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.
This is no easy question. I hear a lot of people who are upset about the entitlement programs that we have in place (social security, medicare, medicaid, etc).
But how would you do that exactly? Sure, you could simply abolish them, but then what about all of the people who need those services? Many who have retired, or are close to retirement have to have that money, it was promised them, for a life of contributing to the system.
Those of us that are younger, have to continue to pay in, to support those that need it now, that were promised. And it wouldn't be fair for me to pay in, all my life, and not get it when I retire right?
So, how would we do this? Take out a big enough loan to pay back all of the money contributed so far? A big enough "Social security pay out" for those that are on it now? If not, how would you suggest that we keep paying them, with no money coming in?
I'm just curious. I never heard of a good explanation for this part of it. I know the Bush administration favored moving that money to a private investment account, but that still doesn't explain on how we'd take care of those that are on it now. Also, I've been paying in since I was 18, I want my money back, if I'm not going to get it later.
You don't end it. Sorry, your paying into the boomer retirement fund.
No, we don't need the money moved to investments. Every time someone starts moving money into investment then it comes up missing or not existing and not enough of them have the decency to commit suicide.
I agree with the OP; it is unfair for our young people to pay into a system of which they will not see any return. I don't have a solution. However, I do have a warning. I, and many others, had no plan to retire. I would have preferred to work as long as I was healthy enough to do so. I worked for a Fortune 500 company that decided the best was to cut costs was to dump those eligible for SS. That was so successful that they extended the forced retirement program to include employees age 55 and up. You might be saying, "just find another job." Not so fast, American jobs are hard to come by and if you are over the hill you don't stand a chance. The only alternative was and is to collect SS.
I suggest you start a plan for retirement no matter how small or simple that plan is. The only person you can depend on for a secure old age is yourself and the day to start is today. Good luck!
Doubtful it will go away, even though younger workers always want to stop transfer payments to the elderly. Ever since its inception, pretty much every year people talk big about how they want to get rid of entitlement programs...never to happen in 8 decades. The declining outlook has been going on since 1977, 33 years now without any concerted effort to get rid of it. The benefits may change and taxes will probably increase in other ways to pay for it, but it won't become insolvent no matter the warnings.
The worst thing they ever did was take it from a savings account system to a transfer system, to take the built up funds to spend it, so if there was ever a drop in population, or taxes, or increase in inflation they were completely screwed.
I am not really for it or against it, my own security is in no doubt that I have good enough funds after paying the tax. I do enjoy watching the debate from those who want a bit of extra money, that won't see any need for it because they are 40 years from retirement and have no doubt they will never need disability or assistance. Once people realize they need disability, or that they have not saved enough for their declining years by putting it off, or have medical issues that they can't pay for without Medicare; that attitude goes into a 180 instantaneously even from the most hard core opponent.
My point on this thread isn't to argue if its going away, or if it should go away. My question is mainly to those who do want it to go away, and their way of responsibly ending the program.
I really don't see a way to end it, regardless of its merits or not. I personally see social security as a good program, if it were kept out of the general funds. However, I don't see that happening anytime soon.
I agree with the OP; it is unfair for our young people to pay into a system of which they will not see any return. I don't have a solution. However, I do have a warning. I, and many others, had no plan to retire. I would have preferred to work as long as I was healthy enough to do so. I worked for a Fortune 500 company that decided the best was to cut costs was to dump those eligible for SS. That was so successful that they extended the forced retirement program to include employees age 55 and up. You might be saying, "just find another job." Not so fast, American jobs are hard to come by and if you are over the hill you don't stand a chance. The only alternative was and is to collect SS.
I suggest you start a plan for retirement no matter how small or simple that plan is. The only person you can depend on for a secure old age is yourself and the day to start is today. Good luck!
Wise advice indeed.
Handle your savings as though it needs to last you the rest of your life. Because, realistically, it does. Open a ROTH in addition to any retirement offered by your employer if your are able.
Realistically I think you set a day, it could have been done on January 1, 2010. Anyone entering the workforce on or after that date does not have SS with-held from their paycheck. They are given the wise advice to provide for their own retirement because they will not be included in the government funded retirement system that is SS.
Those currently recieving or who, by way of paying into the system, will qualify for SS, receive only that which they have paid-in (or their spousal benefits) adjusted to include the interest the government has earned on that money and nothing more. Eventually, the system is ended when those who paid into the sustem have all died or exhausted their benefits.
Realistically I think you set a day, it could have been done on January 1, 2010. Anyone entering the workforce on or after that date does not have SS with-held from their paycheck. They are given the wise advice to provide for their own retirement because they will not be included in the government funded retirement system that is SS.
Those currently recieving or who, by way of paying into the system, will qualify for SS, receive only that which they have paid-in (or their spousal benefits) adjusted to include the interest the government has earned on that money and nothing more. Eventually, the system is ended when those who paid into the sustem have all died or exhausted their benefits.
What the retired have already paid in, is long gone. The only way to continue to fund their SSI, or to give them back what they've paid in, would be to continue to tax those coming into the work force now. Also, you can't just take away their only means of retirement income, when they were promised that for all of the years they worked.
Give everyone entitled to Social Security a bonus like the executives are getting for screwing over the American people. About $2 million and we'll all go away.
Give everyone entitled to Social Security a bonus like the executives are getting for screwing over the American people. About $2 million and we'll all go away.
Most people don't go in and say, hell, I know let me just live off SS.
It has less to do with being promised. It has more to do with what happens. This whole lets screw people when they age has to go. I just watched a women who has worked for the same institution and she has 2 more years until she QUALIFIES to retire. She was forced into part time. She isn't going to be hired anyplace else. Now that she is part time, she doesn't get the benefits that she has been paying into AND they didn't fire her so she doesn't qualify to get anything else. That is one department. In a different department that put 5 people on part time (4 of those were to retire in 2 years) and 3 of other ones were forced into early retirement.
All of the above people paid into a retirement fund and everyone of them that had money in stocks, lost almost 2/3 of what they had. Why? Because they don't know how to work the stockmarket. Some jack off came in, aka "financial advisor" and made the calls.
Work, work, work, do the right thing, do the right thing, do the right thing and then get screwed.
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.
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.
