How's everybody feel about SS?

[chinaco]

I need two or three of you younger people to continue working to fund my SS.

 

[Webzter]

I need two or three of you younger people to continue working to fund my SS.

You get me for another 10 years then you're on your own.

 

[chinaco]

You get me for another 10 years then you're on your own.

Correction: I still have 4 years myself.

The sad part about this thing is that it is a total pay as you go system because the govt didn't hang on to any of the boomer payments in a trust. It was spent!

They claimed it was borrowed. Who gets to pay it back? The whole thing is ridiculous.

 

[samclem]

Correction: I still have 4 years myself.

The sad part about this thing is that it is a total pay as you go system because the govt didn't hang on to any of the boomer payments in a trust. It was spent!

They claimed it was borrowed. Who gets to pay it back? The whole thing is ridiculous.

Maybe not as ridiculous as it seems. The "lockbox" was a laughable campaign gimmick.

How would the money actually have been kept? As physical currency in a safe somewhere earning no interest and subject to inflation? Invested in stocks /bonds of companies (do we really want the US government to be a major stockholder in major corporations? Look to Europe for the rat's nest of problems that causes). Or, maybe loaned back to the US government (which needed to borrow money from somebody since they were spending more than they were taking from us). Just like an individual would buy US bonds. That's what was done.

Who will pay the money back? US taxpayers, just like they pay bearers of all government bonds. The bucks owed to SS are allegedly just as firm an obligation of the USG as all of the other bonds issued by the treasury.

But, who knows how it will really work out. There's definitely gonna be a crunch as SS becomes a net "taker' rather than a net "giver" starting in approx 2018. By approx 2041, all the paper IOUs that the Treasury owes SS will be used up and "pay as you go" will have a new meaning.

 

[chinaco]

Maybe not as ridiculous as it seems. The "lockbox" was a laughable campaign gimmick.

How would the money actually have been kept? As physical currency in a safe somewhere earning no interest and subject to inflation? Invested in stocks /bonds of companies (do we really want the US government to be a major stockholder in major corporations? Look to Europe for the rat's nest of problems that causes). Or, maybe loaned back to the US government (which needed to borrow money from somebody since they were spending more than they were taking from us). Just like an individual would buy US bonds. That's what was done.

Who will pay the money back? US taxpayers, just like they pay bearers of all government bonds. The bucks owed to SS are allegedly just as firm an obligation of the USG as all of the other bonds issued by the treasury.

But, who knows how it will really work out. There's definitely gonna be a crunch as SS becomes a net "taker' rather than a net "giver" starting in approx 2018. By approx 2041, all the paper IOUs that the Treasury owes SS will be used up and "pay as you go" will have a new meaning.

I see your point.

But, it could have been invested like an endowment or pension. Perhaps the excess could have been used that way.

Otherwise, the SS tax should have been lower the last 30 years.

In the PAYG system the SS tax is more of a function of how many people are paying into the system. If they had stashed it away... it would be there. Where was all of the talk about private accounts 30 years ago?

We have been scr3wed! In any other area (such as personal or business)... this would be illegal.


Sorry for the rant!

 

[wildcat]

I see your point.

But, it could have been invested like an endowment or pension. Perhaps the excess could have been used that way.

Otherwise, the SS tax should have been lower the last 30 years.

In the PAYG system the SS tax is more of a function of how many people are paying into the system. If they had stashed it away... it would be there. Where was all of the talk about private accounts 30 years ago?

We have been scr3wed! In any other area (such as personal or business)... this would be illegal.


Sorry for the rant!

Ahh yes. Take your complaint to Sudan and tell them how bad you have it here in the US

 

[lets-retire]

My thoughts are restrictive means testing will become a reality. Since nobody has any compassion for the wealthy, there will be a time when if a person earns, whether through pension, investment income, or something else, over a certain amount they will no longer be eligible for SS. The definition of wealthy will be rather low and will result in many people being told they are not going to receive any SS. I think this will be phased in over a very long time period, in effect making people who are either just entering the work force or younger the recipients of a very bad system. Most of the younger people working now will receive something, but much less than the current benefit.

