Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 04-21-2016, 03:54 PM
 
31,988 posts, read 27,135,714 times
Reputation: 24905

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
just pass a bill and let congress have it funded .

funny how social security , a fund that is supported by folks who worked all their lives runs out of money , while welfare which is used by folks who don't work never runs out of money .

Yeah, you really want to leave SS funding to the various whims of either party that happens to control the government or at least the House.


Welfare funding comes out of general revenue, SS via payroll taxes of the workers themselves. The latter means you are entitled to get something once you've met the qualifications. Former leaves the government plenty of leeway to make trouble.


Remember one of the reasons SS has been left largely untouched is because it does not receive funding via general revenue. Mess with that formula and you open up a huge can of worms.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-21-2016, 03:59 PM
 
Location: Omaha, Nebraska
10,377 posts, read 8,022,892 times
Reputation: 27805
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Thomas View Post
That's negative man

And we should all thank you Boomers
Nah, the Greatest Generation is the one which gave the world nuclear weapons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:18 PM
 
106,981 posts, read 109,264,794 times
Reputation: 80384
that would be way before my time as a boomer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:23 PM
 
4,504 posts, read 3,041,324 times
Reputation: 9632
Quote:
Originally Posted by rruff View Post
So far this is in the "pop sci" category.

Since 1950 the life expectancy at age 65 has gone from 14 to 19 years.
I've been seeing blurbs that for women, it has gone down. Just a few months, but down, nonetheless.


Moderator cut: .

Last edited by yellowbelle; 04-24-2016 at 12:57 PM.. Reason: off topic comment removed
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:24 PM
 
106,981 posts, read 109,264,794 times
Reputation: 80384
that is what being in the work force does as jobs get more stressful . .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:47 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,728,360 times
Reputation: 25236
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Not really. The program is 30% underfunded. It's just turned cash-flow negative over the last couple of years. The general budget is now paying "interest" to the Social Security trust fund. In another 8 years or so, the "Trust Fund" will start hitting the principal. The "trust fund" money has already been spent. Write it off. Social Security taxes need to go up 30% and/or the retirement ages need to be adjusted upwards a bit to account for the fact that people now live longer.

In the grand scheme of things, 30% isn't insurmountable. There will be all kinds of political squabbling about it but there's really no choice but to fund the program properly. 2/3 of Millennial retirees would live in abject poverty without it since defined benefit pensions have vanished. Rich people and corporations don't want their taxes to go up. That's totally understandable. Nobody wants the retirement ages to slide up. Also totally understandable. In the end, taxes are going up on everybody in some way.
The trust fund is in the form of treasury notes. SS can cash them in and the treasury can sell new notes, just like it does with any other debt obligation. The only way the trust fund has already been spent is if the treasury plans to welsh on its debt obligations.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:51 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,728,360 times
Reputation: 25236
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Well, that is certainly innovative. We sort of do that already via the income tax - based on your income, your SS payments will be taxed. So, if you are withdrawing enough from an IRA in combination with other income sources, the your SS payments are taxed away.

I think I prefer a combination of
(a) raising more revenue via an increase in premiums (the payroll tax),
(b) increasing the retirement age, and
(c) taxing defined benefit pension disbursements to government workers.
Defined benefit pension disbursements are taxed like any other income. So are interest payments and tax deferred savings disbursements. Do you mean levy a payroll tax on pensions? I think a surcharge on capital gains like the current Medicare surcharge would be a better solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Myrtle Creek, Oregon
15,293 posts, read 17,728,360 times
Reputation: 25236
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeoffD View Post
Your math is totally broken. It assumes zero economic growth.
It assumes zero payroll growth, which is a pretty reasonable projection. Jobs are being eliminated right and left, with declining income levels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 05:16 PM
 
Location: Central IL
20,722 posts, read 16,432,962 times
Reputation: 50387
Quote:
Originally Posted by J.Thomas View Post
There is no way it can be sustained.

People better wake up from this dream.

This will be a colossal failure across the board.

Not just US.

Europe and Japan as well.

And for us millennials retirement won't even be an option.
It's true that you technically do need to first work before you can retire...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-21-2016, 05:21 PM
 
Location: Central IL
20,722 posts, read 16,432,962 times
Reputation: 50387
Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke9686 View Post
Remember all this the next time the war drums start beating.
Yes - there's never any discussion or doubt about whether we can afford a war (or any kind of skirmish) but somehow our politicians can't figure out a way to fund something FOR OUR OWN PEOPLE...that has been PROMISED for decades...and that people do PAY INTO.

If the U.S. never participated in another war effort I sincerely think there would be no negative impact on us OR the rest of the world. Let's try it for a couple decades and see!
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 > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 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