Social Security to Exhaust Funds in 2033

[rudder]

You're wrong. Unless idiots vote to get rid of SS, it'll be there for you.

How nice you don't 'need it'. That doesn't solve the issue for the country.

Sure it will always be there... the government can raise taxes, cut other services, or print more money to keep making payments.

Of course there is means testing and preventing people who don't really need it to not get payments... but this type wealth redistribution encourages people to not save for their own retirement.

 

[Mursilis]

You're wrong. Unless idiots vote to get rid of SS, it'll be there for you.

How nice you don't 'need it'. That doesn't solve the issue for the country.

Idiots voting to get rid of SS? No, idiots are why we have it. Idiots would rather "invest" in sweet rims and the coolest cell phones rather than a retirement account, and get to 65 with little to show for years of working.

 

[child of wonder]

You're wrong. Unless idiots vote to get rid of SS, it'll be there for you.

How nice you don't 'need it'. That doesn't solve the issue for the country.

What's wrong with not depending on it being there? I'd rather save some extra money and be pleasantly surprised if SS is still around when I retire rather than not save enough and, should it not be available, I've found my retirement is underfunded.

 

[destey]

Wait, all the money that's being taken out of my check isn't going into an account with my name? Where the f is my money going?

 

[Mursilis]

Wait, all the money that's being taken out of my check isn't going into an account with my name? Where the f is my money going?

It's going to some old fart who's probably driving slowly in the left lane with his blinker on as we type.

 

[WackyDan]

...lol... Priceless!

yeah.. no shit. The borrowing happened day 1 of SS. SS wasn't an entitlement program first... it was a TAX and the fuckers who wanted to pass SS knew it when they proposed it.

But that is Craig's M.O.... Blame any conservative he can.

 

[Svnla]

Wait, all the money that's being taken out of my check isn't going into an account with my name? Where the f is my money going?

Read my previous post (#7) in this thread. It has several links about SS and the myth and HUGE problem(s) down the road.

The money you and others are paying right now ==> to current retirees. The money those retirees paid ==>> to the retirees before them...and so on.

 

[WackyDan]

+1 Although I would like to see this happen in less than 20. SS really is pointless when no one expects or plans on it to fund any of their retirement. They are already taking steps to do that themselves.

The problem is, there are a great number of people that view SS as exclusively their retirement. They've done nothing to save, work, prepare for their later years. Live in the moment, no worries, SS is there at 62!

Until people realize that the mediocre life they are living now, coupled with their subpar choices in career, will greatly reduce their SS check amounts... Well that will never happen, so fuck it.

I would have made more back on my SS taxes if I was FORCED to invest that same withholding in an investment fund over my 40 year career... Bush tried to partially privatize SS but the Dems used scare tactics on the senior citizens to create a public outcry... when the privatization would never have impacted senior citizens or those close to potential retirement.

Time to phase SS out with a compulsory private program. Get the gov't out of it. They can still levy my paycheck and transfer that to the funds they back... SHIT they can even take 1% to help fund the existing SS entitlements. I don't care... it just needs to be fixed, and it will take multiple adjustments and changes to do so.

 

[WackyDan]

respectfully, I think several EU countries already tried universal insurance that made things better. I won't say it is a cure all but at least it's a proven concept to reduce long term cost for everyone.

However, I cannot say it can be the only solution to this problem. You seem to be on the Republican side, maybe, some state can give the Republican plan to fix SS/medicare a try see how successful it really is.

Maybe we can come up w/ something that most people can accept while solve this problem.

It was called partial privatization under GWB, and the DNC was able to block it using lies and smear tactics to get the public against it.

 

[senseamp]

Time to phase SS out with a compulsory private program. Get the gov't out of it. They can still levy my paycheck and transfer that to the funds they back... SHIT they can even take 1% to help fund the existing SS entitlements.

That's individual mandate, aka "socialism." No, thanks, commie.

 

[WackyDan]

That's individual mandate, aka "socialism." No, thanks, commie.

THANK YOU... You took the bait. So SS is just a tax then you say? DO away with it. Or, offer gov';t backed securities program and anyone who does not participate during their working years can rot in the streets if they failed to partake. You'd probably find a problem with letting people die from their own poor planning too huh?

 

[senseamp]

According to resident Constitutional scholars, the government cannot require people to invest in private financial products, that's socialism. So, go back to Russia and try your commie system there.

 

[Craig234]

yeah.. no shit. The borrowing happened day 1 of SS. SS wasn't an entitlement program first... it was a TAX and the fuckers who wanted to pass SS knew it when they proposed it.

But that is Craig's M.O.... Blame any conservative he can.

