catagory anyway, and by the time they retire, Congress will have made it 100%.

If you plan your retirement, LBYM, save, do without, when you retire, the government will consider you rich, and you will get less SS. The guy that blows all his money, plays hard, and retires with little, will get maximum benifits. That's what is known as being 'Fare'.
__________________
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 11:09 AM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Hmm, so it seems like theres some consensus that younger folks will receive less social security, if any at all...30 to 40 years from now when they're of age.

Whats the prognosis for folks who live a little longer than they're supposed to? Someone in their 50's now thats counting on SS benefits as their safety net should they live to 100 or 120...thats even further out.

Will we pull the rug out from under the really, really old folks, or cut further into the younger retirees?
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 11:13 AM   #29
Moderator Emeritus
Nords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oahu
Posts: 26,616
Quote:
Originally Posted by Webzter View Post
If not, what do you think the long term solution will be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
As the 20 somethings get older SS will be means tested, or/and a higher precentage will become taxable. As the taxable figure is not means tested, inflation will push all 20 somethings into the 85% catagory anyway, and by the time they retire, Congress will have made it 100%.
Means testing (more than currently exists) with additional tweaking of the CPI adjustment. From here it's just politics! Maybe a rise in the age of full eligibility, but as Martha said the human lifespan has not lengthened very much.

People physically unable to work will have to find other occupations or apply for disability. How well that will work out seems pretty speculative.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
The guy that blows all his money, plays hard, and retires with little, will get maximum benifits. That's what is known as being 'Fare'.
Social Security will become a club for whose membership you won't want to qualify. The cost of paying the payroll tax, however, will be far less than the social costs of not having a safety net for the rest of society...
__________________
*
*

The book written on E-R.org, "The Military Guide to Financial Independence and Retirement", on sale now! For more info see "About Me" in my profile.
I don't spend much time here anymore, so please send me a PM. Thanks.
Nords is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 11:17 AM   #30
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
lazygood4nothinbum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,895
does increasing immigration eventually contribute to the solvency of social security by increasing the population and therefore the workforce?

i'm 50 so ss should be there for me until at least my early 80s. i'm counting on it to make lease payments on nice new beemer vertibles. if i don't get it i'll be happy in a toyota. and by the time it runs dry i'll be in my 90s and out of gas anyway.
__________________
"off with their heads"~~dr. joseph-ignace guillotin

"life should begin with age and its privileges and accumulations, and end with youth and its capacity to splendidly enjoy such advantages."~~mark twain - letter to edward kimmitt 1901
lazygood4nothinbum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 11:32 AM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
cute fuzzy bunny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Losing my whump
Posts: 22,697
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazygood4nothinbum View Post
does increasing immigration eventually contribute to the solvency of social security by increasing the population and therefore the workforce?
Ding ding ding!
__________________
Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful. Just another form of "buy low, sell high" for those who have trouble with things. This rule is not universal. Do not buy a 1973 Pinto because everyone else is afraid of it.
cute fuzzy bunny is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 12:52 PM   #32
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
[quote=lazygood4nothinbum;535585]does increasing immigration eventually contribute to the solvency of social security by increasing the population and therefore the workforce?
[quote]

Maybe, not so easy to answer. What if we don't increase the workforce. If economics 101 is right, wages will go up. As wages rise, SS payments increase. Will the rise in SS payments offset the increase in workforce. I doubt if anyone has looked at it. However, there is a difference between undocumented immigration that work in the cash arena, and pay no SS, and documented immigration that pay a full share. A reason to solve our ileagal imigration problem.
__________________
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 05:22 PM   #33
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,032
There are just 3 ways to solve the SS/Medicare shortfall: 1) decrease benefits, 2) increase taxes or 3) a bit of both.

