What exactly is social security?

[BarneyFife]

CkG[/quote]

Not everyone is as well off as your grandma. A lot of seniors can barely pay for their medicine each month. Some ask their doctor for stonger Rx. so they can cut pills in half in order to have money to pay their bills.

My parents didnt have great jobs, and they didnt get any retirement plans or fancy healthcare. My sister and I pay for my parents' health care, otherwise they would be living off of SS and medicare.[/quote]

Exactly. Everyone isn't fortunate enough to be a UAW member and get outrageous benefits.

 

[tcsenter]

Actually if the federal government just PAID BACK all the money it stole from social sevurity we would be fine.

The federal government didn't 'steal' anything from social security. It was never meant to be a 'seperate' fund of any kind. It was meant to be 'dipped into' at will.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Well, I have contributed very little over the years to SS in the realization that I would never see a dime of it. Any portion of SS that is due to me, all of you are welcome to have, but I have a sneaky suspicion that the pols have already spent it.

Did you spend 20 years in grad school? Other than being poor or chronically unemployed (hang out with some trust fund kids and you will understand the difference) how can you contribute very little to SS?

 

[tm37]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Actually if the federal government just PAID BACK all the money it stole from social sevurity we would be fine.

The federal government didn't 'steal' anything from social security. It was never meant to be a 'seperate' fund of any kind. It was meant to be 'dipped into' at will.

and paid back.

The problem is of course they don't havbe to money to pay the IOU's.

If they were to pay back all the IOU's SS would be fine.

that ain't gonna happen though.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: tm37

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Actually if the federal government just PAID BACK all the money it stole from social sevurity we would be fine.

The federal government didn't 'steal' anything from social security. It was never meant to be a 'seperate' fund of any kind. It was meant to be 'dipped into' at will.

and paid back.

The problem is of course they don't havbe to money to pay the IOU's.

If they were to pay back all the IOU's SS would be fine.

that ain't gonna happen though.

No No No, SS still would collapse even if we paid back the IOUs - it'd just make it last a tad longer. In a few short years the Baby Boomers will start to make the SS system pay out more than it takes in - which will quickly deplete any "lock box" funds and IOUs.

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Actually there is one caveat for the Baby Boomer withdrawals. A Reagan-era or Bush 41, economic advisor recently noted that government coffers will get a big boost when Boomers start taking mandatory withdrawals from 401k plans. We will still be in a big hole but at least the digging rate will slow . . . assuming government restrains spending/raises taxes.

 

[jackschmittusa]

I have paid into SS for over 30 years (and will continue to pay for several more). If that money would have been put into a simple savings account it would have provided a nice monthly stipend for my retirement and probably leave leave a balance upon my death. The whole system has been horribly managed by the government. As far as I am concerned, the government promised me something for the money they took and I expect it.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Fair enough old man . . . but the government isn't some geezer on a stool behind a curtain . . . the government is the people. The government isn't going to give you jack. The money liberated from your paycheck by the Feds greatly improved the quality of life of previous generations (and the disabled, etc). But there's no way my generation (X) and those that follow can afford to maintain the current system through your retirement.

The government promised freed slaves "40 acres and a mule" for their uncompensated labor. I suspect you will get a better deal . . . maybe.

Personally, I think every time the US government is going to waste resources on "announcements" about how much we can expect from SS or the latest tax cut . . . they should include a statement of current indebtedness accrued through unfunded future liabilities (SS/Medicare) and the ever enlarging national debt.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: tm37

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Ditto . . . the penalty for early withdrawal is 10%+ from your 401K . . . but most people under 40 will probably never see a dime of SS. I may change that to under 50 if Bush (and the do nothing Democrats/Republicans in Congress) get re-elected.

Creating private accounts, reduced benefits or increased social security taxes is going to be the only thing that can save social security.

Actually if the federal government just PAID BACK all the money it stole from social sevurity we would be fine.

No we wouldn't Once the Baby Boomers hit retirement SS is going to collapse on itself in short order. It will be quite entertaining(in a sick sort of way) to watch them bitch and moan. They may not have created the problem(SS) but they didn't do anything to solve it either.

