Should Social Security be made voluntary?

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by Memphis1979

I believe they should pull the Social Security funds out of the general spending fund for the government.

Not only would this save the system, but it would keep Congress from fudging their numbers on just how much we are spending.

Also, I think they should raise the cap on how much they charge the top 10% of American earners.

Originally Posted by Bagger

I agree with you. Get it out of the general fund and don't cap the salary limit for which the tax is paid. And yes, that would mean that I would pay more.

Originally Posted by nicet4

Social security is the one thing you can count on.

Imagine the vote should the party in power decide social security is broke and will no longer pay. Talk about political kiss of death.

Remove the earnings cap.

Apply means testing to cut costs remembering it is an insurance not a retirement investment account. No reason to give Bill Gates $2500 a month when he turns 66.

Originally Posted by Boompa

Let them pay in at the same rate as everyone else.

Why should America Run a deficit while they avoid Billions in Taxes.

uhm,,,if you remove/increase the cap..you also increase the PAYOUT

for example a person making 102k (the current max) pays 6.5% of that 102k..meaning 6630...a person earning 1 million pays 6.5% of the first 102k...meeaning 6630....if that was the said salary their whole life ..they BOTH would recieve the SAME PAYOUT at 67..but..if you raise the limit..the guy earning 1 million would pay more right now,,but get would also get PAID more later...making the system LESS solvent

Apply means testing to cut costs remembering it is an insurance not a retirement investment account. No reason to give Bill Gates $2500 a month when he turns 66

if he PAID into the system, them he should get the benefit, whether he NEEDS it or not

[Moth]

Originally Posted by Boompa

Withdrawals, .............No Withdrawals it's a wage tax, you get to keep paying it. In fact I want to remove the cap so the rich can pay in too

(congrads on figuring out who Boompa is)

No Mr Hobbs. Withdrawals as in withdrawing the money from said account.

Pay attention please.

[stan4]

I don't think it should - not because I believe in big government but because I believe that irresponsible people will opt out of it (like they opt out of health insurance and make other stupid financial decisions) and still fail to save for their future.

And then, when they are old and have no money, the dems will come out of the woodwork and clamor that we can't just let them live with the consequences of their own actions (like they do now about health care, etc) and we'll have another welfare program, but the difference will be that they never paid into it in the first place.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by parfleche

with all due respect you will never get away with abandoning older Americans.you are one sick puppy. my dog even hates you

I don't pay into social security or medicare now. Therefore, I am NOT paying for others as you suggest I have to.

[nmnita]

Totally voluntary, NO, but I do think everyone should have the option to invest part of the money into Private plans.

Nita

[Casper in Dallas]

Originally Posted by Greatday

I believe it should.

Can we have a civil discussion on the issue?

I would have no problem walking away from SS, the second they repay me the money they have highjacked from me with the promise i would get it back in benefits.
Casper

[Rosinante]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

I believe SS can be voluntary but only if there is an alternative 401-k type of plan that people must invest at least an equal amount in, with that investment being mandatory with no refunds until retirement. The account would be treated just like any other personal asset for estate purposes, but cannot be borrowed against.

If we don't enforce the saving of money for people's future retirement years, we will end up with tens of millions of indigents who have paid in nothing and then we'll be told that we cannot let them starve and live under bridges at which time we'll end up bailing them out just like we have the banks.

I have many relatives who would end up broke and indigent; some because of their stupidity, some just don't make that much. We only need to look around to see that at least a third of our population, or more, have no idea how to handle their money. Tens of millions live from paycheck to paycheck and spend every cent they get on booze, drugs, guns, hunting, fishing, cars, gambling, porn, collectibles (junk), boats, RVs, ATVs, campers and tons more extraneous stuff. It's a shame some folks lack a good set of limits and boundaries, but we must protect ourselves from more trillion dollar boondoggles.

If given a choice, even some middle class folks would put off investing for retirement so they can spend more on the here and now.

An alternative is okay, so long as we make it mandatory and get it out of Government hands so that Congress can't use it for their smoke and mirror methods of counting it as part of the budget they can spend each year.

Unbelievable! A moderator that makes sense. Bully for you.

The Black Caucus would NEVER allow a bill that would make such a provision make it to the floor. They've been against the privatization of SS since Day One.