Actually, blame anyone who deserves it - just happens that's usually conservatives.

You're an ideologue, so your posts are empty of substance - you don't refute anything.

Bottom line - America had a serious problem with elder poverty and Social Security has been wonderful for Americans. Anything you suggest would hurt Americans.

Conservatives want to take the money from Americans for the rich - then blame them.

Are there improvements available for Social Security? Sure. But talking about them with someone like you is like talking about refining a gun ban law with the NRA.

 

[woolfe9999]

Personally I am assuming Social Security will be around, and will vote to make sure that happens.

This. I'm amused at the people who would end it right now to get like 7% more pay. 90% of those people will end up at the local food bank when they retire. It's typical American consumerism where instant gratification is the priority and these people think they are above it but history says the vast majority of them are not.

I'm also amused at the "SS is not going to be there when I retire" nonsense. The first time I heard that was when my parents said it back in the 1980's. Needless to say, they've been collecting it for 13 years now. And I've heard it from loads of people ever since. Doesn't matter because we'll see hyperinflation before then anyway, right? Haha.

- wolf

 

[WackyDan]

Actually, blame anyone who deserves it - just happens that's usually conservatives.

You're an ideologue, so your posts are empty of substance - you don't refute anything.

Bottom line - America had a serious problem with elder poverty and Social Security has been wonderful for Americans. Anything you suggest would hurt Americans.

Conservatives want to take the money from Americans for the rich - then blame them.

Are there improvements available for Social Security? Sure. But talking about them with someone like you is like talking about refining a gun ban law with the NRA.

You refuted that there wasn't a surplus earlier in this thread... where are your fancy charts and graphs Craig? Right... There aren't any.

Both D and R's deserve blame... You however always single out the conservatives... and I'm the ideologue here? Go fucking look in the mirror.

 

[senseamp]

The right has been spearing SS FUD to sucker people into giving it up so that the rich don't have to repay all the money they raided out of it for their tax cuts.

 

[rudder]

That's individual mandate, aka "socialism." No, thanks, commie.

Yes it is sad that people are so stupid that the government has to think and do for them. If an 18 year started investing right out of high school and put $100/month towards retirement until age 60... that person would not need social security.

But there is always that shiny new camaro, the latest iphone, ipad, satellite TV, the McMansion, etc etc that prevents many people from saving for the future.

 

[WackyDan]

According to resident Constitutional scholars, the government cannot require people to invest in private financial products, that's socialism. So, go back to Russia and try your commie system there.

But mandating contributions to SS in the form of a tax is legal as long as it is a tax. I get it. you going to reply to me yet?

 

[Craig234]

According to resident Constitutional scholars, the government cannot require people to invest in private financial products, that's socialism. So, go back to Russia and try your commie system there.

Funny thing, early in US history Congress passed bills requiring a mandate for privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance, signed by John Adams:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...dicine-and-mandates-health-insurance-in-1798/

There was also a bill signed by President Washington with a mandate for men to buy guns:

http://www.salon.com/2010/03/25/militia/

 

[senseamp]

But mandating contributions to SS in the form of a tax is legal as long as it is a tax. I get it. you going to reply to me yet?

That is correct. Tax and spend is capitalism, individual mandate is socialism. The end.

 

[airdata]

wtb opt out, pst.

 

[senseamp]

Funny thing, early in US history Congress passed bills requiring a mandate for privately employed sailors to purchase healthcare insurance, signed by John Adams:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickung...dicine-and-mandates-health-insurance-in-1798/

There was also a bill signed by President Washington with a mandate for men to buy guns:

http://www.salon.com/2010/03/25/militia/

Just because the founders were commies, doesn't make it right.

 

[Craig234]

You refuted that there wasn't a surplus earlier in this thread... where are your fancy charts and graphs Craig? Right... There aren't any.

Both D and R's deserve blame... You however always single out the conservatives... and I'm the ideologue here? Go fucking look in the mirror.

It's very simple: Under Reagan, Social Security added an additional withdrawal (50% IIRC) to build a surplus aimed at keeping Social Security solvent for baby boomers.

That wasn't the first or last bad thing done with Social Security, but it was a major increase in the funds available for the government to borrow and spend.

Perhaps you don't understand what I was referring to - that 50% extra.

 

[Craig234]

Just because the founders were commies, doesn't make it right.

Well, of course they were commies - revolution against the 1% from England who were overly wealthy abusing their power, creating all kinds of 'social good' government programs.

 

[Craig234]

wtb opt out, pst.

Here's your opt out for greedy bastards: leave the country, renounce US citizenship.