Hay - The old bleeding heart song and dance isn't effective here. Most of us are educated people who see through that scare tactic. Please turn the page - the one you are reading from has worn thin - heck I hear the Dems might actually revise their playbook this year so you can read it from new page ....well...Uhh...maybe not.

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

You ignore a real problem. Now address it if you can.

 

[tcsenter]

and paid back.

The problem is of course they don't havbe to money to pay the IOU's.

If they were to pay back all the IOU's SS would be fine.

Again, there is nothing to 'pay back'. The IOUs are not written to the Social Security Trust Fund because there is no such beast as a Social Security Trust Fund. The IOUs are written (figuratively) to Social Security recipients, what the government will have to spend on social security payments.

Even if there was a "fund", like some enormous account held by Chase Manhattan into which all SS contributions go, which may be spent only on Social Security benefits, it will still go broke because the amount being payed out will exceed the amount coming in. It may have already gotten to that point, but it takes awhile for it to bleed dry.

The problem is not that the government spends the social security contributions on other things. The problem is that there won't be enough social security contributions coming in to sustain the amount that is being paid out, so the balance will have to come from the general fund, eliminating the 'self-supportive' manner of Social Security, unless SS taxes are increased, benefits are reduced, or both. It will always be a slippery slope of one, the other, or both because economically its a bankrupt system.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: tm37

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Ditto . . . the penalty for early withdrawal is 10%+ from your 401K . . . but most people under 40 will probably never see a dime of SS. I may change that to under 50 if Bush (and the do nothing Democrats/Republicans in Congress) get re-elected.

Creating private accounts, reduced benefits or increased social security taxes is going to be the only thing that can save social security.

Actually if the federal government just PAID BACK all the money it stole from social sevurity we would be fine.

No we wouldn't Once the Baby Boomers hit retirement SS is going to collapse on itself in short order. It will be quite entertaining(in a sick sort of way) to watch them bitch and moan. They may not have created the problem(SS) but they didn't do anything to solve it either.

Hay - The old bleeding heart song and dance isn't effective here. Most of us are educated people who see through that scare tactic. Please turn the page - the one you are reading from has worn thin - heck I hear the Dems might actually revise their playbook this year so you can read it from new page ....well...Uhh...maybe not.

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

You ignore a real problem. Now address it if you can.

No, I'm not ignoring - I'm only stating the relevent parts to rebutt his assertion that everything would be peachy if we didn't "borrow" from SS. The fact is that SS will not be solvent wether or not these so called IOUs are paid back or not.

Now since you ask - THE main problem with SS is that it a social program that has outlived it's usefulness or atleast it's original intentions and that it is so out of control that our own gov't can't even handle it anymore. We as a nation can't afford to keep giving and giving to those that have done nothing to earn it except for becoming "old". There are other ways to take care of old people and those that can't take care of themselves. What do you think happened before SS was around?

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
THe only way to fix this is manditory death at some age.

So some guy making 25k and spending it all on sustinence is going to have a 401k retirement fund. Rigghhhhtttt.

If you kill everyone at say age 70, you would not have to worry about those pesky old homeless people. Not only that, but this is the ultimate in fairness. You could not buy your way out of it, you could only escape to another country, and if they do so, the goverment seizes their assets, or if they have moved them offshore, they are not permitted to leave until they are surrendered to Bush the 4th or whoever.

There. Problem solved.

Well... could you phase the program in sorta... like the folks under fifty go at seventy... the ones over seventy live on and the folks fifty through sixty nine go if they reach over one hundred five... ?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LunarRay

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider
THe only way to fix this is manditory death at some age.

So some guy making 25k and spending it all on sustinence is going to have a 401k retirement fund. Rigghhhhtttt.

If you kill everyone at say age 70, you would not have to worry about those pesky old homeless people. Not only that, but this is the ultimate in fairness. You could not buy your way out of it, you could only escape to another country, and if they do so, the goverment seizes their assets, or if they have moved them offshore, they are not permitted to leave until they are surrendered to Bush the 4th or whoever.

