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)
 
Old 12-03-2018, 08:21 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
2,117 posts, read 704,992 times
Reputation: 975

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
It is nothing like Enron accounting, unless "Enron accounting" is a buzzword for anything financial you disagree with or don't understand. Enron hid massive debts from risky business ventures that failed, the Social Security Administration isn't making any risky investments and they are completely transparent on their accounting. You want to know how much is in the trust fund or when it'll be depleted it's in publicly available reports created using audits by internally and by CBO.

The general fund isn't making up the difference because the SSTF hasn't been depleted.


False. Social security has been completely self-sustaining since inception, therefore it has zero impact on deficits. There is nothing illegal about it.
Being that contribution rates have skyrocketed. Yet, the government blows every penny it receives via taxes and SS contributions. Itís no different than your wife spending the house payment on a new purse leaving you to borrow for the house payment. There is no legitimate reason for contribution rates to have increased from 3% to the current 12.4%. It isnít fair for future generations to have further rate hikes or for socialistic measures to fix future unfunded liabilities. The program was a disaster suredly to happen. As with the failing pension system, the fix needs to be modeled after the 401k system under privatization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-03-2018, 11:32 PM
 
Location: Thailand
5,114 posts, read 2,433,433 times
Reputation: 9366
Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
Yet, the government blows every penny it receives via taxes and SS contributions.
It was already explained to you why this is false, repeating the same erroneous claim over and over doesn't make it true. The Social Security Trust Fund didn't grow to almost 3 trillion by the government blowing every penny it received from SS contributions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
There is no legitimate reason for contribution rates to have increased from 3% to the current 12.4%.
Legitimate reason = demographics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by maat55 View Post
the fix needs to be modeled after the 401k system under privatization.
You should read up on and understand the system before proposing fixes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-03-2018, 11:52 PM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
2,999 posts, read 1,319,472 times
Reputation: 5423
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
1. End all spousal benefits including for spouses who never worked or divorced spouses. If you want SS, then work and pay into it.
2. End minor child benefits for old folks who can't manage their old age family planning.
Thank you for proposing some very plausible possible fixes for Social Security.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 12:11 AM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
2,999 posts, read 1,319,472 times
Reputation: 5423
Quote:
Originally Posted by bpollen View Post
You CAN get SS, even though you're still working. It's just that there's a formula that cuts the benefit you get at that age, if you are still working. That amount that is cut is NOT taken from total amounts you'll get. Those amounts will be added to your benefits in the future.

I don't think SS benefits should be taxed at all. These benefits were already taxed at least once. Taxing SS encourages people to keep their income below a certain level, when they are still working.

It's incorrect to say that working people support everyone else. Paying into Social Security is going toward supplementing those who worked like the working people, and are thus missed getting that money while they were working. Like the current working people will find out. Everyone who has worked the required length of time to get SS has paid for Social Security for everyone, whether still working or having worked in the past.

Of course, parents who choose to have children SHOULD pay for them. So they should be left out of the equation. Social Security only applies to people who worked in the past or are currently working. That doesn't include children, usually.
Thanks for the response and you are correct. I did mis-speak on the the collection of funds vs the tax rate on the end.

I also like the thought of why SS Benefits would be taxed at all. I guess they are treating it as a pretax asset purchase rather than a tax, which explains half the tax, but none at all for the employer.

While the thread quickly went a different way, my overall point was that we should be encouraging people to work, not discouraging them with significant benefit tax rates. People that continue work even at normal tax rates are a benefit to the country, not something that should be punished.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 12:16 AM
 
Location: Silicon Valley
2,999 posts, read 1,319,472 times
Reputation: 5423
Solution #2 - Means test the marriage benefit. Taking care of a home is not easy, and in some families one member raised the family while the other worked. The marriage benefit is solid. However, distinguishing between a spouce of 10+ years getting full benefit vs a mail order bride that marries some old lonely idiot and spends the rest of their life overseas collecting SS for kids/retirement is shady. Should marriage benefits transfer at 0% <5 years, 50% 5-10 and 100% 10+?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 01:31 AM
 
9,752 posts, read 7,585,787 times
Reputation: 23874
Quote:
Originally Posted by artillery77 View Post
Solution #2 - Means test the marriage benefit. Taking care of a home is not easy, and in some families one member raised the family while the other worked. The marriage benefit is solid. However, distinguishing between a spouce of 10+ years getting full benefit vs a mail order bride that marries some old lonely idiot and spends the rest of their life overseas collecting SS for kids/retirement is shady. Should marriage benefits transfer at 0% <5 years, 50% 5-10 and 100% 10+?
What about single people who never marry? Why should we give special benefits to the life choice of marriage?

This is just an old provision based on outdated sexism and expectations that women are dependent on men.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 01:31 AM
 
Location: Thailand
5,114 posts, read 2,433,433 times
Reputation: 9366
I'm all for changes to the program to prolong solvency, but wonder is a graduated marriage benefit really something worth addressing? In other words, of the millions on social security how many are lonely idiots who get mail order brides then promptly drop dead with a decade? You want fixes that catch a little bit from a lot of people, not going after the occasional guy with the Filipino wife who is 30 years younger.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 02:39 AM
 
66,327 posts, read 67,522,611 times
Reputation: 44438
with divorce rates so high you can be talking both spousal benefits and survivor benefits for a whole lot of the older population . i would take it a step further and end all spousal adders period . we all eat only what we kill. or at the least ,like most pensions , if you want it to go to a spouse then you yourself have to take less
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 05:17 AM
 
11,969 posts, read 6,201,906 times
Reputation: 21995
Quote:
Originally Posted by aridon View Post
Bonds have been expiring and being repurchased for decades now. What will happen is the trust fund will buy less treasury bonds as demand for cash rises until ultimately they can't buy anymore bonds (trust fund is depleted). At this point there will be a choice, continue paying benefits and borrow / tax to pay them or pay 75% or so of benefits. This number will change based on economic output, number of retirees and inflation adjustments.

What will that do to the treasury markets? Well the change will be slow so there will be time to adjust but ultimately higher interest rates as a significant amount of demand will be removed from the market.
Not really


Today, the Social Security system is slightly cash flow negative. The government has to borrow money to pay pension benefits. In 20 years, itís going to be massively cash flow negative. For every dollar it receives in payroll taxes, it will distribute $1.25 in pension benefits. Unless something changes, there will be massive borrowing.


The trust fund is fiction since the money has already been spent. To pay it back without borrowing, the government has to dramatically raise Federal income taxes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-04-2018, 05:19 AM
 
66,327 posts, read 67,522,611 times
Reputation: 44438
break ssdi off , make it part of welfare . the ss system would then be just fine with a few adjustments . it has become the new unemployment insurance fund today . leave ss retirement and survivor benefits as part of ss and move out ssdi. it is draining ss retirement /survivor .

billions had to be moved from ss retirement to ssdi in order to keep paying out because it so bogged in claims . 16 sents of every dollar goes to ssdi .

then close up some of the overly generous spousal benefits . if anyone wants to pass their work record to a spouse for a bigger benefit they should have to take a reduction in their own just like pensions do

. that should be pretty close to being solvent .

Last edited by mathjak107; 12-04-2018 at 05:51 AM..
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