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.
They spent the money we put into SS so let them figure out a way to cut all these unnecessary programs that are in place. How many billions do we pay for space exploration...let's cut that out completely.
The arguments for raising the age have to do with demographics and the social security tax projections, in it's current form it cannot work. I don't believe the solution is to just expand into government revenues indefinitely as need increases.
Age has to raise, benefits have to be cut, or the taxes have to rise. One of combination of those must be implemented.
Let's see what some state governors have to say about their public employee unions as they attempt to get spending under control.
Sheesh you can already find that in dealings with some of the teachers unions.
I read an article recently that mentioned Wyoming public employees haven't had to make contributions to their retirement plan since 1991, and have finally agreed to a $60/month contribution. What? These guys probably get to retire in their early to mid 50s with a pension and they didn't even have to contribute? Unreal.
Drover SS is not and never was intended as a retirement program per se. It was an insurance program for dependants of dead workers for their families and a small suplement to peoples retirement savings~ one leg of a five or six leg stool. was enacted to provide a small suplemental income for people who could no longer work hard physical labor so they wouldn't clog the welfare rolls.
No, the program we now call Social Security, created by the Social Security Act of 1935, was initially intended to pay benefits to retired individuals. Benefits for spouses, widows, and children were added by the 1939 Amendments.
It is true that Social Security was never intended to be one's sole source of retirement income. Private pensions and annuities and savings were supposed to provide a large part.
Originally, Social Security did not cover much of the workforce. Self employed persons were not covered at all until 1951, and many self employed, such as farmers, lawyers, engineers, and doctors were not covered until later. Many employees, such as most farm workers and domestic workers were not covered until 1951.
I think that raising the payroll ceiling to much higher would help the SS deficit significantly, from what I have read, and seems to be the most popular solution (according to AARP polls). Probably most of us wouldn't be affected because we never hit the ceiling and will always pay into it. The higher wage earners could pay more and they will get more when they receive their SS benefits (since it is based on earnings). I'd rather see that happen than increase the age.
Course in reality, the more that is paid into SS is just more they will spend on something else other than SS, just like they have done in the past. Where's that lockbox????
Course in reality, the more that is paid into SS is just more they will spend on something else other than SS, just like they have done in the past. Where's that lockbox????
What are they supposed to do with this lockbox? Just put it in a bank account or something? Keep a bunch of cash sitting in a vault?
No, the program we now call Social Security, created by the Social Security Act of 1935, was initially intended to pay benefits to retired individuals.
Not quite. At the time SS was enacted, the average life expectancy was only 63. SS was an insurance program that paid an "old age benefit" to those individuals who lived longer than the average life expectancy. As deckdoc noted, SS was not intended to be a general retirement program.
The reason SS is in trouble is that the age for eligibility of benefits has not kept pace with the increase in life expectancy. If we went back to its original intent, the age for receiving benefits would need to be raised even higher than Boehner's suggestion of 70.
I seem to recall it was Al Gore talking about a lockbox in one of his infamous speeches.
Believe it or not, not so many years ago, most people truly did believe that SS money was set aside (as it was suppose to be), building interest for our future...that's before everybody woke up and figured out our government was lying to us about most things. Or maybe I was just late coming to this realization.
House Republican leader John Boehner thinks the retirement age should be raised to 70 for those who still have at least 20 years to go in the work force. "We need to look at the American people and explain to them that we're broke," he tells the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review in a wide-ranging interview. He also thinks President Obama has alienated so many people that Republicans will win big in November.
The tanned one needs to get a reality check. before they ask ppl to work til we're in our graves, they need to eliminate aid to foreign countries, infrastructure and useless wars in iraq & afghan, no aid/benefits for immigrants and their children. that would be just a start. that statement from him really makes me angry.
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.