There. Problem solved.

Well... could you phase the program in sorta... like the folks under fifty go at seventy... the ones over seventy live on and the folks fifty through sixty nine go if they reach over one hundred five... ?

Or we could rework the system so it wouldn't bleed me and my kids dry I'm sorry if you people think I'm some uncaring person but dammit - where is people's sense of responsibility? You work you whole life(or not) and then expect the gov't to give you money when you say you are old enough to quit working? What about taking charge of your own life? Why does the gov't have to pay it's people who don't want to work or haven't saved? Granted there are people who really "need" help but we can take care of those people in other ways. Oh, and my Grandma isn't "raking it in" but the point remains that she is getting something for doing nothing - and that is wrong.

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Hay said
You ignore a real problem. Now address it if you can.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CAD said
No, I'm not ignoring - I'm only stating the relevent parts to rebutt his assertion that everything would be peachy if we didn't "borrow" from SS. The fact is that SS will not be solvent wether or not these so called IOUs are paid back or not.

Now since you ask - THE main problem with SS is that it a social program that has outlived it's usefulness or atleast it's original intentions and that it is so out of control that our own gov't can't even handle it anymore. We as a nation can't afford to keep giving and giving to those that have done nothing to earn it except for becoming "old". There are other ways to take care of old people and those that can't take care of themselves. What do you think happened before SS was around?

Social Security is a disaster!
****************************************************

CAD each month when I get my SS check I'm gonna think of you... I'm gonna assume that what I get is what I put in at the compounded rate of return of the S&P 500 for every dollar me and the employers I worked for put in to the 'fund' and any short fall comes directly from your fund... The CAD fund will be my short fall makeup... Thank you very much...
I will start drawing checks (assumes I don't start drawing on disability.... which I could...) in 5 years... so pay in lots of $ so I will have lots of $ to pay for my trips hither and yon.... Don't worry bout the medicare.... I use the VA or Naval Hosp... thanks for that too CAD.. BTW when I do go on to the tax free heaven... I will leave you the contents of my bag avatar... having removed it before hand..

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Why the false dichotomy? It is absolutely true that SS/Medicare's current problem is that revenue is being used in the general fund instead of accumulating interest in a secure lockbox. While SS/Medicare's long term solvency is threatened by the use of funds for tax cuts/NMD and the inability of Gen X/Y/Z to pay the future liability of the Boomers.

This debate has the same dysfunctional tenor as Congress which always agrees that something must be done but never agrees on the actual problem or appropriate solutions.

 

[Syringer]

So what do you guys think of Gore's plan on spending the surplus to aid SS?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Why the false dichotomy? It is absolutely true that SS/Medicare's current problem is that revenue is being used in the general fund instead of accumulating interest in a secure lockbox. While SS/Medicare's long term solvency is threatened by the use of funds for tax cuts/NMD and the inability of Gen X/Y/Z to pay the future liability of the Boomers.

This debate has the same dysfunctional tenor as Congress which always agrees that something must be done but never agrees on the actual problem or appropriate solutions.

No, I don't think people here (atleast the sane ones) disagree that spending money out of the "SS fund" is fundamentally wrong, but that "problem" isn't what will cause the collapse of SS. What will collapse SS is that more $ will be paid out of the system than into it in a few short years.

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Why the false dichotomy? It is absolutely true that SS/Medicare's current problem is that revenue is being used in the general fund instead of accumulating interest in a secure lockbox. While SS/Medicare's long term solvency is threatened by the use of funds for tax cuts/NMD and the inability of Gen X/Y/Z to pay the future liability of the Boomers.

This debate has the same dysfunctional tenor as Congress which always agrees that something must be done but never agrees on the actual problem or appropriate solutions.

