Public Believes "Facts" that Don't Happen to Be True

I like option #4 - Stop putting anyone new on SS. This means stop taking money from their paychecks, and stop promising them any future SS "benefits".

  • For those under 30 currently in the system, take 1/3 of their current deductions, and pay them 1/3 of their due benefits when they retire. They should be required to put the other 2/3 of what would have been collected for SS pre-tax into a true retirement savings account at a bank. If they withdraw the money post retirement, it should be tax free. This should make up for the 2/3 that they will not get from SS post retirement.
  • For those between 30 and 40, take 2/3 of their previous deductions and pay 2/3 benefits upon retirement. Require them to save the other 1/3 in a private account under the same rules until they retire.
  • For those over 40, nothing changes.
Obviously, there will be a gap between revenue taken in vs. payouts for at least 25 years. This country made promises, and we should keep them. I'd support a temporary tax on imported manufactured goods to cover the costs, as long as it was adjusted yearly to the lowest necessary rate to cover SS payouts and completely gone when there are no more SS benefits to payout.

If there is still a gap, George Soros could just write a check to pay it off. He has "enough" money. We should just take it. :grin:

I like option #4 :thumbsup:

One one thing to add for those 30/40- You can choose to "cut your losses" and just give up everything you have paid in but be exempted form future witholdings. I doubt the 2/3s will even be there for me anyway so I would like to just get out while I can.
 
I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm trying to understand. How is raising the retirement age "screwing" the middle class? Social Security was designed as a safety net for people in the twighlight of their lives. Now 65 is no longer a twilight. The life expectancy has changed pretty dramatically from inception and the math is different. We accept that in gas prices, and college diplomas...why not in Social Security?

On another track...we all know that SS doesn't make economic sense and needs to be fixed. We apparently only have three choices...increase payments in (through taxes or contributions), reduce benefits, or raise the retirement age. Of the three choices, which do you choose?

Ok we live longer does that we will physically able to work longer and do the same job we have been doing all our life? Is a 65yro truck mechanic going to be able to still pull a trans or install a 100# clutch or even wrestle with changing tires. I’m 63 and my knees are giving out from walking up and down the stairs to my shop and office for the last 16yrs, Yea I know get another job where I don’t have to do that, maybe we all should just go to Wal-Mart and be greeters until we die. There a lot of us that have been busting our a$$ all our life and we are just plain worn out and would like to have a few years not working before we die..

How about we start by not giving it to people that don't put in to it such as any immigrants legal or illegal’s, take it out of the general fund and put it back into a private fund and start letting people have individual accounts that their money goes into and they can control. Take able bodied people off welfare and free up more money but then the Dems won't do that because they would loose votes
 
And why is the liberal mentality geared towards "if you live longer, you should work longer?"

If we're going to live longer, then I want my extra years to be when I am NOT working, dammit...
 
As much as we would like to think the problem is with illegals (and certainly some of it is), the unearned section drawn down by illegals is a rounding error.

As I recall, SS and HHS were around $1.5t in 2009 (and a portion of that blame falls on the prescription drug benefit). I do like reinventing the system in option four, but what do we do with what we have? (As an aside, the total treasury receipts were about $2.1t and disbursements were about $4t...lest you think I am simply castigating conservatives over illegals, the total budget for all of the military was around $750b, and while it is hard to argue that it could not be shaved without significant impact to our common defense. "Blood for oil"-funded by the Democratically controlled Congress and signed off on by both presidents-hasn't been the only problem).
 
There are Billions if fraud in Medicare & Medicaid but for some reason nobody wants to go after that, the 12000 IRS agents Obama is hiring could go after that and save more money then screwing with the public.
 
Here's the problem with Social Security in a nutshell. I just received my annual SS Statement that shows my employer and I paid about $225K at the limiti into the system and my benefits if I live 20 years after I retire will be $600K. Even assuming an overall return on the payments of 50% that still leaves $260K of benefits paid to me that someone else has to fund. Increasing the retirement age will mitigate to a small extent the problem but will not fix the underfunded liabilities. You either have to take a lot more in (plus increase the return on investment) or greatly reduce what is paid out to maintain the current system. Neither will be politically palatable to most to fix this ponzi scheme.

