According to this old people really need social security

[Dissipate]

According to this old people are in a sad state of affairs. They suffer from a low standard of living and really need huge social security benefits.

Consider these facts about the 50 plus generation:*

Financial Status

* Members of the 50-plus population (an $800 billion market) own 77% of all financial assets in America.
* This group owns 80% of all money in U.S. savings & loan institutions.
* Within the 50-65 age group, 79% are homeowners; half have paid their mortgages. Home equity for this age group is $70,000, twice which of people under age 35. Average household income is 20% higher than the U.S. average.

Buying Power

* People over 50 control over half of all discretionary income.
* This group purchases 43% of all new cars in the U.S. The 50-plus population spends more on quality children's clothing for their grandchildren than the parents do.
* This group spends more per capita in the grocery store than any other age group, and eats out an average of three times a week.

Travel/Entertainment

* The 50-plus population spends more money on travel and recreation than any other age group, and purchases 80% of all luxury travel.
* This age group gambles more than any other segment of the population.

Go Bush go, grandpa needs to go on an extra luxury cruise!

Link

 

[sandorski]

Certainly some don't need it.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Certainly some don't need it.

Not according to the gubmint. Benefits are bestowed regardless of income or wealth.

 

[Spencer278]

SS should be means tested.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Spencer278
SS should be means tested.

Damn straight. Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

CkG

 

[Orsorum]

Why don't we abolish Social Security altogether?

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Spencer278
SS should be means tested.

Damn straight. Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

CkG

I DISAGREE. People who paid into the system should get back out what they paid into it.
I think we need to move towards private accounts. GWB and the Republican Congress wasted a GREAT opportunity to do that with their borrow and spend ways.

SS is the GREATEST ponzi system around backed by the full faith and credit of the US government (until we change it on you young folks).
I cannot believe good republicans like CAD who defend tax cuts for the wealthy are not defending SS for the wealthy. They paid into the system just like everyone else. Remember, means testing SS is a TAX INCREASE for the old and wealthy.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: chowderhead

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Spencer278
SS should be means tested.

Damn straight. Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

CkG

I DISAGREE. People who paid into the system should get back out what they paid into it.
I think we need to move towards private accounts. GWB and the Republican Congress wasted a GREAT opportunity to do.

SS is the GREATEST ponzi system around backed by the full faith and credit of the US government (until we change it on you young folks).
I cannot believe good republicans like CAD who defend tax cuts for the wealthy are not defending SS for the wealthy. They paid into the system just like everyone else. Remember, means testing SS is a TAX INCREASE for the wealthy.

That's because I think SS needs to go away The gov't shouldn't be in the retirement forced savings business. I think "privatization" sends the wrong signal to people - because it says that they "own" something the gov't takes from you even though you really don't "own" anything other than a promise.

CkG

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: chowderhead

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Spencer278
SS should be means tested.

Damn straight. Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

CkG

I DISAGREE. People who paid into the system should get back out what they paid into it.
I think we need to move towards private accounts. GWB and the Republican Congress wasted a GREAT opportunity to do that with their borrow and spend ways.

SS is the GREATEST ponzi system around backed by the full faith and credit of the US government (until we change it on you young folks).
I cannot believe good republicans like CAD who defend tax cuts for the wealthy are not defending SS for the wealthy. They paid into the system just like everyone else. Remember, means testing SS is a TAX INCREASE for the old and wealthy.

Private accounts suck too. People should be allowed to provide for their own retirement however the hell they want to. If you are too stupid to provide for your retirement tough luck for you, no one else should be forced to pay for your retirement. The whole thing should be abolished as soon as possible.

 

[Wolfdog]

It was a good system at its beginnings, when there were about an equal amount of working to those retired. Now that the amount retired is set to grow well beyond those working..... It surely hasn't helped that the US government including the current regime have used SS as thier personal piggy bank. I'm actually surprised there hasn't been any major lawsuits over SS coming from the younger classes. Since by paying SS every paycheck you are entitled to receive at least that much back. Well when I get to retirement age, there probably won't be even a penny left. Thus the governmnet is breaking thier agreement with every american that can't withdraw on it. All the old farts will have exhaused my hard earned wages. You guys do have to remember though that SS isn't only for retirement. If you are mortally wounded on the job it allows you extra security. Say if you loose a limb and can't work anymore. I am really not for privitization either. Since buying into the SS program hinges on the stability of our own governmnet. Money that you invest yourself or by a manager has no guarantees it will be there. What we do need though is a better return on the SS fund, so that the interest can compound faster. Actually doing something about it though doesn't seem to be the governments foray. They seem hellbent on speding every last penny and then charging up a storm on the Bank of US credit card.

