U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-13-2016, 08:48 AM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705

Advertisements

Not sure the article headline reflects what is in the article:

Americans are more willing to cut Social Security than once thought

Change yes, not so sure about cut.

 
Old 12-13-2016, 09:16 AM
 
33,046 posts, read 22,057,675 times
Reputation: 8970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
In this case, their situation should have little net change. If you've scraped by your whole life and are scraping by on a similar amount with SS, how is your situation materially? It isn't, and ideally, you should have fewer expenses in retirement.

People who've scraped by their whole life probably never bought a home, which means they've been rent serfs their entire life. Since rents are now at all-time record levels, many of these people will probably have large downside change.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,218,356 times
Reputation: 6866
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Not sure the article headline reflects what is in the article:

Americans are more willing to cut Social Security than once thought

Change yes, not so sure about cut.
Nice link. Besides the headline being slightly misleading, the author's observation that " ...two-thirds or more of Republican and Democratic registered voters agreed on steps along the lines of Johnsonís proposal..." is also misleading. However, the overall article was good as was the underlying research.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 11:35 AM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705
Wonder if they will decide they support cutting SS also not realizing what they are supporting?

http://www.vox.com/science-and-healt...bamacare-trump
 
Old 12-13-2016, 11:37 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,581 posts, read 17,567,761 times
Reputation: 27672
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
People who've scraped by their whole life probably never bought a home, which means they've been rent serfs their entire life. Since rents are now at all-time record levels, many of these people will probably have large downside change.
True, not saying they'll always have an easy time. For current retirees, home ownership was much more achievable years ago than it is today.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 11:48 AM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
True, not saying they'll always have an easy time. For current retirees, home ownership was much more achievable years ago than it is today.
And that is another thread and another topic that could soon become overwhelming for seniors. Housing what, where and how much. There are two broad segments of senior housing:

Public- Either built or subsidized by the public sector. Within this sector is new and existing. How much will be available for government to spend on housing those who need help and how willing will taxpayers be to pay.

Private- Free market housing either existing or new. New will be at market price and what and where it is built will be decided by the private sector. New innovations and trends can be found in this segment with the ability to pay providing more comfort and innovations. Retirement destinations that are popular with affluent seniors will probably see the most development and innovation.

There is nothing to say that either segment will be in equilibrium with demand. Much of existing housing will be used by those who have owned the house for years and may not be available for market demand. New private housing will be where developers feel they can make money and new public housing will be where government can afford it.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Florida and New England
1,233 posts, read 1,418,186 times
Reputation: 1681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
The situation is going to get worse with the peak of Boomer retirements before it gets better by the time the Boomers are dying off and X, which is a smaller group, retire. With a larger number of working Millennials and the generation after that paying for the then current small X retiree cohort, there is likely to be some relief. The younger boomers (64) are 52 now.

We're probably talking twenty years before we get any natural relief from simple demographics at all. None of this considers any sort of political maneuvering that may either aid or worsen the situation. If the Republicans do anything too severe, my guess is the Democrats will be voted in the next election cycle and will spend two years undoing what the Republicans did.

The thing is that younger people who have not been paying into SS very long would be more likely to give up the "sunk money" they have paid in FICA than someone who has been in the workforce for decades.
This is why I think that the changes are going to be modest -- radical changes for those born after 1985 (The Millennials) would simply motivate them to abandon the system. Even the oldest millennial who finished college at 22 and started working immediately and at the maximum SS contribution has only been paying into the system for 9 nears, or about $60,000 personally paid into FICA (and of course matched by employer).

If these younger people are disenfranchised from Social Security, they might just say screw it -- let's abandon the whole system. They will soon have the votes to do so. I think the likeliest outcome is to raise the retirement age from 67 up to 70, perhaps one year per decade starting with those born in the 1980s or so.

On the other side, those of us born in the 1960s and 1970s who have been paying into the system since the 1970s or 1980s are already invested in the system to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the expectation of the median $1500 monthly benefit is widespread (with no more than small changes, like the chained CPI proposal). The oldest Gen Xer (born 1965) would collect at 67 full retirement age, so 2032. Say he lives until 85, or eighteen more years. He would receive probably around 300,000 in benefits back. Not an unreasonable expectation if he and his employer put 300,000+ into the system starting during the Reagan administration.

