Social Security Reform - Today's News............

Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Chuck-Lyn,

Great comments - as for cries of "this isn't a crisis," I would think that most people in this group would know that little tweaks or changes early on can have large impact 20 or 30 years down the road. I.e. if you change your consumption early on and save that money, there's that much more later on.

As for attacking the messengers and their motives, I believe this is one issue that all sides need to be given the benefit of the doubt. History is replete with both US political parties 'screwing' the populace. I believe that can be attributed to "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

I for one am more of an individualist and would prefer to control my investment. In this case, it seems that a very small percentage of it would be available for personal investment. However, I am willing to listen to different ideas. I don't think that waiting for 34 years and then saying we need to fix it is smart, however. Reminds me of the people who post here with no assets who want to retire.

Bridget aka Deserat
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Hey CT, I will agree to work on the Medicare problem
if you will agree to work on the SS problem. :)

Deal?

Charlie
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Hmmm - one 'could do the right thing' - give a 6th or 8th grade math whiz/computer geek a set of uncorrupted data and let him solve the problem.

Never will happen - and probably would require a court restraining order to keep his parents off his back.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Hyperborea:

Is your moving icon a secret photo of George W. flashing us as a means to divert attention away from the social security fiasco?

Perhaps just this very moment he can be found prancing around the oval office wearing his speedos, singing show tunes, and cowboy boots, laughing at those that thought he was really just another silly cowboy. "Hey, Condi, guess what I'm wearing under my Tux during the inaguration?

Great special effects...
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Has anyone done the math to see if taking the cap
off of SS tax will solve the long range problem?
Click to expand...
Yes. People have looked at that. Of course it depends on the assumptions you make about the economy. In fact, under the most optimistic assuptions about economic performance, there is no social security short-fall problem. Under nominal assumptions, the problem is short term and disappears in a 75 year time-frame.

So, removing the cap reduces the relatively minor short-term short-fall except under the most pessimistic assumptions.


Do any of you grandparents think your babies will
be better off with the existing system?  Or would
you just rather do nothing and let them solve our
problem?
Click to expand...

With all due respect, Chuck-Lyn, there are more than two options. This is exactly the argument that the current administration is trying to make -- Either do what we want to do or face disaster. In reality, the system can be preserved with relatively minor tweaks. I am in favor of exploring these options first.

Don't throw out the baby with the wash!  :)
Click to expand...

I certainly agree with this sentiment. Social Security has served as an effective safety net for millions of Americans for several decades. Today, nearly half of all Americans over the age of 65 would fall below the poverty level if not for social security benfits. And younger generations are saving and investing even less than their parents and grand-parents. In the future, social security benefits are likely to be even more important to the elderly of this country. Before we throw the social security baby out just because of some possible short-term short-fall bathwater, let's look closely at the numbers. :)
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

The big question is why aren't we talking about Medicare when it is a problem today, intead of a future problem with Social Security?
Click to expand...

I suspect Medicare will be next on the agenda, but you might not like the solution. The template for Social Security private accounts is Chile, which has fully private accounts. Shortly after Chile privatized their Social Security system, the privatized their Medicare system. 10% of a worker's wages goes into a Social Security private account, and another 10% goes into a private Medicare account. If you run out of money in your private Medicare account due to high medical costs, tough.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

I suspect Medicare will be next on the agenda, but you might not like the solution.
Click to expand...

Bush is officially a lame duck today. The pundits today said that if folks don't quit dying in Iraq in the next couple months, his domestic agenda does not stand a chance. He sold us a bill of goods and has not come through yet.

Bush created the 'Iraq Crisis',  Congress will not let him create a Social Security or Medicare crisis. Even his only party will be scurrying like cockroaches. Expect the 2008 presidental debate to highlight Social Security. The Presidential Campaign will start in 2006. Even GOP strategists said today that a Tax Overhaul is probably off the table.

Bottom Line: Bush has to clean up the Iraq mess in about 6 months. - This looks almost impossible from where I sit.

Expect Bush to command such important tasks in the next few years of when the nations flag will be flown at half mast.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Yeah, I think you're right, Cut-throat.

Tim Russert on NBC news tonight quoted some recent polling numbers........something like 52% of the population now thinks that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was not worth the price we paid for it (versus 40% who think it was). And on SS, something like 65% said they do not support a major overhaul, including privatization.

I would be very surprised if Bush is able to do what he wants to do with SS. Lots of Republicans in Congress have to think about their re-election chances in a few years, and they are not going to commit political suicide on behalf of King George.


Bob
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Why have a cap at all? Why shouldn't everyone in this country pay the standard Social Security tax, regardless of their salary? To me this is a no brainer.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

I suppose the reason for 'any cap at all' might be that there is a cap on SS annuity payments. If memory serves me, last year the highest monthly SS annuity was a bit over $2400.

To someone earning $200,000, a year this would be unjust.

