Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 08-08-2011, 11:31 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,478 posts, read 59,608,382 times
Reputation: 24858

Advertisements

Social Security was insurance so when the market collapses and the banks all fail the elderly will still be able to pay the rent and buy food. It was designed to keep some cash flowing through the economy and incidentally prevent the elderly from becoming completely impoverished when the business system inevitably collapsed. It has changed into a low grade pension and regressive income tax because the taxes do not apply to all income and the payments are made to everyone that contributed.

The current funding has to be changed to include all income from all sources and the payments only made to elderly with pensions less than the 50th percentile. That would provide enough money in and restrict outlay enough to keep the system operating forever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-08-2011, 11:39 AM
 
9,855 posts, read 15,171,990 times
Reputation: 5481
The current rate of return for Social Security is 1.4%. The average rate of return for the market as a whole over the last 25 years is 11.2%. The average person would have exponentially more retirement savings if they could pocket their SS money and invest it in the stock market.

How can anyone say (with a straight face) that SS is a good idea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,398,176 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Millions of Americans DON'T get back what they paid in. It depends on WHEN you paid in and when you collect - the first generation of workers to collect did indeed receive way more than they paid in, with the financial return declining over time. Boomers and Gen X would have been far better off in old age if their Social Security taxes had instead been invested privately.

And then if you die before you collect you lose all the money you paid in.
oh please
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
I'm on track to get $900 a month from Social Security. Take that away and I'm in deep doo doo. Poor grandpa, that will be me in a few years.b

What's that you say, I should have saved for retirement? How much do you realistically expect people to save on a $15K income?

Quote:
Originally Posted by workingclasshero View Post
so let's see if I get this straight

you settle for a 15k a year job

save NOTHING

and then plan on getting a 2/3 pension when you retire (900/month is over 10k a year )


btw your contributions to ss 6%...6% of 15k is 900 A YEAR

so you think it good that you contribut 900 a year (and your employeer matches it) for you to get 900/month????? how liberal of you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:08 PM
 
2,930 posts, read 2,218,739 times
Reputation: 1024
Social Security was never meant to be the sole source of income after retirement, but a source to supplement retirement savings or pensions. Those who try to live on their monthly SS check probably are not doing so well.

Though Social Security contributions were initially designed to be a small percentage currently the government takes roughly 15% from the self-employed, and a similar amount from employee/employer contributions. Over the years (had these amounts been invested) there would have been a substantial amount of growth that might have guaranteed a person a much larger nestegg than the government provides.

Entitlement? Hardly! Entitlements are seldom mandated with force.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:15 PM
 
737 posts, read 1,145,101 times
Reputation: 1013
Quote:
Originally Posted by GregW View Post
Social Security was insurance so when the market collapses and the banks all fail the elderly will still be able to pay the rent and buy food. It was designed to keep some cash flowing through the economy and incidentally prevent the elderly from becoming completely impoverished when the business system inevitably collapsed. It has changed into a low grade pension and regressive income tax because the taxes do not apply to all income and the payments are made to everyone that contributed.

The current funding has to be changed to include all income from all sources and the payments only made to elderly with pensions less than the 50th percentile. That would provide enough money in and restrict outlay enough to keep the system operating forever.
That would make it a welfare program. The amount that you pay on is capped because the maximum you can receive is capped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:24 PM
 
20,948 posts, read 18,995,992 times
Reputation: 10270
Any time that someone receives more than they put in, it's an entitlement. The 1st person to collect social security was Ida May Fuller. She paid a total of $49.50 into the system and received $22,889 in benefits.

That is a poorly designed system if I ever saw one.

Any time that people who never paid in receive a benefit, it's an entitlement.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:29 PM
 
2,930 posts, read 2,218,739 times
Reputation: 1024
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
Any time that someone receives more than they put in, it's an entitlement. The 1st person to collect social security was Ida May Fuller. She paid a total of $49.50 into the system and received $22,889 in benefits.

That is a poorly designed system if I ever saw one.

Any time that people who never paid in receive a benefit, it's an entitlement.
Well then an IRA or a 401K must be entitlements.............
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:34 PM
 
22,768 posts, read 30,642,821 times
Reputation: 14737
Quote:
Originally Posted by hilgi View Post
My dad retired in 84, he got back every dollar he had ever paid in ALL taxes, in the first 5 years. H is still collecting BTW.
is this real dollars or nominal dollars?

i am guessing nominal, and your dad only THINKS he got back what he paid in.

Anyway, social security fulfills several roles in the minds of voters. I would describe it as a very inefficient social insurance program, run by the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:55 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,180,653 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by le roi View Post
is this real dollars or nominal dollars?

i am guessing nominal, and your dad only THINKS he got back what he paid in.

Anyway, social security fulfills several roles in the minds of voters. I would describe it as a very inefficient social insurance program, run by the government.
Considering he said this in 1989 and he is still receiving benefits along with my moms spousal benefit from the that time, I bet he is correct in any kind of dollar you want to look at.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-08-2011, 02:57 PM
 
Location: MI
1,930 posts, read 1,819,646 times
Reputation: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Raising the retirement age increases the number of people who pay in for decades and die before collecting a dime.

In other words, raising the retirement age is highly regressive.

Which has never stopped conservatives.
WOW, good post. Yes this is what exactly can happen.
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
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

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 > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:02 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top