There is going to be a SS deficit in the 2020s and 2030s -- but Serious Conversation is correct that the 2040s and 2050s should run at a surplus for demographic reasons.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,581 posts, read 17,567,761 times
Reputation: 27672
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
And that is another thread and another topic that could soon become overwhelming for seniors. Housing what, where and how much. There are two broad segments of senior housing:

Public- Either built or subsidized by the public sector. Within this sector is new and existing. How much will be available for government to spend on housing those who need help and how willing will taxpayers be to pay.

Private- Free market housing either existing or new. New will be at market price and what and where it is built will be decided by the private sector. New innovations and trends can be found in this segment with the ability to pay providing more comfort and innovations. Retirement destinations that are popular with affluent seniors will probably see the most development and innovation.

There is nothing to say that either segment will be in equilibrium with demand. Much of existing housing will be used by those who have owned the house for years and may not be available for market demand. New private housing will be where developers feel they can make money and new public housing will be where government can afford it.
I think it's already a massive issue in a lot of areas. In many cases, the states with the highest property taxes are the ones with the best jobs and are heavily populated. Working people may be able to afford the five figure annual property tax bills, but many seniors cannot and either have to sell out and move on or do something to try to figure out how to pay those bills. Meanwhile, a house that sells for $200,000 here in small town Tennessee (a pretty nice home) will have a "back of the napkin" annual property tax bill of about $1,000, but there are few decent jobs here. You aren't going to be buying a house on ten bucks an hour no matter where you are.

Specifically to SS, if there is substantial political uncertainty about whether or not SS payments are going to be cut significantly, this is going to impact whether lenders see seniors as a more substantial credit risk. If there is uncertainty as to whether SS can be figured in as income, a lot of seniors may have trouble getting approved for the mortgage they desire, or even cash flowing an auto loan.

People here are getting alarmed, maybe rightly so, but there are so many downstream cascading impacts few people ever really consider.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 12:26 PM
 
29,782 posts, read 34,871,258 times
Reputation: 11705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
I think it's already a massive issue in a lot of areas. In many cases, the states with the highest property taxes are the ones with the best jobs and are heavily populated. Working people may be able to afford the five figure annual property tax bills, but many seniors cannot and either have to sell out and move on or do something to try to figure out how to pay those bills. Meanwhile, a house that sells for $200,000 here in small town Tennessee (a pretty nice home) will have a "back of the napkin" annual property tax bill of about $1,000, but there are few decent jobs here. You aren't going to be buying a house on ten bucks an hour no matter where you are.

Specifically to SS, if there is substantial political uncertainty about whether or not SS payments are going to be cut significantly, this is going to impact whether lenders see seniors as a more substantial credit risk. If there is uncertainty as to whether SS can be figured in as income, a lot of seniors may have trouble getting approved for the mortgage they desire, or even cash flowing an auto loan.

People here are getting alarmed, maybe rightly so, but there are so many downstream cascading impacts few people ever really consider.
Yesssssssssssssss, many unintended consequences and all it really amounts to is income redistribution with the accompanying change in what money is being spent on and that has economic results. Cutting one persons discretionary spending to help another with necessities has outcomes that should be considered.
 
Old 12-13-2016, 12:46 PM
 
Location: Idaho
4,627 posts, read 4,466,840 times
Reputation: 9050
This has been an interesting discussion about something that may or may not happen. Some conjecture, some speculation, and way too much political mudslinging and alarmist rhetoric.

There have been too many complaints today from regular Retirement forum members who do not want politics in this sub-forum. A lot of the political posts have been by people who primarily post in the "Politics and Other Controversies" forum and for some reason felt the need to come here.

There is a very active companion thread, (currently up to 67 pages), with almost the same title as this one in the P&OC forum and I invite you to continue the conversation there. This thread is now closed.

Link to other thread:

GOP Introduces plan to Massively cut Social Security

.
__________________


Moderator posts will always be Red and can only be discussed via Direct Message.
C-D Home page, TOS (Terms of Service), How to Search, FAQ's, Posting Guide
Moderator of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Guns and Hunting, and Weather



Last edited by volosong; 12-13-2016 at 01:02 PM..
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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