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.
sure by borrowing from Peter to pay Paul and by raising the anti everytime one turns around. It has to be revamped...
Let's look at it this way? I am not an economist and I doubt you are, but that isn't the issue:
The program was started in the mid 1930s as a way to give a few extra $$s to seniors past 65. At that time the average life expectancy was 64. Thus a large number would never even collect and those who did would only recieve it for a short time. I don't think there was even the SS disability program included, but I am not sure.
We all know from the early 30s to the post war families were shrinking because of the war, the depression and people moving from rural America to urban America, thus there wasn't the need for large families, plus birth control was inproved which led to fewer unwanted pregnanies. Thus there are fewer people in my age group but we are living longer.
Move forward to 1945 when the baby boom started (or 46) This continued until the early to mid 60s. Now these babies are all about to become part of the SS system recepients or will soon. In the mid 60s women stopped having larger families with the introduction of the pill plus the word abortion (though still illegal) was a common word. Now, those babies are adults and are going to have to continue contributing to the program so the baby boomers can collect plus we are living into our 80s and 90s, which means maybe 20 to 30 years of receiving benefits.
And you think it is doing just fine. Well, I would disagree.
Nita
You are right. Neither of us are economists. When it comes to a complicated issue like Social Security, the best I can do is to listen to nonbiased expert opinion. If Republic rhetoric was right, I would support Republic solutions, but it's not. I follow this issue very closely. I have heard numerous informed, conservative economists confirm that Social Security will remain 100 percent solvent until 2037 if nothing is done to fix it. After that, it will be able to pay out about 75 percent of benefits for the indefinite future.
(There is one caveat to this, however. The disability portion of Social Security is in trouble. That will be bankrupt by 2018. I am very open to all good ideas, Republic or otherwise, on how to fix that.)
When it comes to retirement benefits, the problem is miniscule. It can be fixed with simple tweaks. I realize the Repulics would like to use a manufactured crisis to convert my Social Security to a "401K"-type account. I know that 401Ks historically pay far less than defined benefits pensions. I also realize they have already convinced my generation that Social Security will not be there for them, so they will probably be able to pull this off.
The only way you can pay full social security benefits is with extraordinary inflation. Not the phoney balogna CPI-U/M/R calculated inflation that doesn't come close to reflecting real cost of good increases.
I don't know where you are getting this, but this is simply not true. Perhaps you are confusing Social Security with Medicare? (Medicare is in trouble, but it has nothing to do with the government. It's due to the skyrocketing cost of health care.)
Thank you. You have taken the time to lay out the facts far more eloquently than I have. I am very grateful to old folks like you who are concerned that the program willl be there for me when I am your age .. and it will be with no problem whatsoever so long as the Republics keep their dirty hands off of it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx
Really hate to diminish your brilliantly composed arguements with facts but...............
1. Here is THE definitive analysis of the social Security Program. I suggest you and all those who wish to expound on the merits or deficiencies of Social Security READ IT. By doing so, you will save yourself ridicule and appear that you actually have a clue. It looks like this will become one of the premier issues in the next 14 months. "Get a Clue" as they say. Social Security: A Program and Policy History
2. As far as raising the anti every time someone turns around, Social security has been reformed or "had the anti raised" as you put it, twice. In 1977 and again in 1983. Jimmy Carter was president in 1977 and surprise, surprise! Ronald Reagan was president in 1983.
3. At the time Social Security was instituted, the poverty rate among seniors was at almost 40%. The poverty rate for seniors dropped to 10.2% within 15 years and has remained stable since that time. Life expectancy now is 77 years. The average monthly payment for a retired worker is 1117.00 per month as of Jan. 2011.
55% of the elderly depend on Social security for the bulk of their income. Policy Basics: Top Ten Facts about Social Security on the Program's 75th Anniversary — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
4. Average length for collecting benefits is calculated at 11 years for men and 13 years for women. Not the 20 or 30 years you are stating.
In summary, The issue of Social Security is slated to be a critical campaign issue mostly foisted on the public by the Republican Party. The SS system can be fixed and remain stable with minor tweeks to the system, such as raising the full retirement age to 68 vs 66 and removing the cap on payroll deductions at 105,700. This will provide stability for the system for the next 75 years. With no changes, the system will be able to pay out full benefits until 2037 and 77% of full benefits for the next 60 years following 2037. Boomers are expected to enter the system starting this year. They will continue to enter the system until 2025. They will start to die off in 2023 and the vast majority will be dead by 2040. People who are now 30 years old will start to retire in 2047 when almost all the baby boomers are dead. There will be far more people paying into the system in 2045 than are recieving benefits. Republicans are attempting to use the fear of baby boomer overload to kill the most successful American social program ever instituted. It is a diversionary tactic, while they continue to transfer the Nation's wealth from the middle class to the rich and favored few.