Although I was a public school teacher, I object to 'means testing' Social Security. The original promise clearly stated that the program was not a welfare program.

A conservative to the right of my political leanings would identify such a change as 'creeping socalism' and would have a strong case.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

under the most optimistic assuptions about economic performance, there is no social security short-fall problem.  Under nominal assumptions, the problem is short term and disappears in a 75 year time-frame.
Click to expand...

Thanks, SG, couldn't agree more.

Of those people who have no interest in investing for themselves now, I believe few of them will change. Let's face it, when you make minimum wage and both adults are working outside the home and you're trying to take care of children, it leaves little time for perusing a prospectus. Reading the ads for the best place to buy cheap bread are about the extent of financial planning.

Judy
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

To someone earning $200,000, a year this would be unjust.  
Click to expand...

Ol Rancher,

Since someone that earns over $200K per year uses a lot more of the public infrastructure than someone that makes 10K per year, it's not unjust at all.

Owners of companies that get their employees trained by the Public Education System, should have to help pay for their retirements as well - Most of these owners no longer have pensions for their employees. They are also using Public infrastructure to pay for the teachers retirements that trained their employees.

The more you earn, the more you suck resources out of the public. - And since we have been running deficiets lately, the rich are not paying their fair share.

I could go on and on. Airports, Roads etc. are used disproportionately by those earning large incomes. The subsidies have only gotten fatter and fatter lately.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

CT,

Arguing with you is about like walking into a buzz saw,
but I can't buy your comment that high dollar wage
earners use more of the public infrastructure.

Who are more likely to send their kids to private schools? Don't they pay school taxes on their
fancy homes?

Can a high wage earner drive more than one car at
a time?

If a business man owns a fleet of trucks does he
not have to pay tonnage fees and gas taxes in
proportion to his highway usage?

Are high wage earners likely to use the emergency
rooms of community hospitals in lieu of visiting a
doctor?

Are the high wage earners likely to live in high crime
areas thus demanding a higher portion of police
protection?

Are high wage earners most likely to be crack dealers
or users thus increasing the need for police and
EM support?

Finally, who is paying for all this infrastructure? The
poor? ..... not likely.

Cheers,

Charlie
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

P.S.

Are high wage earners overcrowding the court system?
(although I would welcome more prosecution of
white collar crime.) :)

Do high wage earners use public defenders?

Are fires more likely to start in high wage earner
homes or in the homes of poor people who
don't have central heating systems?

In health epidemic situations who is more likely to
need help from the public health system? Have
you ever checked to see if high wage earners
are more likely to have AIDS? Do high wage earners
use public hospitals to abort their young or do
they use private doctors?

When the weather gets God awful cold or hot do
high wage earners flee to the public libraries or
tax supported missions?

Yes, they use more gas, electricity and water but
those commodities are taxed in proportion to use.
Should they have to pay a premium? I think
the total demand for these services is dominated
by low wage earners ..... don't you?

Jeez Louise, CT -------- soak the rich, they can
afford it.

Charlie
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Charlie,

All of those middle-class and low class people that you used as examples of using public services, I agree they are!

They are workers at large companies making a few people very rich! - When they are sitting in a traffic jam, they are doing so to get to work. - We are subsidising those large companies.

The folks that make $100 million a year, don't do it by themselves. They hire workers that we subsidize. The companies don't pay for their education, transportation, medical care, housing.


Get it!
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

P.S. #2

I forgot about public transportation. Do the high
wage earners in your city use buses more
than low wage earners? They sure don't in
Dallas.

End of rant.

Cheers,

Charlie
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Jeez Louise, CT -------- soak the rich, they can
afford it. Charlie
Click to expand...

Of course. Adam Smith recommended this precisely as fair. If you belivbe in capitalism it is part of the machinery.

They are workers at large companies making a few people very rich! - When they are sitting in a traffic jam, they are doing so to get to work. - We are subsidising those large companies. The folks that make $100 million a year, don't do it by themselves. They hire workers that we subsidize. The companies don't pay for their education, transportation, medical care, housing
Exactly. It's called The Invisible Hand. And since every businessman knows there is no free lunch...every businesman must be willing to pay his fair share..and as every businessman knows you gotta go where the money is. And it ain't with the Un-Rich. The rich just resditribute other people's wealth into their own pockets, with Government mechanisms and then call it Private Property.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

P.S. #2

I forgot about public transportation.  Do the high
wage earners in your city use buses more
than low wage earners?  They sure don't in
Dallas.  
Click to expand...

Let's see, my dermatologist cousin who lives and works in Manhattan uses public transportation exclusively. She definitely earns above minimum wage, even when you divide the salary among all the family! ;)

Also, have you ever driven through the projects or "poor" areas of town? The vehicle of choice is definitely not your newest energy efficient hybrid. More likely the cheapest clunker that spews out fetid, ozone destroying fumes. I have no problem with paying taxes so that the enviroment is protected.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

CT,

It is the classic argument and basic disagreement between liberals and conservatives. You want to
soak the rich and we say don't shoot the goose. :)

Ol_Rancher commented that raising the SS cap to
$200,000 was unfair and you said that it was fair
because they used a higher portion of the
infrastructure. Clearly you were wrong, IMHO.