I personally favor some type of phase out of the SS payroll deduction and substitute a larger tax free, not tax deferred, payroll contribution to a self funded retirement account will some voluntary matching options by the employer. This is along the lines of what Skibum suggested.
 
Ok we live longer does that we will physically able to work longer and do the same job we have been doing all our life? Is a 65yro truck mechanic going to be able to still pull a trans or install a 100# clutch or even wrestle with changing tires. I’m 63 and my knees are giving out from walking up and down the stairs to my shop and office for the last 16yrs, Yea I know get another job where I don’t have to do that, maybe we all should just go to Wal-Mart and be greeters until we die. There a lot of us that have been busting our a$$ all our life and we are just plain worn out and would like to have a few years not working before we die..

How about we start by not giving it to people that don't put in to it such as any immigrants legal or illegal’s, take it out of the general fund and put it back into a private fund and start letting people have individual accounts that their money goes into and they can control. Take able bodied people off welfare and free up more money but then the Dems won't do that because they would loose votes
Is this really legally happening?? Got some links to share. I would say your proposal would probably get the support of Native Americans.
 
I understand why they want to raise the retirement age and I also why the SS system is failing. Too much coming out, not enough going back in- as well as all the borrowing from SS that has been done for other spending. I have a private retirement plan and don’t expect to have SS around when I retire.

What happens when someone pays in to the system for 50 years then dies right before they collect? They get $250, Wow, what a great deal isn’t it? Imagine what they could have had if they would have been able to keep and save that same money? At least something to leave to their family.
Can you explain this a little better?
 
And why is the liberal mentality geared towards "if you live longer, you should work longer?"

If we're going to live longer, then I want my extra years to be when I am NOT working, dammit...

LIBERAL mentality? I don't think so.

Until recently, working till you died was the NORM, not the exception. Now, the question of who PAYS for people in their golden years is a question society has not yet answered.

I believe the view of most is "You better save alot of money. . because there is no free lunch."


"Blood for oil"-funded by the Democratically controlled Congress and signed off on by both presidents-hasn't been the only problem).

What on earth are you talking about? :huh:

- - - - - - - - - -

I think the real question is in your earlier post: What do we expect people in the 65-75yr old age bracket to be doing?

If you are in physical labor. . you are not doing that in this age group, are you?

If you are doing white collar work. . .well. . .I don't think you will be doing that either. Most white collar companies that I know simply are not hiring people older than 45, and are laying off those that are older. (btw. . .the trend is to replace these white collar workers with overseas white collar workers, not younger Americans)

I think people really need to either (1) be self employed if you are over 45-50 or (2) have the money to be self sufficient (btw: I only know a few people who have the money to retire at 55)
 
Can you explain this a little better?

Sure,

A- Prime example of not enough going in too much coming out was explained in post#150 by 320Bob. Also look at all the cases where someone pays very little in to the "system" and then gets tons out such as someone that dies early or becomes unable to work at an early age.

B- It is a well known fact that the government constantly "borrows" form the SS trust fund (if there really is one) for other spending. Here is a nice article from a few years back. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16984-2005Feb11.html
 
The Social Security Trust Fund is a lie.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Let's think about the "elimination of SS" for a minute;

1) If you think employers will turn over their 6% FICA component to the employees for them to invest. . . I have a great buisness opportunity to share with you. Just PM me with your ACH information.

2) If you think most people can fund a decent 10-20 year retirement by investing 6% of their earnings. . .I also have a great buisness opportunity to share with you. Just PM me with your ACH information.

- - - - - - - - - - -

I personally neither advocate for or against SS.
 
I say it need's to me mandatory those rich 20yro big bosomed girls have to support us old crusty and we could tell the wives they are orphans and we are doing our civic duty housing them.:smt043

normspicks306.jpg
 
The Social Security Trust Fund is a lie.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Let's think about the "elimination of SS" for a minute;

1) If you think employers will turn over their 6% FICA component to the employees for them to invest. . . I have a great buisness opportunity to share with you. Just PM me with your ACH information.

