Means testing SS

[RetireBy90]

So one more issue to throw in the old mixer here. It seems to me that a big part of the reason SS is or will have problems paying the number we expect every month is the increase in the programs over the years. Disibility claims, as noted by several WSJ articles have increases, and appeals are approved at an increasing rate. One SS judge had approved all appeals in 2011 as of something like end of Nov. We also pay benefits for surviving children and spouses. I don't know of all the programs they support with the old FICA tax but they have increased and the charge for them has not kept pace.

I'm not saying these programs are a waste or un-needed, but that they haven't been paid for and thus are taking funds collected each month. If you were to offer a jelly-of-the-month club at $5/month after carefully planning the costs and a small profit, then added pickles, olives and sardines to the shippment without an increase in the $5 charge you could go broke like SSA.

 

[wolfbay]

So one more issue to throw in the old mixer here. It seems to me that a big part of the reason SS is or will have problems paying the number we expect every month is the increase in the programs over the years. Disibility claims, as noted by several WSJ articles have increases, and appeals are approved at an increasing rate. One SS judge had approved all appeals in 2011 as of something like end of Nov. We also pay benefits for surviving children and spouses. I don't know of all the programs they support with the old FICA tax but they have increased and the charge for them has not kept pace.

I'm not saying these programs are a waste or un-needed, but that they haven't been paid for and thus are taking funds collected each month. If you were to offer a jelly-of-the-month club at $5/month after carefully planning the costs and a small profit, then added pickles, olives and sardines to the shippment without an increase in the $5 charge you could go broke like SSA.

Our society has unlimited needs and wants but our financial situation unfortunately is unsustainable.One way or another our standard of living is going to decline at least for a significant period of time. We'll all have to sacrifice but coming up with a compromise people can accept IMHO will be impossible. We'll probably need a crisis. How can pols ask for real shared sacrifice when Bush and Obama bailed out the Banksters without prosecutions and new management and allowing them to get their multimillion dollar bonuses? The latest is letting Obamas buddy Corzine go Scott free after "misplacing" 1.2 billion at MF GLOBAL. Crony capitalism at it's finest.

 

[Midpack]

I am all for upping the retirement age, similar to how the age was raised to 67. You can't "spring" it on people that are within a few years of the magic age. I am 47 and if I were told I have to wait until 70 to draw minimum benefit I would be okay with that; as long as I have LBYM and saved money, my retirement will be driven by my own savings. I still could retire at any age I wish. Allows for FIRE if I have been a good saver vs. penalize me by means testing my income and cutting the monthly benefit.

I'm 57 and retired. It would not surprise me if elibility ages are raised before I enroll in Soc Sec, I think we all need to be prepared to sacrifice...like it or not.

 

[REWahoo]

I seriously doubt any changes to SS will impact anyone 55 or older other than changes to how cost-of-living increases are calculated and eliminating the FICA earned income limit.

Congress has repeatedly demonstrated they don't have the courage to address the problem and when finally forced to bite the bullet, they will look for whatever cover they can find. Phase-ins of changes to the FRA and grandfathering those over 55 will almost certainly be used to try to shield them from tar and feathers.

 

[Midpack]

I seriously doubt any changes to SS will impact anyone 55 or older other than changes to how cost-of-living increases are calculated and eliminating the FICA earned income limit.

Congress has repeatedly demonstrated they don't have the courage to address the problem and when finally forced to bite the bullet, they will look for whatever cover they can find. Phase-ins of changes to the FRA and grandfathering those over 55 will almost certainly be used to try to shield them from tar and feathers.

I suspect you're right and that would be beneficial to me, but I am still prepared to take a hit. We're all going to have to sacrifice some to get our ship in order IMO...time will tell. All these proposals selecting one group or another to pay more or benefit less are pointless and tiresome to me. Let's just quit kidding ourselves that we can go back to the 50's, and get on with it. Sorry, I digress...

 

[scrabbler1]

My take on raising the retirement age for full SS benefits is this: Anyone whose FRA was raised back in 1983-84 when SS was reformed and was already paying FICA taxes into the system should have his or her FRA age grandfathered in and not increased a second time. I think there should be a limit of 1 for "moving the goalposts" when it comes to raising the retirement age for those who already began paying into the system and therefore had some expectation of when they could begin receiving benefits. This would grandfather most workers born before the mid-1960s assuming they entered the workforce to some degree before 1983-1984 when the FRA law was passed.