 

[SuperTool]

They should abolish SS taxes and replace SS with a need based program,after they pay out those who already paid into the system.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
They should abolish SS taxes and replace SS with a need based program,after they pay out those who already paid into the system.

Need based program my @ss. The only thing people need to do is plan their own retirement, not use the force of government to tax young generations to pay for their "needs".

Edit: I would like to emphasize the fact that this age group gambles more than any other. Yeah, I'm sure grandma NEEDS regular bingo hall money.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Wolfdog
It was a good system at its beginnings, when there were about an equal amount of working to those retired.

ummm... no

Now that the amount retired is set to grow well beyond those working.....

we're really fscked if there are more people drawing than working

It surely hasn't helped that the US government including the current regime have used SS as thier personal piggy bank.

they have to spend it, they can't just hold it or else they'd drag the economy down

I'm actually surprised there hasn't been any major lawsuits over SS coming from the younger classes.

it's non-justiciable, the courts wouldn't hear it. you want it changed you'd have to go through the political process.

Since by paying SS every paycheck you are entitled to receive at least that much back. Well when I get to retirement age, there probably won't be even a penny left. Thus the governmnet is breaking thier agreement with every american that can't withdraw on it. All the old farts will have exhaused my hard earned wages. You guys do have to remember though that SS isn't only for retirement. If you are mortally wounded on the job it allows you extra security. Say if you loose a limb and can't work anymore. I am really not for privitization either. Since buying into the SS program hinges on the stability of our own governmnet. Money that you invest yourself or by a manager has no guarantees it will be there. What we do need though is a better return on the SS fund, so that the interest can compound faster. Actually doing something about it though doesn't seem to be the governments foray. They seem hellbent on speding every last penny and then charging up a storm on the Bank of US credit card.

 

[Tripleshot]

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

While you are posting "facts", enlighten us with wealth distribution in that age category, and while you are at it health care costs broken down by age.


Edit: Oh, do it for 65+ since they are the ones (mostly) collecting SS.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
While you are posting "facts", enlighten us with wealth distribution in that age category, and while you are at it health care costs broken down by age.


Edit: Oh, do it for 65+ since they are the ones (mostly) collecting SS.

The government doesn't really care about living costs of younger workers when it collects FICA from them, does it? Working at a fast food place for 6 months I saw my co-workers slave away, barely able to make ends meet all the while paying FICA to the government every 2 weeks.

While we are at it, why don't you post the wealth distribution of the 18-40 year old population and all the costs they have broken down by age.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: chowderhead

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Spencer278
SS should be means tested.

Damn straight. Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

CkG

I DISAGREE. People who paid into the system should get back out what they paid into it.
I think we need to move towards private accounts. GWB and the Republican Congress wasted a GREAT opportunity to do that with their borrow and spend ways.

SS is the GREATEST ponzi system around backed by the full faith and credit of the US government (until we change it on you young folks).
I cannot believe good republicans like CAD who defend tax cuts for the wealthy are not defending SS for the wealthy. They paid into the system just like everyone else. Remember, means testing SS is a TAX INCREASE for the old and wealthy.

Good it would be a tax increase on rich old people. The amount they paid in is no where near the amount they are taking out. I really don't care what prectange of my money old people voted to give them selves they shouldn't get it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

Yea, like foodstamps, medical, housing assistance, childcare, therapy,job training. What else is on your feeble mind, CKG?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

Yea, like foodstamps, medical, housing assistance, childcare, therapy,job training. What else is on your feeble mind, CKG?

Let me guess - in your feeble mind you think all "welfare like activities" have a 5 year lifetime limit. Right....

I was talking about more than just traditional welfare if you still don't understand.

CkG

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

Yea, like foodstamps, medical, housing assistance, childcare, therapy,job training. What else is on your feeble mind, CKG?

Let me guess - in your feeble mind you think all "welfare like activities" have a 5 year lifetime limit. Right....

I was talking about more than just traditional welfare if you still don't understand.

CkG

I don't have the feeble mind, fool. You do. You haven't addressed anything in this thread about welfare, traditional or otherwise. If you are discussing Social Security, that is not welfare. That is a paid for insurance policy all american workers pay into unless they have another replacement retirement method.

