SS Could Be Insolvent in 8 Years

+1000

IMHO they'll remove the wage cap first.

Yeah, that's probably an easy one. Wild guess is that doing so will not make a big difference. I could be wrong, so YMMV.
 
I seem to remember OpenSS suggesting taking SS at 68 and a few months for me if there will be a reduction in benefits. I will likely be 68 and even 70 before the SS situation is resolved. Have people changed their Take Date based on this new information?
 
It strikes me that the model for reductions (if any) will follow the same general bend point, etc. method that benefits currently follow. Therefore, including those already collecting, the 24% will be spread from 0% on the lower benefit amounts to whatever it takes to get the equivalent of 24% across the board reductions.

I've watched this "need to fix it now" go on for a little under 20 years and I am sure it was going on before I started watching. The pull and tug between fixing SS and ending SS, including privatization schemes, just keeps on making it harder.
 
What may happen is that "they" may change the rules for those younger than .......... say 55. And those folks may have to deal with reductions, if any. Just a thought as nothing has been set in stone and probably will not be in my lifetime.
 
It strikes me that the model for reductions (if any) will follow the same general bend point, etc. method that benefits currently follow. Therefore, including those already collecting, the 24% will be spread from 0% on the lower benefit amounts to whatever it takes to get the equivalent of 24% across the board reductions.

I've watched this "need to fix it now" go on for a little under 20 years and I am sure it was going on before I started watching. The pull and tug between fixing SS and ending SS, including privatization schemes, just keeps on making it harder.

What may happen is that "they" may change the rules for those younger than .......... say 55. And those folks may have to deal with reductions, if any. Just a thought as nothing has been set in stone and probably will not be in my lifetime.

I am more in line with what ShokWaveRider suggests. Here is why. For those already receiving a "check" (yeah, I know, it's a direct deposit) it will be 3rd-rail time to suddenly see a big (or even small) drop in benefits. Remember the big brouhaha that surrounded the increases in monthly charges for Medicare which come out of SSA payments? That was only a few dollars and (I don't recall how it was resolved) but there was talk of grandfathering in payments instead of making people pay for the extra cost of Medicare. (I could be wrong on this, I've slept a few times since the issue arose a few years back.) So imagine suddenly someone's SSA payment will be cut by 24% (or in Tadpole's scenario, even more than 24% for "rich" old people.)

I still recall my in-laws "washing their hands" of (IIRC) Reagan because something in the press suggested he was going to cut SSA. That was it. They were "done" with him. They would have voted for Bernie Sanders had he been a candidate at the time.

No idea how it will all turn out, but major cuts to those already receiving benefits seem unlikely. Old folks vote - Even "rich" old folks vote - and they all vote their pocket books. YMMV
 
Here's one person's view on the future fixes of SS:

https://www.creators.com/read/your-social-security/09/21/social-security-will-not-go-broke

My emails clearly indicate that news has many of my readers saying, "Oh my God, what do we do now?" But frankly, it's got me saying, "Ho-hum. Been there, done that!" Without trying to be too flippant, let me explain.

Listed below are eight commonly mentioned reforms. Four involve cutting benefits and four deal with raising revenues. Next to each is a number expressed as a percentage. The number indicates the portion of Social Security's long-range deficit that would be eliminated if the proposal became law. Also listed is a brief argument for and against each proposal.
 
Back
Top Bottom