2) If you think most people can fund a decent 10-20 year retirement by investing 6% of their earnings. . .I also have a great buisness opportunity to share with you. Just PM me with your ACH information.

- - - - - - - - - - -

I personally neither advocate for or against SS.
Ok, can you explain please.

Can't make up your mind?
 
Sure,

A- Prime example of not enough going in too much coming out was explained in post#150 by 320Bob. Also look at all the cases where someone pays very little in to the "system" and then gets tons out such as someone that dies early or becomes unable to work at an early age.

B- It is a well known fact that the government constantly "borrows" form the SS trust fund (if there really is one) for other spending. Here is a nice article from a few years back. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16984-2005Feb11.html
A) There are certainly individual examples like 320Bob but there are also cases that are just the opposite. Actually this year appears to be the first year since 1983 that the SS will run a deficit. http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

B) Some one should have run up and put there hand over Bush's mouth. His statements were not accurate and misleading as illustrated by the debate in the article as to what he meant. Does all the cash actually have to be in a pile somewhere to make the trust fund real? That's not the case at banks and we all accept it. It's implied often that money disappears from the trust, "borrowed", never to return. To date that has not been the case. All plan assets are accounted for...the issue is what will the gov due when the securities held by the plan are called in year after year. Do they dare default on those obligations?

There's no doubt about it something needs to be done. SS as it sits doesn't fit the changing demographics. I agree with some of the posts here. Phase out SS, put the responsibility on the individuals. Given that freedom I think a large portion of our population will bungle their attempts or do nothing at all. Decades ago emphasis was put on planning for the future, we were warned to not rely on SS as the sole retirement income. We now know not enough were listening. That group will always exist and the rest will always be expected to take up the slack.
 
What on earth are you talking about? :huh:

- - - - - - - - - -

The "Blood for Oil" wars is a pretty common refrain I hear from my more "progressive" friends...as if our budget would be balanced and there would be money left over for a slew of social programs-had we not engaged in an immoral folly. My (apparently poorly articulated) point was that whether it is the "right" arguing that we can solve the problem through fraud/illegals or the left arguing that the problem is the military/industrial establishment and taxing the rich...neither addresses the magnitude of the disconnect between income and outgo.
 
How did Jefferson know?


John F. Kennedy held a dinner in the white House for a group of the

brightest minds in the nation at that time. He made this statement:

"This is perhaps the assembly of the most intelligence ever to

gather at one time in the White House with the exception of

when Thomas Jefferson dined alone."





Especially read the last quote from 1802, near end





When we get piled
upon one another in large cities, as in Europe,
we shall become as corrupt as Europe .
Thomas Jefferson


The democracy will cease to exist
when you take away from those
who are willing to work and give to those who would not.
Thomas Jefferson


It is incumbent on every
generation to pay its own debts as it goes.
A principle which if acted on would save
one-half the wars of the world.
Thomas Jefferson


I predict future happiness for
Americans if they can prevent the government
from wasting the labors of the people under the
pretense of taking care of them.
Thomas Jefferson


My reading of history convinces me
that most bad government results from too much
government.
Thomas Jefferson


No free man shall ever be debarred
the use of arms.
Thomas Jefferson


The strongest reason for the
people to retain the right to keep and bear arms
is, as a last resort, to protect themselves
against tyranny in government.
Thomas Jefferson


The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time with the blood of
patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson


To compel a man to subsidize with
his taxes the propagation of ideas which he
disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson


Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
'I believe that
banking institutions are more dangerous to
our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow
private banks to control the issue of their
currency, first by inflation,then by
deflation, the banks and corporations that will
grow up around the banks will deprive the people
of all property -until their children
wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers
conquered.'
 
A) There are certainly individual examples like 320Bob but there are also cases that are just the opposite. Actually this year appears to be the first year since 1983 that the SS will run a deficit. http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TRSUM/index.html

B) Some one should have run up and put there hand over Bush's mouth. His statements were not accurate and misleading as illustrated by the debate in the article as to what he meant. Does all the cash actually have to be in a pile somewhere to make the trust fund real? That's not the case at banks and we all accept it. It's implied often that money disappears from the trust, "borrowed", never to return. To date that has not been the case. All plan assets are accounted for...the issue is what will the gov due when the securities held by the plan are called in year after year. Do they dare default on those obligations?