Similar to how the military was promised a very lucrative retirement, but somehow it was cut. Look at what the recruiters were promising during the Vietnam era. If the military member served 20 years everything would be taken care of for free. Now military retirees are required to pay for their health care. Some will say, "oh big deal I don't have company paid retirement health care." The military, who the vast majority are enlisted and don't make much, are told they will have a very good retirement in exchange for very lo pay, yet their retirement is continually being cut, and modified to the members' detriment.

 

[OAG]

I thought this was about SS which, by the way, is already "means tested" just go look at the IRS Worksheet for determining ones taxable SS Benefits.

How come the rant on the military? About 50% (COLA'd) pay for 20 years service. Most reach that point at about 43 years or age, even younger if entering as an enlisted person (maybe as early as 37 years old). Plenty of time to enter a second career if one wanted to. Medical care currently $230 a year per person (or $460 a year for a Family) if you want the Prime program. You can go to a Military Facility for free or just go space available and forget the $230/$460. Care to provide some quotes about the "promising during Vietnam era" I was in before, during, and after the VN era and never remember anything like that. Although, I guess it all worked out pretty well since TRICARE is not too expensive (at about $40 to 80 a month) especially if you select the "free" levels (which I never did).

 

[lets-retire]

I thought this was about SS which, by the way, is already "means tested" just go look at the IRS Worksheet for determining ones taxable SS Benefits.

How come the rant on the military? About 50% (COLA'd) pay for 20 years service. Most reach that point at about 43 years or age, even younger if entering as an enlisted person (maybe as early as 37 years old). Plenty of time to enter a second career if one wanted to. Medical care currently $230 a year per person (or $460 a year for a Family) if you want the Prime program. You can go to a Military Facility for free or just go space available and forget the $230/$460. Care to provide some quotes about the "promising during Vietnam era" I was in before, during, and after the VN era and never remember anything like that. Although, I guess it all worked out pretty well since TRICARE is not too expensive (at about $40 to 80 a month) especially if you select the "free" levels (which I never did).

My emphasis was on the restrictive part. I guess I didn't make that clear enough. I think in the future the benefit will be dropped so that the only people receiving SS will be those who are unable to make as much from whatever retirement they earned as those on SS. For example say SS pays a maximum of $20,000 per year. If you make that much in retirement you will not receive any SS. If you make less than that you will receive enough from SS to bring you up to that. I also believe these changes will not come to pass until the boomers are not running the show any longer. They don't want their legacy to be one of destroying the system.

I was drawing a comparison between SS and another government run retirement system. Have you tried going space-a at a military hospital. Most have gone to relying on the civilian sector and can't see military dependents in a timely manner, let alone a retiree. Space-a for retirees is almost non-existent. I am not a military retiree, however not too long ago I was talking to a person very involved with military veteran and retiree benefits and issues. From what he stated, the DOD came straight out and stated retirement benefits were never guaranteed by contract, however they realized many recruiters were using the rich retirement benefits as a recruitment tool. The DOD was put in a very bad position, but went on to say they would not honor any of the promises, even though they know the promises were being made. These recruits were given promises, even if it was only by a recruiter, by a representative of the military yet the military refused to honor the promises.

 

[deserat]

Not to hijack the thread - but my husband's active duty and he's having problems seeing the military docs - they're all deployed...

As for SS - I'm in between -- 43 - and will rely on a combination of pensions (smaller ones) and my own savings over the duration (hoping to retire at the latest at 50 - earlier if number pan out) - I'm of the mind that I paid in to SS, I want to benefit from that - I think it may be worse in that most of my retirement income from whatever source will be taxed heavily to meet all of the gov't obligations we are amassing - couple that with a probably Democratic turn in the next election and bad news fiscally for sure.

However, I remember reading that if the COLA was adjusted to just the
CPI versus the amount average amount of 'raises' (I may be stating that wrong), SS would be solvent - the big issue is healthcare - Medicare/Medicaid.

The comment earlier about Norway was interesting - when I visited there I spoke with several Norwegians - they are a very rich country, however, they are banking it and still taxing their people heavily -the comment made was that the oil wouldn't last forever and they wanted to make sure that they thought of the future.....

 

[FIREd]

they are a very rich country, however, they are banking it and still taxing their people heavily -the comment made was that the oil wouldn't last forever and they wanted to make sure that they thought of the future.....

