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 12-02-2018, 06:42 PM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158

Advertisements

it is what it was designed to be , an insurance system where those who die pay for those who live .

you are wasting your time dwelling on what it should be , could be or is . this is what we have.

your time is better spent working on playing the cards your dealt instead of complaining about the dealer . if people spent as much time learning all the ins and outs of good retirement planning and integrating things with ss they would be a lot better off then complaining about things they can't change .

put your time in to what you can control .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-02-2018, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Raleigh NC
8,010 posts, read 6,308,522 times
Reputation: 7100
Quote:
Originally Posted by aridon View Post
Lots of stupid in this thread. Lots.


The Reformer: An Interactive Tool to Fix Social Security


Here play with this and see what actual changes would do. This isn't perfect by any means but its a hell of a lot closer than most of the garbage in this thread like "congress stole our money" and gems like "those leaching widows".

Some of you folks are demented and or ignorant.

Social Security is hardly a lost cause and can be adjusted to be quite solvent. People are going to have to pay a little more to secure their checks and some benefit changes. The earlier we do that, the better.

By all means though, lets spend an extra trillion a year on needles tax cuts elsewhere, the war pig just farted, it is also due. Our priorities as a nation are completely ****ed up. There is probably more support to run off and kill some brown people in the desert than there is to solidify one of the most important government programs.

But yeah, lets cut window benefits from Social Security. Lets just get rid of the program and go back to the 20's. That worked out really well for everyone when there were no safety nets.
you were making sense until you said we're giving out 1T tax cuts per YEAR. After that, you dropped straight to the bottom of partisan witch-hunting.

Moderator cut: report posts that violate TOS - don’t quote or respond

Last edited by toosie; 12-03-2018 at 05:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 08:01 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
2,036 posts, read 686,553 times
Reputation: 954
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
it is what it was designed to be , an insurance system where those who die pay for those who live .

you are wasting your time dwelling on what it should be , could be or is . this is what we have.

your time is better spent working on playing the cards your dealt instead of complaining about the dealer . if people spent as much time learning all the ins and outs of good retirement planning and integrating things with ss they would be a lot better off then complaining about things they can't change .

put your time in to what you can control .
Basically, you are saying that despite its major shortcomings, just get used to it continuing to degrade and cost future generations more than the previous. While I might be wasting my time, I would rather push for a better solution than kick the current one down the road.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Raleigh NC
8,010 posts, read 6,308,522 times
Reputation: 7100
anything I've ever read that wasn't "it's a retirement vehicle" has said it was intended to protect people (primarily widows) who got to old age and had no source of income.

There's no dispute that when it started the eligibility age was > average life expectancy. So, it was a true "safety net".

When it started you could opt out. And when it started it was 1% of your income.
Which of these points have I been misled on?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-02-2018, 08:38 PM
 
Location: Cebu, Philippines
2,578 posts, read 936,549 times
Reputation: 5099
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
SS is a forced program that cost the contributor 12.4% of their income. This is not chicken feed. A better plan would be a mandatory private system that builds personal wealth for the contributor to pass to whom he pleases. 12.4% is way too costly for an insurance. It reflects just how poor the program is.
With all the security of private pensions.


SS is not to create personal wealth for the wily, but to create public wealth for all to share as needed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 02:46 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
Basically, you are saying that despite its major shortcomings, just get used to it continuing to degrade and cost future generations more than the previous. While I might be wasting my time, I would rather push for a better solution than kick the current one down the road.
well keep pushing . let us know how that worked out for you.

there will likely be no other system , you can take that to the bank .

Last edited by mathjak107; 12-03-2018 at 02:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 02:57 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
Potato, potatoes. SS was initiated by paying out to those who had little or nothing contributed into it. The very first full recipient(Ida Mae Miller) paid in around 24.00 dollars and collected over 22k. The first payees paid in far less % than current payees. If it looks like a duck and quacks like as duck.

You claimed SS funds never went into the general fund, yet, the way it is accounted for is essentially the same as if it did.
no it is not the same . fixed income is the only investment ss can make . it does not matter who's bonds they buy . in fact they get a higher interest rate on those special treasuries than the regular ones pay .

the gov't can not buy stocks . they can not own private companies . what a borrower does with the money they borrow is irrelevant to the situation . the fact is no ss money is just moved to general funds.

if you or your funds in a 401k buy treasuries ,are they stealing your money ? nonsense , of course not!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 04:15 AM
 
11,815 posts, read 6,117,839 times
Reputation: 21725
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
no it is not the same . fixed income is the only investment ss can make . it does not matter who's bonds they buy . in fact they get a higher interest rate on those special treasuries than the regular ones pay .

the gov't can not buy stocks . they can not own private companies . what a borrower does with the money they borrow is irrelevant to the situation . the fact is no ss money is just moved to general funds.

if you or your funds in a 401k buy treasuries ,are they stealing your money ? nonsense , of course not!
This is all a charade. The money has already been spent. Social Security needs to be cash flow neutral or it eats the Federal budget alive. Right now, the program is just barely cash flow negative if you ignore the “interest on the Trust Fund” charade. It doesn’t need to be fixed now. It can limp along on borrowed money for a decade. Eventually, taxes have to go up to get the program back to cash flow neutral. Politically, there is no way any Congressman is going to vote to cut benefits for anyone over the age of 25. Raise the employer and employee rate from 6.2% to 8% and eliminate the income cap. Fixed. It doesn’t need to be done today. It needs to start phasing in 8 to 10 years from now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 05:06 AM
 
65,954 posts, read 67,221,781 times
Reputation: 44158
no , it is no different then annuities , insurance or pensions where current money tries to pay for existing claims so i disagree . there is almost nothing that is fully funded today in anything nor is it likely there ever will be . ss will end up resolved at the 11th hour .

it is like worrying about our debt which you can't control . it is what it is and despite what you think it ain't going to change .

it is like if someone is so worried the debt will be crushing and the world will no longer finance us , then that person should play the cards they are dealt --buy gold .

but complaining about it over and over or trying to say what should be done is wasted thoughts because these kinds of things have no resolution that you personally are going to solve . the brightest minds on the subject have already looked at these options . so the best we can do is learn to work with what we have and can control and that is the best way to spend time .

Last edited by mathjak107; 12-03-2018 at 05:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 05:23 AM
 
15,661 posts, read 9,241,916 times
Reputation: 67979
Quote:
The deficits have risen significantly under Trump and will continue to rise.

Funny how Republicans don't care anymore.
that is an excerpt from a now-deleted post. It provides an example of what is and isn’t ok here at Economics.

The first sentence mentioning Trump in this context is perfectly fine. It doesn’t mean the comment is a fact. It doesn’t mean others can’t contest the assertion. But it’s ok as per Econ posting standard.

The second sentence is partisan politics and off topic. It doesn’t matter if it’s trolls under bridges, people who like soup, or people on the honor roll who “don’t care anymore”. It’s irrelevant in this forum - and saying it’s Republicans or Democrats who don’t care is just partisan and has no place at Economics forums.

Posters who continue to fail to grasp that distinction should be reported and ignored. Those posters will be earning infractions.

As noted before - if you have a comment about this note, DM me instead of posting it here.

Carry on and please stay on topic.
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