There's no doubt about it something needs to be done. SS as it sits doesn't fit the changing demographics. I agree with some of the posts here. Phase out SS, put the responsibility on the individuals. Given that freedom I think a large portion of our population will bungle their attempts or do nothing at all. Decades ago emphasis was put on planning for the future, we were warned to not rely on SS as the sole retirement income. We now know not enough were listening. That group will always exist and the rest will always be expected to take up the slack.

A) My response was to your request seeking more info on my statement- "I understand why they want to raise the retirement age and I also why the SS system is failing. Too much coming out, not enough going back in- as well as all the borrowing from SS that has been done for other spending."

My earlier statement was based on the fact that SS is running on a defecit and will no doubt continue to. Your evidence supports this fact. The defecit will continue to grow until one of several things have been done which have already been discussed.

B) Yes, I believe if you are going to call it a "trust fund", it should be a big pile of money somewhere, not lie in the estimated projection of future collection and count on a number of people dying before they can collect what they have put in. Hence part of the problem.

My biggest problem with SS is that if you put in to the system for 50 years and die before or shortly after you begin collecting you loose everything but $250. At least with a private fund, your hard earned dollars can be passed on to whoever you see fit. Even if the private fund is a stable insured fund like Money Market.
 
Ok, can you explain please.

Can't make up your mind?

Ah . .. heck. . .if the Admiral can change her mind three times in one sentence; can't I advocate two sides of a point in one post? :)

I have mixed views on Social Security. I do however, believe the following:

GIVEN THE CHOICE between investing my money in social security and investing the money on my own: I will pick investing on my own. WE WILL NOT GET THAT CHOICE; If SS disappears tomorrow, my company will not "pass the savings to the employee". I will bet three donoughts and a beer that my salary will be unchanged. And FICA will not drop to zero. But the SS benefit (and medicare?) will go away.

Call me a cynic -> but I believe that when "they" privatize social security, I can bet that NOBODY is going to look after my interests and I am NOT going to reap any benefits.

And is Social Security bad as a concept?

The "Blood for Oil" wars is a pretty common refrain I hear from my more "progressive" friends...as if our budget would be balanced and there would be money left over for a slew of social programs-had we not engaged in an immoral folly. My (apparently poorly articulated) point was that whether it is the "right" arguing that we can solve the problem through fraud/illegals or the left arguing that the problem is the military/industrial establishment and taxing the rich...neither addresses the magnitude of the disconnect between income and outgo.

Agree fully.

It is amazing how many people are challenged by the simple math.
 
Ah . .. heck. . .if the Admiral can change her mind three times in one sentence; can't I advocate two sides of a point in one post? :)

I have mixed views on Social Security. I do however, believe the following:

GIVEN THE CHOICE between investing my money in social security and investing the money on my own: I will pick investing on my own. WE WILL NOT GET THAT CHOICE; If SS disappears tomorrow, my company will not "pass the savings to the employee". I will bet three donoughts and a beer that my salary will be unchanged. And FICA will not drop to zero. But the SS benefit (and medicare?) will go away.

Call me a cynic -> but I believe that when "they" privatize social security, I can bet that NOBODY is going to look after my interests and I am NOT going to reap any benefits.

And is Social Security bad as a concept?



Agree fully.

It is amazing how many people are challenged by the simple math.
You're unhappy because SS is not a good savings plan, you're correct, it is not. It is not a savings plan at all.
I wish I would have had a choice, but since I've been a teenager I've always understood that SS is not a savings plan. Should the fact I could pass on early and not draw a penny upset me...should I be upset because a lot of my tax dollars pay for education and I don't have kids in school. These are social programs that we all pay into, some of us get more out of them than others. If my neighbor sets records in longevity and in essence starts drawing off funds my early demise made available I'm satisfied, it worked.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
112,950
Messages
1,422,834
Members
60,931
Latest member
Ebrown69
Back
Top