Please, fellow posters, please educate yourselves using non-partisan source material I have provided. I am obviously partisan for social security but my sources and links are not. Why wouldn't I be? I'm 68 and the bulk of my income is my social security check. I have held a steady job since 1960 until 2010. That's 50 years of paying into the system. Those who are for social security and those who are against social security should know that the issue is far too important to allow a bunch of "Hack", partisan statistics to dominate the debate.
Edited to add: If you have any questions regarding social security statistics, need to find back up for the statistics I posted or any other subject, here is the best information link for instant, non partisan information. Ask.com - What's Your Question?
First of all, that was just his opinion. One which most Americans do not agree with and especially those Americans in that auditorium tonight. You have to have some common sense and Ron Paul thinks he does, so he should use it.
yeah common sense means its okay to lie to the people you work for. You should stop now, please.
First of all, that was just his opinion. One which most Americans do not agree with and especially those Americans in that auditorium tonight. You have to have some common sense and Ron Paul thinks he does, so he should use it.
Most Americans are idiots. Ron Paul was ONE credible candidate among the rest who were nothing but hawks. And idiots make for a good meal.
You are right. Neither of us are economists. When it comes to a complicated issue like Social Security, the best I can do is to listen to nonbiased expert opinion. If Republic rhetoric was right, I would support Republic solutions, but it's not. I follow this issue very closely. I have heard numerous informed, conservative economists confirm that Social Security will remain 100 percent solvent until 2037 if nothing is done to fix it. After that, it will be able to pay out about 75 percent of benefits for the indefinite future.
(There is one caveat to this, however. The disability portion of Social Security is in trouble. That will be bankrupt by 2018. I am very open to all good ideas, Republic or otherwise, on how to fix that.)
When it comes to retirement benefits, the problem is miniscule. It can be fixed with simple tweaks. I realize the Repulics would like to use a manufactured crisis to convert my Social Security to a "401K"-type account. I know that 401Ks historically pay far less than defined benefits pensions. I also realize they have already convinced my generation that Social Security will not be there for them, so they will probably be able to pull this off.
When it comes to economists I hope you are listening to the Austrian economic experts. They were the ones who told us from the get go there would be a housing bubble.
When it comes to economists I hope you are listening to the Austrian economic experts. They were the ones who told us from the get go there would be a housing bubble.
It doesn't take an economist to figure that out... any thinking adult should have seen this coming, considering we had a credit crunch in late 1980s and a recession in 1991-92. And when you allow lenders to go crazy while fully backing them up and allowing leveraging to over 30:1 (2004), what else was to be expected?
Come on! SS was started to keep the elderly out of poverty and off of the streets with a cup in their hands! Way to minimize SS for political purposes.
Gee now who do you think caused all that poverty that happened during the extended FDR depression?
Government caused the problem so government should fix it? How about government doesn't get involved in "fixing" the economy in the first place.
Your kid keeps going outside in the cold without a coat? Are you going to continually feed him cold medicine or give him a coat.
Treat the cause not the symptom.
Perry is more interested in giving benefits to illegal immgrants and then discussing social security as a government failure. Perry is a failure to liberty and the republican estiblishment can't control Ron Paul and the truth which is what is driving them crazy. The republican estlishment has tried everything to TELL YOU how the nominatee is. They gave you Romney and republicans havent fallen for it now its all about Perry this pretend conservative. Soon enough we will all see thru the lies and get to the truth of PERRY.
It doesn't take an economist to figure that out... any thinking adult should have seen this coming, considering we had a credit crunch in late 1980s and a recession in 1991-92. And when you allow lenders to go crazy while fully backing them up and allowing leveraging to over 30:1 (2004), what else was to be expected?
You don't think it's a good idea to lend money to people who don't make enough to pay it back in a timely manner and who have little in the way of down payment because they have proven they cannot manage money?
You're un American.
The concept of free money, lending it to unqualified borrowers, which causes mal investment, is the same thing that caused FDRs depression. We don't learn. The busts are always worse than the booms. Get in and out early and hang on for the roller coaster ride.
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.
You have taken the time to lay out the facts far more eloquently than I have. I am very grateful to old folks like you who are concerned that the program willl be there for me when I am your age .. and it will be with no problem whatsoever so long as the Republics keep their dirty hands off of it. 
You should stop now, please.