There is but one solution to the SS issue and a different one for the Med issue..
For the SS issue the only solution is to phase it out over time. Those on SS continue till they expire. Those over 55 receive a fixed benefit equal to their and their Er contribution over time compounded by the S&P for their expected life span.. starting at age 67... those 45 thru 54 can withdraw their funds similarlly compounded for non withdrawal capability into some 401k or other vehicle OR they can have their funds calculated and frozen in the SS fund drawing interest at RFR of TBills and start drawing it at age 67. Those under 45 get all their funds back with compound effect of S&P500 and put it into whatever they want. End it now!!!!!!

For the medicare issue... we need cost effective clinics etc so folks who don't have the funds can get health care.. med's supplied by the mfg. at cost... and dispensed as needed by clinics... A clinic where the patience of the patient is understood.. Teaching clinics... that sorta thing... If you can afford to go to John Hopkins or Sloan or Boston General... so be it.. If beds are available fine... also revamp the MED/MAL to eliminate the insanity...

 

[MonkeyK]

I understand the whole deal about personal responsibility, but sometimes we just F*** up. I want to live in a country where people who do not have the means to care for themselves can recieve some help. Systems will be abused. I am enraged that Social Security surpluses of past have been replaced with worthless IOUs. It is a shame that people who have no real need are getting extra from some fund. Unfortunately everyone will try to maximize what they get out of the system. I have a friend who complains bitterly about being taxed and how aweful Social Security and Medicare are. When his parents had to move into a nursing home, he advised them to wrap all of their money up into a trust that the state could not touch so that the state would pay for the care (where do you think the money for that care comes from).

All that I ever see about the Social Security business is ME ME ME. If I had put that money away for MYSELF, it would be worth so much more for ME! Maybe it would (because whoever makes the claim, I know that it would be invested with keen business insight and that all withdrawls would be carefully contemplated to prevent loss of principle --a very tricky process for even the financially savvy). But maybe it wouldn't, in which case wouldn't you like to know that you won't starve.

The notion of persona accounts is a good start, but just doesn't cut it. Maybe some program needs to be better managed. Maybe we need an some better fiscal management in congress (and whatever anyone says, pork happens on both sides of the fense. For the personal responsibilty people, how personally responsible are we if we did not vote out those who allowed it to happen).

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
Hay said
You ignore a real problem. Now address it if you can.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


CAD said
No, I'm not ignoring - I'm only stating the relevent parts to rebutt his assertion that everything would be peachy if we didn't "borrow" from SS. The fact is that SS will not be solvent wether or not these so called IOUs are paid back or not.

Now since you ask - THE main problem with SS is that it a social program that has outlived it's usefulness or atleast it's original intentions and that it is so out of control that our own gov't can't even handle it anymore. We as a nation can't afford to keep giving and giving to those that have done nothing to earn it except for becoming "old". There are other ways to take care of old people and those that can't take care of themselves. What do you think happened before SS was around?

Social Security is a disaster!
****************************************************

CAD each month when I get my SS check I'm gonna think of you... I'm gonna assume that what I get is what I put in at the compounded rate of return of the S&P 500 for every dollar me and the employers I worked for put in to the 'fund' and any short fall comes directly from your fund... The CAD fund will be my short fall makeup... Thank you very much...
I will start drawing checks (assumes I don't start drawing on disability.... which I could...) in 5 years... so pay in lots of $ so I will have lots of $ to pay for my trips hither and yon.... Don't worry bout the medicare.... I use the VA or Naval Hosp... thanks for that too CAD.. BTW when I do go on to the tax free heaven... I will leave you the contents of my bag avatar... having removed it before hand..

Well I have a solution to that also well atleast my employer does
This past January they made my position a salaried position so now when I work my ass off(last week I worked 84 hours not including 8hrs of Holiday pay) - I don't make more money - thus "saving" me from having to pay more to the likes of you! I guess my employer really does look out for me

I will curse in your general direction every 3rd day of the month(assuming that is when your check arrives) when you start collecting your "old person's paycheck" please do inform me when that day comes - I wouldn't want to miss an opportunity to curse

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

No, I don't think people here (atleast the sane ones) disagree that spending money out of the "SS fund" is fundamentally wrong, but that "problem" isn't what will cause the collapse of SS. What will collapse SS is that more $ will be paid out of the system than into it in a few short years.