Now I don't object to raising the cap somewhat,
but I don't think it would be fair to remove it
altogether. That would be equivalent to raising
the upper tax bracket by 7.65%. Now I know you
probably would favor raising the tax bracket but
that is a different argument.

It seems reasonable to me to increase the cap by
an amount equal to the average increase in
salaries since the last time it was adjusted and
then index the cap to annual increases from here
on.

Cheers,

Charlie
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Ol_Rancher commented that raising the SS cap to $200,000 was unfair and you said that it was fair
because they used a higher portion of the
infrastructure. Clearly you were wrong, IMHO.
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of who PHYSICALLY USES the infrasytructure. Due to the maldistribution of wealth there will always be too few rich people so the math alone will keep them from physically using much of the actual infrastructure.

Who benefits most from the the infrastructure is salient. In any case, in any situation, those with the most, by definition, have benefited the most whether roads are good or bad, schools are good or bad, crime is high or low, taxes are high or low.

The talk of who rides the bus or pays for private schools is a bogus argument. Southland Corp., owners of 7-11's get richer off government welfare money than the actual recipients. And what a nice way to funnel public money into private profits.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Ol Rancher,

Since someone that earns over $200K per year uses a lot more of the public infrastructure than someone that makes 10K per year, it's not unjust at all.

Owners of companies that get their employees trained by the Public Education System, should have to help pay for their retirements as well - Most of these owners no longer have pensions for their employees. They are also using Public infrastructure to pay for the teachers retirements that trained their employees.

The more you earn, the more you suck resources out of the public. - And since we have been running deficiets lately, the rich are not paying their fair share.

I could go on and on. Airports, Roads etc. are used disproportionately by those earning large incomes. The subsidies have only gotten fatter and fatter lately.
Click to expand...
Cutthroat:
I usually enjoy your posts, and appreciate your love of fly fishing., but let me ask you a question.
You are in your early 50's, and retired.
You and wife both drive lexus cars, live in an expensive home, enjoy fine dining and wines, have expensive home entertainment systems, enjoy elaborate trips, etc., etc.
How has our system failed you?
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Jarhead,

If I just look at my personal life, it probably has not. That's the difference between the NeoCons and the Liberals. We're not just out for ourselves.

However, when I look at the shrinking middle class, the debt we are passing on to next generation. It upsets me. I think we're heading in the wrong direction.

In other words, I was just as upset about denying folks Civil Rights, even though I was not Black.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

I don't see how it will ever be possible to calculate who benefits most from specific government benefits, or what the tax/benefit ratio is by person or class. I don't have children. Does that mean that I don't benefit from having a public education system? Although I travel a lot, I have only driven on a small fraction of the interstate highway pavement. Does that mean I don't get my money's worth from the highways? et canem meam makes several similar points.

But I can look at the ratio of rich to poor in this country and see whether the gap is widening or closing. . . It is widening. You can see the data that supports this conclusion by logging onto the US Census Bureau web site and looking at the data they collect.

Do we believe that increasing this rich-poor gap is what is best for this country? I believe that the current administration does believe that a widening gap between rich and poor is better. Whether that's because they honestly believe that the rich will handle power and money in a way that is best for the country or whether it is purely a matter of greed, I cannot say. But it seems pretty clear that widening this gap is exactly what they wish to accomplish.

I don't believe that a widening gap between rich and poor benefits this country. I think that the country is better served by a taxation/benefit system that reduces this gap and promotes a strong middle class. We can reduce the gap through a combination of taxation and benefits. Since our current system is already widening the gap, I am not in favor of any taxation/benefit changes that exacerbate the problem. Until we see a trend of reducing poverty or strengthening the poor and middle class relative to the ultra-wealthy, I don't see why that attitude might change.
 
Re: Social Security Reform - Today's News.........

Falling nearly into that high wage earner category, working my butt off to save everything I can while paying massive taxes,  I am looking forward to ER'ing so I can point at the other guy and say "he's making a lot of money, tax him more but not me".  I'll be safely ER'd, and in a low income tax bracket by then.

;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Social Security (House) Proposal
6 7 8
Replies
194
Views
8K
Alan
Alan
FiveDriver
Question about Income Taxes and 2nd Social Security claim
Replies
3
Views
364
FiveDriver
FiveDriver
D
Marriage Tax Penalty on Social Security wish I knew earlier
Replies
6
Views
1K
Dave J
D
M
Social Security Tips on W-2 and Retirement Benefits
Replies
15
Views
771
meleana
M
S
New CRS Report - Social Security: Estimated Impact of Hypothetical Solvency Measures
Replies
1
Views
403
MichaelB
MichaelB

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom