U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-01-2018, 07:55 PM
 
17,784 posts, read 12,478,198 times
Reputation: 13113

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
Signifantly reduce the maximum benefit. There are married couples getting more from SS (over $60,000 a year) than I ever earned in a year of working. They had the income to afford on their own their continued lavish liestyle, it is not what SS was designed to pay for.
Folks who get 60k in ss pay way more into it than you ever did typcially.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-01-2018, 09:10 PM
 
5,024 posts, read 2,394,878 times
Reputation: 9249
Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
There are married couples getting more from SS (over $60,000 a year) than I ever earned in a year of working. They had the income to afford on their own their continued lavish liestyle, it is not what SS was designed to pay for.
Let's hear something concrete. 60k is hardly a lavish lifestyle it's less than the median household income in USA. What should the maximum benefit be for those folks who contributed far more than you did to the program? You start skating on a really slippery slope when trying to use your personal compass on what people "need" to set limits on income, there is almost always someone who can point at you and say you're getting too much as well.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
How to "fix" social Security?
Perhaps a "fix" would be to require Congress to pay back all the money they "borrowed" (stole) from The Social security Trust Fund. Of course, that would require proof that "they" actually stole the money.
good luck.
What money did congress borrow from the Social Security Trust Fund? Do you mean the bonds issued that pay the trust fund back with interest?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 03:29 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redraven View Post
How to "fix" social Security?
Perhaps a "fix" would be to require Congress to pay back all the money they "borrowed" (stole) from The Social security Trust Fund. Of course, that would require proof that "they" actually stole the money.
good luck.
nonsense .

ss was never in the general funds , it is prohibited by law .it can only be used to fund ss retirement,ssdi and ss survivor benefits. Any excess can only buy treasuries which have never defaulted .

they can only go in to fixed income . the gov't can't buy stock or it would own private business and that is communism.

Johnson did an accounting slight of hand by combining on paper only, the excess ss funds with the general funds to make the deficit appear smaller when funding the vietnam war but those ss funds were never in general funds .

what is draining ss retirement is ss disability which is rampant with abuse and fraud and is now the new unemploym,ent insurance.it went broke from all the claims and billions had to be shifted from ss retirement to ssdi
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 04:06 AM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
2,578 posts, read 936,549 times
Reputation: 5099
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Let's hear something concrete. 60k is hardly a lavish lifestyle it's less than the median household income in USA. What should the maximum benefit be for those folks who contributed far more than you did to the program? You start skating on a really slippery slope when trying to use your personal compass on what people "need" to set limits on income, there is almost always someone who can point at you and say you're getting too much as well.


What money did congress borrow from the Social Security Trust Fund? Do you mean the bonds issued that pay the trust fund back with interest?
OK, following your lead -- what should the maximum benefit be? A million a year? Ten million? Is that who the SS system was intended to protect the interests of?


I lived most of my life where my entire neighborhood consisted of workers who couldn't dream of earnings such lavish wages. Which is $30 an hour.

SS was not set up for retirees to enjoy the median wages of workers added onto to their private pension, savings, investments and inheritances, which are abundant for anyone who earned the wages that enabled upper bracket SS benefits. It was set up to escape poverty for those who did not have the wherewithal to earn and invest that "median wage" you think everyone is entitled to.

Maybe my SS is too much. I've live off it since retirement, without touching my savings. It wasn't created for people like me. But the people it was created for are at risk of losing it, because country clubbers are grabbing a share equal to five people who need it.

Last edited by cebuan; 12-02-2018 at 04:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 04:13 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
going back to even the first rendition of ss in the 1800's it was never meant to provide more than 30-40% of anyone's wages
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 05:27 AM
 
5,024 posts, read 2,394,878 times
Reputation: 9249
Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
OK, following your lead -- what should the maximum benefit be? A million a year? Ten million? Is that who the SS system was intended to protect the interests of?
4th and ten... cebuan decides to punt. You're the one who suggested we lower the maximum benefit, but when asked to how much you suddenly want those asking to fill in your blanks.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
I lived most of my life where my entire neighborhood consisted of workers who couldn't dream of earnings such lavish wages. Which is $30 an hour.
It's not about you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
SS was not set up for retirees to enjoy the median wages of workers added onto to their private pension, savings, investments and inheritances, which are abundant for anyone who earned the wages that enabled upper bracket SS benefits. It was set up to escape poverty for those who did not have the wherewithal to earn and invest that "median wage" you think everyone is entitled to.
Really? I'd be interested to know the source of this information. Where exactly did you discover that the people getting the max social security have that on top of private pensions, investments, and inheritances?


Quote:
Originally Posted by cebuan View Post
because country clubbers are grabbing a share equal to five people who need it.
60k country clubbers?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 05:35 AM
 
Location: North Beach, MD on the Chesapeake
32,458 posts, read 39,760,777 times
Reputation: 41043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lowexpectations View Post
Folks who get 60k in ss pay way more into it than you ever did typcially.
No individual is receiving $60K/year from Social Security in any event. The highest possible benefit is just under $2800/month, so $33,600/year. The average benefit this year for all recipients is $1400/month. So misstating the benefit amount is just one problem with this thread.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...nt-benefit.asp
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 05:40 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
Quote:
Originally Posted by North Beach Person View Post
No individual is receiving $60K/year from Social Security in any event. The highest possible benefit is just under $2800/month, so $33,600/year. The average benefit this year for all recipients is $1400/month. So misstating the benefit amount is just one problem with this thread.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/ans...nt-benefit.asp

this is not correct . 2800 is only the max at fra . your article clearly says that " The maximum monthly Social Security benefit payment for a person retiring in 2018 at full retirement age is $2,788."


a high earning couple can get over 88k at 70 as a couple . 3698 is the max a month per person .

2018
Age----Per month-----Per year

70-----$3,698---------$44,376 x 2 for a couple is 88,752


https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018...-62-65-or.aspx
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 05:46 AM
 
2,030 posts, read 1,798,224 times
Reputation: 4369
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
a high earning couple can get over 88k at 70 as a couple . 3698 is the max a month per person . you did see in the link you posted that 2800 a month is at fra i hope and not the max benefit .

2018
Age----Per month-----Per year

70-----$3,698---------$44,376


https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018...-62-65-or.aspx
Are there stats on what age most take SS? I would guess is 65 is the highest percentage and 70 being the lowest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 05:50 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
https://photos.smugmug.com/photos/i-...-s4z4PbW-M.jpg

Last edited by toosie; 12-03-2018 at 05:00 AM.. Reason: TOS - copyright. Include link and your own summary explanation of contents
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top