Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 07-22-2012, 11:15 PM
 
Location: The land of infinite variety!
2,046 posts, read 1,500,526 times
Reputation: 4571

Advertisements

Looking back at how much I have paid into Social Security in the last 35 years, and looking ahead to the probabilty that there may be nothing there in 15 years, sometimes I have to wonder if I couldn't have done better with the money through the years......either paying down the mortgage or putting into savings, etc.

On the other hand, there are many people that depend on their SS for food, housing and medications. Also, the pictures from the 30's of soup lines and widespread poverty haunt me. Would we be better going back to that??
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-22-2012, 11:23 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
No. You think the national debt is bad now, imagine how bad it would be if they didnt mask it using SS funds.

As for the individuals, they would be better off if they were required to put funds aside, rather than give it to the govt to blow. I dont think very many individuals do the math on what type of returns they lose out with SS. Thats why I stopped paying into it 12 years ago.

For those that "cant" save without being taxed, imagine how bad these people would be. Its sad that people I know in their 80's, dont have a dime to their name, after working 60+ years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2012, 11:31 PM
 
Location: Texas
1,767 posts, read 2,349,328 times
Reputation: 634
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post


No. You think the national debt is bad now, imagine how bad it would be if they didnt mask it using SS funds.

As for the individuals, they would be better off if they were required to put funds aside, rather than give it to the govt to blow. I dont think very many individuals do the math on what type of returns they lose out with SS. Thats why I stopped paying into it 12 years ago.

For those that "cant" save without being taxed, imagine how bad these people would be. Its sad that people I know in their 80's, dont have a dime to their name, after working 60+ years.

All good points.


.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2012, 11:52 PM
 
1,724 posts, read 1,471,864 times
Reputation: 780
Social Security is not without its problems, but has been a tremendous success over the decades, especially reducing poverty. If we abolished SS today, the poverty rate will sky rocket, especially among the elderly.

As for a investment policy, SS will not bring you significant returns unless you were stuck working dead end, low paying jobs. Barring any unfortunate economic catastrophes, most people could find a better rate of return for their money. However, SS is defined benefit plan that acts a safety net until you die.

Even if you invested wisely, you could outlive your investment. With SS, you cannot. I think people often forget this important fact. Another fact that people miss, is the SS keep people spending and smooths out their lifetime consumption, which lubes economic activity.

Last edited by A Common Anomaly; 07-23-2012 at 12:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 12:06 AM
 
Location: Arizona
13,778 posts, read 9,666,314 times
Reputation: 7485
^^^ This.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 12:16 AM
 
Location: The land of infinite variety!
2,046 posts, read 1,500,526 times
Reputation: 4571
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
No. You think the national debt is bad now, imagine how bad it would be if they didnt mask it using SS funds.

As for the individuals, they would be better off if they were required to put funds aside, rather than give it to the govt to blow. I dont think very many individuals do the math on what type of returns they lose out with SS. Thats why I stopped paying into it 12 years ago.

For those that "cant" save without being taxed, imagine how bad these people would be. Its sad that people I know in their 80's, dont have a dime to their name, after working 60+ years.
Absolutely good points.

I get in such a quandary about it sometimes. I would hate to see the people that need SS lose it, but what about the promises we grew up believing in? Dang government....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 12:49 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Common Anomaly View Post
Social Security is not without its problems, but has been a tremendous success over the decades, especially reducing poverty. If we abolished SS today, the poverty rate will sky rocket, especially among the elderly.

As for a investment policy, SS will not bring you significant returns unless you were stuck working dead end, low paying jobs. Barring any unfortunate economic catastrophes, most people could find a better rate of return for their money. However, SS is defined benefit plan that acts a safety net until you die.

Even if you invested wisely, you could outlive your investment. With SS, you cannot. I think people often forget this important fact. Another fact that people miss, is the SS keep people spending and smooths out their lifetime consumption, which lubes economic activity.
People who sit back and collect Social Security, are already living in poverty. If you abolished it, you'd
A) Simply change the definition of poverty, not the numbers because SS isnt theirs.
B) Decrease future poverty because people who save up on their own, rather than relying upon SS, wont be poor.. They have an asset that has value, which can be given to their estate to reduce future poverty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 12:54 AM
 
Location: The land of infinite variety!
2,046 posts, read 1,500,526 times
Reputation: 4571
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
People who sit back and collect Social Security, are already living in poverty. If you abolished it, you'd
A) Simply change the definition of poverty, not the numbers because SS isnt theirs.
B) Decrease future poverty because people who save up on their own, rather than relying upon SS, wont be poor.. They have an asset that has value, which can be given to their estate to reduce future poverty.
I'm confused when you say it isn't theirs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 12:57 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayiask View Post
I'm confused when you say it isn't theirs.
Social Security ISNT YOURS, its the government. its welfare, there is no big magical pot with your money sitting aside. Its a promise to pay, if you live long enough. You die, you get nothing, because its a TAX..

If you put money aside, rather than giving it to the government, when you died, your family would receive the funds, and thus, it would reduce poverty among the poor. As it stands now, when you die, you get nothing back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2012, 01:23 AM
 
Location: The land of infinite variety!
2,046 posts, read 1,500,526 times
Reputation: 4571
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Social Security ISNT YOURS, its the government. its welfare, there is no big magical pot with your money sitting aside. Its a promise to pay, if you live long enough. You die, you get nothing, because its a TAX..

If you put money aside, rather than giving it to the government, when you died, your family would receive the funds, and thus, it would reduce poverty among the poor. As it stands now, when you die, you get nothing back.
Thank you for clarifying that. Even though people do pay in to SS, it is not theirs to pass on to their children. With you now.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:56 AM.

© 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