Poll:Is SS a critical part of your retirement plan?

[Fedup]

Older folks are a big voting group so I can't see pols messing with it too much. The UK election has just shown how important older folks are. The PM had no need to call an election but did so because the polls had her party 20 points ahead. She then put out a manifesto promising to not put a cap on long term care costs, means test the winter fuel allowance and change the formula on the COLA for UK SS which will cut the annual increase.

Surprisingly she has lost her majority and is now struggling to form a government

My husband just showed me the chart. Older folks, older than 65, mostly voted for the conservatives. But I was confused about hearing something about Alzheimer's online, still not sure what's that about. But I think there is no clear mandate for either party, her party has higher majority and therefore it makes sense for her party to rule vs Corbyn. Plus the Economist wrote Corbyn only passed two A levels with an E, no wonder he wants to give everything free.
Sorry for being off topic.

 

[Rosie]

I just ran firecalc, omitting both DH's current SS and my future SS. We're still at 100% success without tightening our belts appreciably, so we'd be OK w/o SS. It's nice to have, though.

 

[hankster]

I like the practice (learned on this forum) of having 3 versions of a retirement budget, which goes something like this:
1. Optimal
2. Reduced
3. Austerity

We could live with the 25% haircut but lifestyle would suffer:
1. Full SS - Rib eye steak and winters in a warm climate
2. 25% haircut - Round steak and one winter month in a warm climate
3. No SS - Ramen noodles and winter in a warm blanket

 

[Alan]

My husband just showed me the chart. Older folks, older than 65, mostly voted for the conservatives. But I was confused about hearing something about Alzheimer's online, still not sure what's that about. But I think there is no clear mandate for either party, her party has higher majority and therefore it makes sense for her party to rule vs Corbyn. Plus the Economist wrote Corbyn only passed two A levels with an E, no wonder he wants to give everything free.
Sorry for being off topic.

I don't want the thread to go off topic but you confirmed my example that when you have such a large voting block you mess with their pension and benefits at your own peril.

 

[FireBug]

Absolutey critical

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

I like the practice (learned on this forum) of having 3 versions of a retirement budget, which goes something like this:
1. Optimal
2. Reduced
3. Austerity

We could live with the 25% haircut but lifestyle would suffer:
1. Full SS - Rib eye steak and winters in a warm climate
2. 25% haircut - Round steak and one winter month in a warm climate
3. No SS - Ramen noodles and winter in a warm blanket

I like option 1

 

[2017ish]

I like the practice (learned on this forum) of having 3 versions of a retirement budget, which goes something like this:
1. Optimal
2. Reduced
3. Austerity

We could live with the 25% haircut but lifestyle would suffer:
1. Full SS - Rib eye steak and winters in a warm climate
2. 25% haircut - Round steak and one winter month in a warm climate
3. No SS - Ramen noodles and winter in a warm blanket

Well, as long as DW and I are in the warm blanket together, I like number 3 best!

 

[AllDone]

We overshot our retirement savings needs by so much that it doesn't matter if we get SS. It's nice to know that there is a pension available to us, just in case something goes wrong though and that the pension doesn't depend on the volatility of the financial market.

"They" have been predicting the imminent demise of SS for 85 years now. I imagine that "they" will still be predicting the same thing 85 years in the future, but I'll be dead by then so I won't know!

We have found that MC with the appropriate supplement is quite manageable financially though not "free" like the Canadian system. I don't know of any situation where we would be on the hook for "millions." Perhaps you were speaking of a time before eligibility for MC and perhaps without any health insurance. That WOULD be disastrous. My DW's SIL speaks highly of the Canadian system though she admits the wait time for some things is excessive. YMMV

We don't know if Canadian wait times are longer or shorter, because nobody keeps track of US wait times.

 

[growing_older]

Quote:
Originally Posted by dixonge
Actually, not a Ponzi scheme. I found this to be an enlightening read.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.967da1a99cd6

Wait. One of the main arguments in the article against SS being a Ponzi scheme is that the pool of young workers paying in is smaller than the pool of old retirees collecting benefits, where successful Ponzi schemes look more like a pyramid. This makes it sound like a failing Ponzi scheme. Not very reassuring.

 

[IMATERP]

SS compliments my State Pension. I've decided to go ahead and take the adjusted State Pension at age 60 so that my adjusted amount will be the same from 60 to death (plus cola.)

Do, I need SS or a percentage - absolutely NOT.

Do I want it under the above scenario - YUP!

Michael

 

[AllDone]

Wait. One of the main arguments in the article against SS being a Ponzi scheme is that the pool of young workers paying in is smaller than the pool of old retirees collecting benefits, where successful Ponzi schemes look more like a pyramid. This makes it sound like a failing Ponzi scheme. Not very reassuring.

There is also no reason why SS can't be funded out of general revenue. The only way that SS can "go broke" is by the entire US government making the decision to fail because countries that control their own currency cannot "go bankrupt". The only thing that can end the SS program is deliberate legislation to do so.

 

[Fermion]

There is also no reason why SS can't be funded out of general revenue. The only way that SS can "go broke" is by the entire US government making the decision to fail because countries that control their own currency cannot "go bankrupt". The only thing that can end the SS program is deliberate legislation to do so.

^ this

All of the arguments claim that SS is just a tax and the money has already been spent. Ok, fine. Then SS can be funded from any tax revenue and will never "run out" of money. We could pay for SS by having a tax on lima bean sales or imports of Nintendo Switch game consoles. Anything really.

So how can SS ever run out of money?

 

[youbet]

when you have such a large voting block you mess with their pension and benefits at your own peril.