The problem I see is that, as boomers start retiring, AARP is about to become the most powerful lobbyist in Washington. Benefit cuts for boomers are just not going to be supported by any lawmaker in his right mind (and who wants to stand a chance to be reelected). Whether they are republicans or democrats, no retiree depending on SS and medicare would support benefit cuts for themselves (but I can see how they might support benefit cuts for the next generations who are not so politically powerful). So that leaves us with massive tax increases for workers to fund SS but mostly Medicare which is by far the costliest program of the two. So, although I support an opt-out system, I just don't see it hapenning. Guess who's gonna be left paying the bills? yeap future generations.
__________________
FIREd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 07:26 PM   #34
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
73ss454's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: LaLa Land
Posts: 4,378
You forgot #4, the government keeping their hands out of the general fund.
__________________
73ss454 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 08:07 PM   #35
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Moemg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sarasota,fl.
Posts: 10,031
When SS started there was not the divorce rate there is now .People have multiple picks on SS ,take your own ,take one of your ex -husbands ,take a dear departed spouses .Some men have two or three people collecting on their record .This needs to be changed .
__________________
Moemg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 08:11 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 11,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moemg View Post
Some men have two or three people collecting on their record .This needs to be changed .
Some men have two to three people taking part of their paychecks each month, too.
__________________
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." - R. Heinlein
samclem is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2007, 10:29 PM   #37
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 11,032
Quote:
You forgot #4, the government keeping their hands out of the general fund.
It would help SS for sure if politicians stopped raiding the general fund. But I don't see how it would help medicare: Medicare is currently the recipient of just about 19% of the payroll taxes levied, but future obligations for the program are far larger than those for SS. Medicare is a much bigger problem than SS.
__________________
FIREd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2007, 12:49 AM   #38
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
Maybe, not so easy to answer. What if we don't increase the workforce. If economics 101 is right, wages will go up. As wages rise, SS payments increase. Will the rise in SS payments offset the increase in workforce. I doubt if anyone has looked at it. However, there is a difference between undocumented immigration that work in the cash arena, and pay no SS, and documented immigration that pay a full share. A reason to solve our ileagal imigration problem.
A couple of points. Are wages, after looking at the cap for SS taxes, increasing at a rate above inflation? From what I have seen, this doesn't seem to be the case.

Regardless of input into the SS system for illegal immigrants, I think people anticipate that it is their children (and so on) who will make the biggest difference. There is a tremendous difference in birthrates between the recent immigrant population and the rest of the US population. And, legal or illegal, immigrants want their children to have US citizenship. This means that they will most likely be paying something into the SS system as they age.

Saying this, I think that governmental fiscal policy that requires an increased population to survive is a complete travesty.
__________________
cho oyu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2007, 09:09 AM   #39
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 60
Personally, I don't believe that retirement is a right and therefore I'd rather see social security be means tested. If you still have the capacity to work then you are not eligible.

Those that want to retire (i.e. not work) can do that as long as they have saved to allow it.
__________________
tapper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2007, 10:01 AM   #40
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
wildcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lou-evil
Posts: 2,025
[quote=lazygood4nothinbum;535585]does increasing immigration eventually contribute to the solvency of social security by increasing the population and therefore the workforce?quote]

So these immigrants won't demand the same benefits out of the system they pay into? I have a hard time believing that is the foundation of solvency. Sounds like topping off the car's oil every week without trying to fix the leak.

I think SS will be around in some form or another. It has to be. *WARNING - THIS A VERY DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW* I don't mind paying in so long as I have the opportunity to live in a country where I can accumulate such wealth.

A lot of people in the US want to collect their check no matter what their net worth reads but if I have a couple million in the bank and could live off what I have saved, keep what would be a tiny check. I suppose the difference for me is that I don't expect SS nor do I feel SS was ever guaranteed to me. It is almost as if the lock box was never real
__________________

__________________
"These walls are kind of funny. First you hate 'em, then you get used to 'em. Enough time passes, gets so you depend on them"
wildcat is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How wealthy do you feel? laurence FIRE and Money 125 06-03-2007 03:11 PM
Does anyone feel jealousy from friends/family/others? FatBoy71 FIRE and Money 92 02-25-2007 10:54 AM
Anyone feel better in retirement ? Empty Pockets Health and Early Retirement 29 01-16-2007 07:45 PM
should I feel quilty aimhigh FIRE and Money 31 12-28-2005 08:55 PM
Net Worth $1.6m @ 51 I don't feel rich - explain that! dex FIRE and Money 49 10-27-2005 10:05 AM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:18 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.