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.
Is it beyond comprehension that a program could be set up to take this into account?
Theoretically, no. Realistically, yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hamish Forbes
Where on earth do you get this idea? Unless right-wing bonkos kill SS for political and ideological reasons, it will certainly, beyond any shadow of a doubt, be around when you retire. What you need to worry about is the cost of medical care, including (but not limited to) Medicare.
By 2037 Social Security will only be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits. Sure, that's a lot better than nothing; but why should I have to settle for 75%?
It wasn't increased; it reverted back to where it was 2 years ago.
That was a "tax holiday", not a tax change and was only supposed to be in place for 1 year.
FICA funds your future retirement. We should have been upset that it was lowered to begin with.
If anything it should be raised IMHO. With pensions gone and 401K savings lackluster, future generations are going to depended on SS as their primary retirement income, not as supplemental retirement income.
And 2% doesn't amount to much really if you do the math..$20/week for a $50K/year salary.
Hitting yourself in the head with a hammer 5 times a day and then going to 4 times a day is an improvement. Too bad it was a temporary improvement. FICA doesn't fund squat. What retirement capacity does it create? Its a tax and a regressive one. It will be a 2% body blow where advanced economies are ecstatic to see 3%. Letting this reset is the center piece of its stupidity.
By 2037 Social Security will only be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits. Sure, that's a lot better than nothing; but why should I have to settle for 75%?
75% of what? What does that even mean 30 years from now?
75% of what? What does that even mean 30 years from now?
By "scheduled benefits" I assume it's talking about what the report you get from SSA periodically says you'll get based on their forecast. Which as far as I know doesn't account for inflation, so it may be more like 50% adjusted for that.
Again, that's just as assumption. The info came from moveon.org and didn't really state what it was based on.
By 2037 Social Security will only be able to pay out 75% of scheduled benefits. Sure, that's a lot better than nothing; but why should I have to settle for 75%?
If reason prevails, you will not have to settle for 75%. The solvency of Social Security is one of our least challenging National problems - it can be fixed very easily (again if reason, rather than right-wing extremism, prevails). Worry about the cost of health care, not the solvency of SS.
By "scheduled benefits" I assume it's talking about what the report you get from SSA periodically says you'll get based on their forecast. Which as far as I know doesn't account for inflation, so it may be more like 50% adjusted for that.
Again, that's just as assumption. The info came from moveon.org and didn't really state what it was based on.
NO, NO, NO! Inflation is taken into account with the 75% number. Wouldn't it be worth your trouble to find this out yourself before jumping to a conclusion that SS is doomed? To get even the most rudimentary knowledge regarding the subject?
Hitting yourself in the head with a hammer 5 times a day and then going to 4 times a day is an improvement. Too bad it was a temporary improvement. FICA doesn't fund squat. What retirement capacity does it create? Its a tax and a regressive one. It will be a 2% body blow where advanced economies are ecstatic to see 3%. Letting this reset is the center piece of its stupidity.
What on earth are you trying to say? Who is hitting whom with a hammer? What does "squat" mean? What, exactly, is a "body blow" to the economy? FICA raises a huge amount of money to fund the SS programs. Money is a store of value for the future; that's fundamental to the concept of money.
Last edited by Hamish Forbes; 01-03-2013 at 12:11 PM..
Money is a store of value for the future; that's fundamental to the concept of money.
How is Social Security supposed to represent a "store of value" when I'm only going to get 75% of what's coming to me when I retire?
And even when it works the way it's supposed to it's not all that great. My mom is a perfect example. She lives on nothing but Social security and has no savings to speak of. She retired early (then later reentered the workforce) and is in good health at 86, so she will probably end up drawing about $250K is benefits before she kicks the bucket.
If she had been allowed to invest the earnings that she paid into FICA all the years she worked into an investment vehicle earning only average returns, she would have had close to $500K in the bank when she finally quit working; she could have lived more comfortably off the interest than she does drawing SSI and would have had something to leave behind (or she could have spent the whole wad, makes no difference to me).
Social Security was introduced to provide something for those who lost everything during the depression. It was never meant to be permanent, but unfortunately it became a sacred political football and a crutch for those who choose not to plan for the future.
How is Social Security supposed to represent a "store of value" when I'm only going to get 75% of what's coming to me when I retire?
And even when it works the way it's supposed to it's not all that great. My mom is a perfect example. She lives on nothing but Social security and has no savings to speak of. She retired early (then later reentered the workforce) and is in good health at 86, so she will probably end up drawing about $250K is benefits before she kicks the bucket.
If she had been allowed to invest the earnings that she paid into FICA all the years she worked into an investment vehicle earning only average returns, she would have had close to $500K in the bank when she finally quit working; she could have lived more comfortably off the interest than she does drawing SSI and would have had something to leave behind (or she could have spent the whole wad, makes no difference to me).
Social Security was introduced to provide something for those who lost everything during the depression. It was never meant to be permanent, but unfortunately it became a sacred political football and a crutch for those who choose not to plan for the future.
I call bull**** -- let's see the numbers, year by year. As for "living off the interest" from $500K in the bank -- do you have any idea of what interest rates are today? She would be lucky to be drawing $5000 per year from $500K in the bank. Dividends on the S&P 500 are a little more than 2%, which would give Mom about 11,000 per year.
Last edited by Hamish Forbes; 01-03-2013 at 12:50 PM..
I call bull**** -- let's see the numbers, year by year.
I'm not going to all that trouble, but I should back up and say that that figure represents the Social Security contributions of both my parents, not just my mom. I only mentioned her before because she's the only one still living. My dad was one who really got the short end of the Social Security stick; he retired at 62 and died at 64.
Quote:
As for "living off the interest" from $500K in the bank -- do you have any idea of what interest rates are today? She would be lucky to be drawing $5000 per year from $500K in the bank. Dividends on the S&P 500 are a little more than 2%, which would give Mom about 11,000 per year.
I'll concede this in part. I worked up this illustration several years ago when privatization was being discussed heavily and interest rates were higher. Today she would indeed have to draw on the principle to match her Social Security income. But even if it drew no interest she'd still live better off the cash savings than Social Security.
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.