As Boomers begin to hit the graveyard in increasing numbers, we may find that here in the USA the demographics and underlying thoughts on SS take a turn. Today, economically struggling youngsters cringe at seeing their FICA taxes increase so yet another well-heeled Boomer can continue to take cruises, own a toy car for Sunday drives, etc.

Youngsters are well aware that ALL of their FICA contributions go to supporting today's geezers (there is no lockbox holding individual accounts dedicated to them) and many of those geezers don't really need the money (this thread is an excellent example). Who could blame them for wanting serious means testing of SS as their percentage of the voting block increases and they begin to have some say?

My household can survive a SS trimming or even elimination. And I'd prefer to take a trimming to seeing FICA taxes increased for working families just getting by and struggling to prepare for their own retirements.

 

[youbet]

^ this

All of the arguments claim that SS is just a tax and the money has already been spent. Ok, fine. Then SS can be funded from any tax revenue and will never "run out" of money. We could pay for SS by having a tax on lima bean sales or imports of Nintendo Switch game consoles. Anything really.

So how can SS ever run out of money?

But what may change is who gets the redistributed (taxes collected from some and given out to others) funds.

SS may become more like Medicaid. Everyone pays in but only the lowest income qualify to collect.

I doubt we'll see FICA taxes raised on the lower and lower-middle classes and those dollars, in part, redistributed to the upper-middle and upper classes.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

Great redistributed, another euphemism i dislike when it comes to social security.

 

[Dash man]

There is also no reason why SS can't be funded out of general revenue. The only way that SS can "go broke" is by the entire US government making the decision to fail because countries that control their own currency cannot "go bankrupt". The only thing that can end the SS program is deliberate legislation to do so.

While what you say is true, the dollar will be devalued as they print that money, making the value of a SS check worth less.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

While what you say is true, the dollar will be devalued as they print that money, making the value of a SS check worth less.

Dont put bad news into threads on Sunday. hahaha. Im trying to be happy. Some one already told me Batman died.

 

[bclover]

its in my budget but I can live if something happened to it. Since I'm 5 years away I'll be collecting some thing

 

[Fedup]

Dont put bad news into threads on Sunday. hahaha. Im trying to be happy. Some one already told me Batman died.

Batman died Saturday. Not Sunday.

 

[bclover]

As Boomers begin to hit the graveyard in increasing numbers, we may find that here in the USA the demographics and underlying thoughts on SS take a turn. Today, economically struggling youngsters cringe at seeing their FICA taxes increase so yet another well-heeled Boomer can continue to take cruises, own a toy car for Sunday drives, etc.

Youngsters are well aware that ALL of their FICA contributions go to supporting today's geezers (there is no lockbox holding individual accounts dedicated to them) and many of those geezers don't really need the money (this thread is an excellent example). Who could blame them for wanting serious means testing of SS as their percentage of the voting block increases and they begin to have some say?

My household can survive a SS trimming or even elimination. And I'd prefer to take a trimming to seeing FICA taxes increased for working families just getting by and struggling to prepare for their own retirements.

you know what I find interesting?? some times we have threads or post where we claim most of Americans have not saved for retirement then we turn around and claim most retirees are "well heeled". go figure.

I think more and more seniors absolutely are depending on ss to live, so whether or not the youngins like it, ss is here to stay. yes Baby boomers are eventually going to kick the bucket but they are living longer so for the next decade at least they will be a force to contend with. as others have said most politicians aren't going to touch that live wire. they might not increase FICA but they could very well eliminate various tax credits and fund ss other ways. tomatoe/toemato either way they will be paying more

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

Batsman died Saturday. Not Sunday.

lol, that ruined my Saturday.

 

[Fermion]

But what may change is who gets the redistributed (taxes collected from some and given out to others) funds.

SS may become more like Medicaid. Everyone pays in but only the lowest income qualify to collect.

I doubt we'll see FICA taxes raised on the lower and lower-middle classes and those dollars, in part, redistributed to the upper-middle and upper classes.

So one might reason that the people in this thread who say they are counting on SS will get SS and the people who say they can live without SS will end up getting their SS cut.

That works for me. I want to be in the group who is counting on SS rather than work 10 more years and then be in the group who gets their SS cut because they have saved more.

But those of you who want to do OMD(ecade) just so you can thumb your nose at SS, have at it! Enjoy that commute too!

 

[Koolau]

I revisited my thoughts on this subject a bit. Losing all of our SS would mean increasing our WDR close to the "standard" 4% if we wanted to maintain our "profligate" life style. So since my roughly 30% equities would not support the 4% withdrawal (for 29 more years) I would have to completely redo my portfolio. THAT would be a pain. 25% haircut wouldn't require much if any portfolio change, so I guess I should go with that option (25% haircut is okay - just not desirable.) Still, that word "comfortable" means different things to different people. So maybe I won't change my input. I guess it's possible to overthink this topic which leads to second-guessing. Maybe I'll worry about this tomorrow. YMMV

 

[mrfeh]

I include it when I run firecalc, so we are depending on it. I think we have enough buffer for a 25% reduction, but I haven't run that scenario.

 

[Hermit]

you know what I find interesting?? some times we have threads or post where we claim most of Americans have not saved for retirement then we turn around and claim most retirees are "well heeled". go figure.

I think more and more seniors absolutely are depending on ss to live, so whether or not the youngins like it, ss is here to stay. yes Baby boomers are eventually going to kick the bucket but they are living longer so for the next decade at least they will be a force to contend with. as others have said most politicians aren't going to touch that live wire. they might not increase FICA but they could very well eliminate various tax credits and fund ss other ways. tomatoe/toemato either way they will be paying more

The oldest Baby Boomers are just hitting 70. The youngest are not yet 60. Can we make that at least 20 more years?