Exactly, Norway, unlike many other countries, has made the difficult decision to take care of its future generations. Despite huge oil revenues, the country lives below its means and requires much financial sacrifices from its taxpayers so that the next generations will be able to continue enjoying a high standard of living long after the oil boon ends. Norway is an exception rather than the rule in the industrialized world. Many industrialized countries with large populations live above their means and favor pleasing the current generations rather than the future ones.
I've heard that Wyoming is also investing a lot of the revenues it is currently receiving from the gas fields popping up all over the state. They also understand it won't last forever and that they need to make the most of it.

 

[bldgengineer]

Well this certainly turned into an interesting conversation

 

[Rustic23]

Let's see.... so when the rest of the States have blown all their cash and their folks are living in the poor house, Wyomingites will be living in tall cotton.... well, until everybody moves to Wyoming and they are compelled to pay support. Hey, just like SS!

 

[jnojr]

This book lays out what's going to happen with Socialist inSecurity and other government entitlement / wealth redistribution programs. I cannot recommend it highly enough. This book scared me almost as much as the first time I actually thought about retirement. I bought copies to hand out for Christmas last year.

BTW it's a hyperlink... click on the image to go to Amazon. Or just check your library for a copy

 

[wildcat]

Please include some supported text rather just posting an image of a book.

 

[jnojr]

Please include some supported text rather just posting an image of a book.

It's a hyperlink

 

[Scooby7]

Atlas Shrugged

Captures the same idea of governmental redistribution of wealth.
Author is Ann Rand

 

[megacorp-firee]

I am 56. Just retired. I paid into the system for over 30 years. I had a contract with the guvm'nt, lived up to my end of it and they should honor their side. ... yes I want my turn at the federal tit. I didn't invent the game or make up the rules... but I did play the game.

 

[jnojr]

I am 56. Just retired. I paid into the system for over 30 years. I had a contract with the guvm'nt, lived up to my end of it and they should honor their side. ... yes I want my turn at the federal tit. I didn't invent the game or make up the rules... but I did play the game.

But we never did have a contract with the government. I never signed anything. I never agreed to fund other people's retirements with the promise that one day someone else would fund mine. All that's happened is I've had a 12.4% payroll tax levied against me at gunpoint.

I'm angry about it, but not enough other people are to make a change. So I kiss that money goodbye, try my best to secure my own retirement, and hope that I'll be able to collect anything when it's "my turn". Any Socialist inSecurity checks that I receive are going to be extra play money unless they decide to tax away a substantial chunk of my retirement savings, which is a distinct possibility... when the entitlement programs begin collapsing, there will be a lot more drones holding their hands out who will be able to vote than there will be honest, productive citizens. It won't surprise me one bit to see my Roth IRA taxed (again), or some large chunk of my savings outright confiscated because I have "too much", and it "isn't fair" that I should have so much while others have nothing.

 

[megacorp-firee]

But we never did have a contract with the government. I never signed anything. I never agreed to fund other people's retirements with the promise that one day someone else would fund mine. All that's happened is I've had a 12.4% payroll tax levied against me at gunpoint.

I'm angry about it, but not enough other people are to make a change. So I kiss that money goodbye, try my best to secure my own retirement, and hope that I'll be able to collect anything when it's "my turn". Any Socialist inSecurity checks that I receive are going to be extra play money unless they decide to tax away a substantial chunk of my retirement savings, which is a distinct possibility... when the entitlement programs begin collapsing, there will be a lot more drones holding their hands out who will be able to vote than there will be honest, productive citizens. It won't surprise me one bit to see my Roth IRA taxed (again), or some large chunk of my savings outright confiscated because I have "too much", and it "isn't fair" that I should have so much while others have nothing.

It's true that it was a 'tax' at 'gunpoint' as you put it. But so are income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes, ...etc. But it is the only game in town. You either play it or you move. I have been all over this world. As bad as it is here in the great US of A, it's a heck of a lot better than in 999/1000 of the other places. Granted you can always point to a place that has better _______ (fill in the blank) than the US. But I don't see people, in mass, climbing fences and crossing rivers to get to those countries.

 

[jnojr]

megacorp - I absolutely agree with you. The difference between SS and other taxes, to me, is at least they're honest about the other ones... "Give us your money". With SS, they try to pretend that there's some benefit to me. I understand that pretty much any government is going to take my money, and if I don't hand it over they'll imprison or kill me. But it really grates to be told that SS is some kind of "retirement account" for me. If that's what it's supposed to be, how about repealing the SS Act and simply mandating that everyone invest 12% of their gross salary in some kind of retirement account? But that wouldn't give the government control of hundreds of billions of dollars of our money, nor does it allow politicians to buy votes with our money.