CkG, I work in the business. Don't let your mouth overload your ass here.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
While you are posting "facts", enlighten us with wealth distribution in that age category, and while you are at it health care costs broken down by age.


Edit: Oh, do it for 65+ since they are the ones (mostly) collecting SS.

The government doesn't really care about living costs of younger workers when it collects FICA from them, does it? Working at a fast food place for 6 months I saw my co-workers slave away, barely able to make ends meet all the while paying FICA to the government every 2 weeks.

While we are at it, why don't you post the wealth distribution of the 18-40 year old population and all the costs they have broken down by age.

In case you haven't noticed, 18-40 year olds are generally in better health and are YOUNG. This means they have fewer health issues and are generally more able to work.

You brought this nonsense up. I am starting to think that SS ought to be largely abolished. In place of that, upon reaching the age of 30, people would have to reimburse their parents in full adjusted for inflation for every cent they spent on raising them.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

Yea, like foodstamps, medical, housing assistance, childcare, therapy,job training. What else is on your feeble mind, CKG?

Let me guess - in your feeble mind you think all "welfare like activities" have a 5 year lifetime limit. Right....

I was talking about more than just traditional welfare if you still don't understand.

CkG

I don't have the feeble mind, fool. You do. You haven't addressed anything in this thread about welfare, traditional or otherwise. If you are discussing Social Security, that is not welfare. That is a paid for insurance policy all american workers pay into unless they have another replacement retirement method.

CkG, I work in the business. Don't let your mouth overload your ass here.

Why should anyone be forced to pay into an "insurance" policy they have absolutely no faith in? Social Security is not an insurance policy, it is a scheme devised so that people don't have to plan for their retirement.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Tripleshot

Ofcourse all "welfare" like activities handed out by the gov't to it's people should be means tested.

It is means tested, and only as long (at best) for 5 years in a lifetime.

"...all 'welfare' like activities handed out..."

CkG

Yea, like foodstamps, medical, housing assistance, childcare, therapy,job training. What else is on your feeble mind, CKG?

Let me guess - in your feeble mind you think all "welfare like activities" have a 5 year lifetime limit. Right....

I was talking about more than just traditional welfare if you still don't understand.

CkG

I don't have the feeble mind, fool. You do. You haven't addressed anything in this thread about welfare, traditional or otherwise. If you are discussing Social Security, that is not welfare. That is a paid for insurance policy all american workers pay into unless they have another replacement retirement method.

CkG, I work in the business. Don't let your mouth overload your ass here.

I don't care what you think you know - you obviously took my intentionally BROAD statement and applied it to only traditional welfare. So yes - who's mouth overloaded their ass?
SS is welfare when people pull more out of the system than they paid in. Only a fool would say nobody gets more than they paid in. So yeah - I guess SS isn't "welfare" it's only "somewhat welfare".

CkG

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: WinstonSmith
While you are posting "facts", enlighten us with wealth distribution in that age category, and while you are at it health care costs broken down by age.


Edit: Oh, do it for 65+ since they are the ones (mostly) collecting SS.

The government doesn't really care about living costs of younger workers when it collects FICA from them, does it? Working at a fast food place for 6 months I saw my co-workers slave away, barely able to make ends meet all the while paying FICA to the government every 2 weeks.

While we are at it, why don't you post the wealth distribution of the 18-40 year old population and all the costs they have broken down by age.

In case you haven't noticed, 18-40 year olds are generally in better health and are YOUNG. This means they have fewer health issues and are generally more able to work.

You brought this nonsense up. I am starting to think that SS ought to be largely abolished. In place of that, upon reaching the age of 30, people would have to reimburse their parents in full adjusted for inflation for every cent they spent on raising them.

Who is government to decide who is more able to work and who isn't? There are plenty of old people able to work, my role in society is NONE of the government's damn business. Just because I am young and able to work does not automatically make me a provider for the old. Where is my right to choose who I am and what MY role in society is? If I want to provide for the old I'll donate to private charities that give services to old people. You and all the government bureaucrats love to pigeon hole everyone into categories and take from them based on inane and arbitrary criteria. Whether I am 10 years old or a million years old my role in society should be neutral, not subject to judgment by a public entity that is supposed to give me equal protection.

Futhermore, money parents spend on their children is voluntary. They chose to have kids, they chose to pay for their kids, a law forcing people to pay their parents is ludicrious. Social Security on the other hand is involuntary. Corporations are forced to deduct it from their employee's paychecks before they even get their paycheck. The logic of your proposition is invalid.

Edit: Your statements are sounding very familiar: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."