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.
FICA was raised every 2-3 years up until 1990 when it stopped.
You cannot expand a program and not increase its funding.
What will happen is means testing. They will raise the cap and you'll still pay but may not get back anything.
You will be the one that has no SS when you turn 67. Hope you have doubled up on your savings.
Should raise the age on social security, people are living and working longer. Medicare, simply put, old folks are expensive to take care of and there's a lot of people becoming old soon.
Should raise the age on social security, people are living and working longer. Medicare, simply put, old folks are expensive to take care of and there's a lot of people becoming old soon.
Height of the baby boom was 1957. They won't be 65 for another 7 years so it's still an upward curve.
But the millennials are a larger group than the boomers so you'd think the FICA revenue would pick up.
Height of the baby boom was 1957. They won't be 65 for another 7 years so it's still an upward curve.
The peak yes.
Quote:
But the millennials are a larger group than the boomers so you'd think the FICA revenue would pick up.
It does but old folks are expensive to provide healthcare to, along with mentally ill and veterans. Just like with the looming pension crisis, we didn't prepare for them old folks. Yes we robbed Peter to pay Paul, which the boomers went along with, but we still underestimated how much it would cost for live out the part of ones life.
I'm not sure which candidate has the cajoles to go up against AARP.
It does but old folks are expensive to provide healthcare to, along with mentally ill and veterans. Just like with the looming pension crisis, we didn't prepare for them old folks. Yes we robbed Peter to pay Paul, which the boomers went along with, but we still underestimated how much it would cost for live out the part of ones life.
I'm not sure which candidate has the cajoles to go up against AARP.
While Europe attacked the cost of health care we in the US attacked the insurance.
Insurance isn't the problem..the rising cost is the problem.
And medicare isn't free once you hit 65. You still have to pay premiums and they just upped the premiums for anyone starting medicare next year.
SS is already up to 67 as FRA. How many can realistically work longer ?
I agree that the US has a health care problem. But attacking the insurance won't solve it.
Bring the costs down and insurance will follow.
I have an aunt and uncle that retired and emigrated to Ireland.
They have their SS and gave up medicare. Costs about $700/year for insurance for them.
Both are over 70. Age is not a consideration for health insurance over there.
Yes. Enabling laziness and dependence is a bad thing.
Call me heartless, but I would rather see the lazy freeloaders go to debtor's prison or die from their ailments than have to pay for their healthcare on top of my OWN healthcare! And I am NOT ashamed to say it!
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.