The whole premise behind SS is financially and morally bankrupt, and it's part of what has torn this country down from the great heights it once occupied, and what will very likely finish turning the US into a Third World craphole within my lifetime.

 

[CyclingInvestor]

As I worked my way through 27.4 years of programming before retiring last year I was
always thrilled that I had the opportunity to be born in the middle/upper-middle class of
the US and paid the max of SS taxes for 24 (1983-2006) of those years. I am constantly
amazed that I retired last year at 48 with dividends replacing all of my spending, and if
they means-test SS before I get there so that only those making <$100k get it I will
not feel left out. I won't be sending back any checks, but geesh . . . I am so well
off compared to every one else I know here, much less in other countries. SS is just
another income tax, levied on a different scale. If just mild LBYM plus some
investment discipline allows you to work only 27 years and then spend the rest of
your life doing whatever you want, how can you possibly complain ?

 

[megacorp-firee]

megacorp - The difference between SS and other taxes, to me, is at least they're honest about the other ones... "Give us your money". .

this is the 1st time I have ever heard anyone characterize what congress and the bureaucrats in Washington do with our 'other taxes' as 'honest'. pork barrel projects like bridges to no where....etc.

... but don't get me started on this ... After 29 days of retirement I've gotten my blood pressure down to normal levels.

 

[Celany]

My mother (who is 65 & just started collecting SS) told me that, when she was in *her* 20s, everyone bemoaned how SS wouldn't be there. And yet her & my pa (who's also 65) are getting nice checks to supplement their pensions (they were public school teachers).

I am not depending on SS, but I hope (and expect) to get it. It's one thing for all of us to say that we assume we won't get it. It's another thing entirely for the gov to make that announcement & have to deal with the fallout (as other people have pointed out, I believe). For one thing, I think if that happened, suddenly there'd be a lot of articles about the gov dipping into it over the years. Lots of finger pointing. Maybe looking into whether or not previous lawmakers can somehow be held responsible. Lots of articles about previous lawmakers retiring after years of holding million dollar jobs 'consulting' that they were awarded after their lawmaking stints & their cars, homes, net worth, etc. There'll be a lot of anger & civil unrest. Maybe even a fair amount of threats & some deaths.

So I think that it could get bad, but that ultimately, it will be fixable. I also think that we should add on that final social program: gov-run (or at least gov consolidate) medicine. We can have a successful hybrid of capitalism & socialism. I always find it interesting, when we think of the people who are benefiting, we think of the deadbeats, the spendthrifts, the careless. What about the cancer victim who's life-saving was wiped out by paying for treatment? what about the people that live with MS? Alzheimer’s? Mental illness? What about the people who ran through their life saving trying to care for kids with autism or mental retardation? What about the autistic or mentally retarded? In an entirely capitalistic society, those people are left hanging, or left to the devices of their relatives. Why shouldn't those of us that were born with better genetics share a bit of their wealth to help them?

I'm not at all for helping dead beats & there's a part of me that says 'not my problem' when it comes to the idea of helping people w/the above afflictions. But I am damn lucky that I was born (mostly) sound of mind (I have bipolar, which I manage through diet & exercise these days) and body. I think that the least I can do is pay it forward a little bit & help out those that weren't as genetically blessed as I am.

 

[samclem]

Why shouldn't those of us that were born with better genetics share a bit of their wealth to help them? . . . .
I think that the least I can do is pay it forward a little bit & help out those that weren't as genetically blessed as I am.

You sound like a wonderful person. Giving to those who are less fortunate is a great and noble thing--it helps the recipient and it helps the giver (it's a great feeling, right?) One big problem with govt run programs is that they rob the donors of that feeling. Can a person really feel good about helping others if they are forced to do it under penalty of fine/jail time?

Some people feel satisfied when they take political action to enact govt-run wealth redistribution programs, but I take issue with this, too. That individual was already free to redistribute his/her own wealth as much as he/she wants. All they have done is leverage the coercive power of government to take the property of OTHER people.
Just because a majority of people want something doesn't make it right. Let's hope the Constitution/Bill of Rights continue to mean something.