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)
View Poll Results: Would you, if you had a Choice, Opt out of Social Security
Yes - only if there were no conditions 55 51.40%
Yes - only if I had to contribute to an approved retirement program 4 3.74%
No - I would not Opt Out 44 41.12%
Undecided at this time 4 3.74%
Voters: 107. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-29-2009, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Right where I want to be.
4,507 posts, read 9,066,456 times
Reputation: 3361

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boompa View Post
Strikes me that people want to "Opt Out " of Social Security for the same reasons they wanted to "Privatize" Social security. If they had you would have nothing now, it would have tanked like the 401ks another suckers game. All that did was relieve the employers or their ERISA obligations. You can not win at the stock market. It's a stacked deck
Our SS investments would be similar to our other retirement savings/investments and we don't have 'nothing' now. I don't know anyone who is properly and wisely diversified who ended up with 'nothing', even with this stronger than usual market correction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 17th Street View Post
I was actually wondering if someone would mention this. My father did have life insurance, but after his death there was some sort of dispute where the insurance company did not want to pay the claim. It was tied up for a while. While this does not happen often, it my family's case, having SS was a great cushion until all of those things were worked out.
I am truly sorry for what your family went through and I'm glad the insurance came through in the end. Given that such things don't happen often I just don't see a need to have an entitlement/safety net program to the extent that we have now with SS.

Along with insurance everyone should have some emergency savings in the bank to cover expenses in the case of income loss (for any reason) or some other emergency, or even a delay in collecting life insurance on a loved one.
We could do a lot better preparing for ourselves instead of looking to the government to do it for us. It has taken a long time for our country to get to this way of thinking and it would take some time to get out of it but I think it could be done. Yes, we have to meet our current obligations to SS but that's no reason to continue to teach/encourage dependency rather than self sufficiency. Teaching people to save for themselves first will greatly lessen the need for government to provide us all with retirement insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-29-2009, 11:23 AM
 
Location: Sinking in the Great Salt Lake
13,138 posts, read 22,826,985 times
Reputation: 14116
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista View Post
No, they aren't. Even under the pessimistic assumptions of the SS Trustees, SS will be able to pay every dime of scheduled benefits through 2037. CBO makes it about a decade after that. Either way, and even if we do absolutley nothing about it by then, SS would then be able to pay 73-75% of scheduled benefits all but indefinitely. Because of the way benefits are calculated, 75% of benefits then would actually be worth more than what 100% of benefits is worth today.
Yea, because for democrats money just magically appears for everything!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 11:25 AM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,867,274 times
Reputation: 9284
I would only opt-out if EVERY penny that I put in was paid back to me +5% compounded interest (heck I would be satisfied with 1% compounded interest with the current state of the market)... PLUS I would never have to contribute a single cent to SS/Medicare... I wish the government would let me opt-out but the problem is they NEED me in order to make the program work, without me, these socialists would be on the street and dying... I don't need them but they absolutely need me...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 11:40 AM
 
13,651 posts, read 20,788,575 times
Reputation: 7653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
If you were given a choice to opt out of Social Security, perhaps on the condition that you contribute to an approved retirement program, that you control what happens with your contributions, would you opt out of Social Security and Medicare?
Oh God, Yes.

Social Security is nearing collapse while my retirement savings are humming along quite nicely.

Yea, really tough choice there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 12:59 PM
 
Location: Crossville, TN
1,327 posts, read 3,679,644 times
Reputation: 1017
What happens to all the money the govt collects when people die before they reach retirement age? They keep raising the age that you are aloud to collect, plus they have restrictions on how many years you have worked before you are allowed to collect. What is the age you are allowed to get your money back? I think it is 70 something now? Many people die before this.
Okay, I know you are going to say it goes to the spouse, but I've heard that it is hard for a widow/widower to collect the spouses money and that there are usually restrictions on this as well...like they lower your payments.
A couple of saving accounts would do better? They are insured. I know the interest rate is low but over years and compounded interest and you keep adding to your nest egg, wouldn't you be better off? That way too if your spouse passes away before you they get the money, or it could go to your children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 01:37 PM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,676,881 times
Reputation: 11084
Quote:
Originally Posted by ManGoneADreamin View Post
But you should still pay for SS sir,

I mean, whats better than throwing a whole lot a money down a giant hole in the ground????


YouTube - Should The Government Stop Dumping Money Into A Giant Hole?
But the rest of you are NOT my responsibility. I'm not my brother's keeper.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 01:45 PM
 
Location: somewhere in the woods
16,880 posts, read 15,207,835 times
Reputation: 5240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ray1945 View Post
Congrats to you --- you obviously managed your money wisely! You should write a book, because it seems you have worked magic with your cash.

You say if you had stayed with SS you would now be collecting $1300/mo, which indicates that during the course of your lifetime, your earned income was modest, to say the least. I was a teacher - did not make big bucks - and my SS is over $1400/mo.

So, with your modest income you have been able to accrue enough in investments to produce a $60000/yr (after taxes?) income, which means your portfolio is probably in excess of one million dollars. As I said, you should write a book...

Most people would not have been able to save that much money on such a modest income. Most people should stick with SS.

if you say stick with SS, then why is any private citizen being charged with a federal felony and doing time if convicted?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 02:12 PM
 
6,993 posts, read 6,342,374 times
Reputation: 2824
Quote:
Originally Posted by LABART View Post
What happens to all the money the govt collects when people die before they reach retirement age? They keep raising the age that you are aloud to collect, plus they have restrictions on how many years you have worked before you are allowed to collect. What is the age you are allowed to get your money back? I think it is 70 something now? Many people die before this.
Okay, I know you are going to say it goes to the spouse, but I've heard that it is hard for a widow/widower to collect the spouses money and that there are usually restrictions on this as well...like they lower your payments.
A couple of saving accounts would do better? They are insured. I know the interest rate is low but over years and compounded interest and you keep adding to your nest egg, wouldn't you be better off? That way too if your spouse passes away before you they get the money, or it could go to your children.
You can start collecting at 62, which I did. Benefits are reduced (75% of full benefit), but you collect longer. If you live past 79, you would have been better off waiting until full retirement age (for me, 66) to start collecting benefits. To see what your full retirement age is, go to: Retirement benefits by year of birth

Widows/widowers collect their own benefit or almost 100% of their spouse's, whichever is larger. There is no problem collecting a deceased spouse's benefit. When you apply for benefits, SS automatically calculates both. Every year they recalculate to make sure you continue to get the larger amount.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 02:13 PM
 
6,993 posts, read 6,342,374 times
Reputation: 2824
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching View Post
if you say stick with SS, then why is any private citizen being charged with a federal felony and doing time if convicted?
No idea of what you're asking here....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-29-2009, 02:29 PM
 
20,462 posts, read 12,392,439 times
Reputation: 10259
Personally opting out would be a good thing.... but there is also a valid reason for the government to make people save for retirement.

That being so I won’t have to pay for them when they retire with no money at all.

That being said, the way we do SS now is criminal and I blame democrats for it.

Berney Madov (sp) went to jail for a ponzy scheme. SS is exactly the same thing!

We should have a SS system that forces 15% or even 20% into a savings plan for every American. HOWEVER, those funds should be placed into an individual account OWNED by each person and the government should not have access to the funds AT ALL EVER.

The types of investments should be very limited to very safe investment vehicles.

I don’t understand why every American doesn’t consider it treason the way our government has burned up our Social Security money by putting it in the general treasury. I don’t know why every American doesn’t demand the system be changed.
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 02:47 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