Dude, that's still doubletalk. If all money paid into SS/Medicare was spent entirely for that purpose the system would still go broke . . . eventually. True and related but the reason SS will collapse when expenses exceed revenue is "drumroll" . . . the government has spent decades using SS/Medicare revenue for other purposes. Part of the solution is balancing the budget without including FICA revenue and folding surpluses . . . HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA . . . back into a real trustfund.

It's true that Gore's lockbox would merely delay the inevitable but at the very least you create a window so that deliberate reforms can take place. The current administration/Congress is driving the country towards a catastrophic failure which will likely necessitate draconian measures.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: MonkeyK
I understand the whole deal about personal responsibility, but sometimes we just F*** up. I want to live in a country where people who do not have the means to care for themselves can recieve some help. Systems will be abused. I am enraged that Social Security surpluses of past have been replaced with worthless IOUs. It is a shame that people who have no real need are getting extra from some fund. Unfortunately everyone will try to maximize what they get out of the system. I have a friend who complains bitterly about being taxed and how aweful Social Security and Medicare are. When his parents had to move into a nursing home, he advised them to wrap all of their money up into a trust that the state could not touch so that the state would pay for the care (where do you think the money for that care comes from).

All that I ever see about the Social Security business is ME ME ME. If I had put that money away for MYSELF, it would be worth so much more for ME! Maybe it would (because whoever makes the claim, I know that it would be invested with keen business insight and that all withdrawls would be carefully contemplated to prevent loss of principle --a very tricky process for even the financially savvy). But maybe it wouldn't, in which case wouldn't you like to know that you won't starve.

The notion of persona accounts is a good start, but just doesn't cut it. Maybe some program needs to be better managed. Maybe we need an some better fiscal management in congress (and whatever anyone says, pork happens on both sides of the fense. For the personal responsibilty people, how personally responsible are we if we did not vote out those who allowed it to happen).

You are right -it is a greed "me" situation. The old people saying that they deserve it and that "the gov't promised me..." and us young uns who say "I want to save and spend that money for myself" Both "me" positions and not in dispute. The problem comes in when the Gov't decides to mess with the "me" argument. The Federal Gov't shouldn't be taking from one to pay another when the ones they take from will never see the return. Stay out of my checkbook(kinda like those who scream stay out of my bedroom)

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[LunarRay]

All the money withheld from paychecks or matched by employers went into the coffers... they know how much each has put in... the money did go into a fund.. and was used by the government to offest borrowing... what else should they have done with it.. Invest in the stock market? The IOU simply means that instead of the SS fund buying govt debt issues and having the government pay the interest and buying more... etc.. they simplified the matter.. It is fine... what they did. All they have to do now is add up all the money each person has contributed and compound it and fund it from the general fund.. but that won't mean much..... from one pocket to another. Phase out the system. We have lots of funds.. Highway trust fund... and others affect of trust funds

The money owed is good to know but, not a big problem except the government won't have those $ anymore to offset borrowing and the current budget debt service...... If interest rates jump a few % the debt service on an annual basis will chew up more and more of the revenue... and delta to debt... With unemployment high... not only is the revenue off but the funding for SS is also off... and the draws on Unemp. ins drain that fund... so ... Mr Bush ... Tear down this wall... let Americans see...

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

No, I don't think people here (atleast the sane ones) disagree that spending money out of the "SS fund" is fundamentally wrong, but that "problem" isn't what will cause the collapse of SS. What will collapse SS is that more $ will be paid out of the system than into it in a few short years.

Dude, that's still doubletalk. If all money paid into SS/Medicare was spent entirely for that purpose the system would still go broke . . . eventually. True and related but the reason SS will collapse when expenses exceed revenue is "drumroll" . . . the government has spent decades using SS/Medicare revenue for other purposes. Part of the solution is balancing the budget without including FICA revenue and folding surpluses . . . HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA . . . back into a real trustfund.

It's true that Gore's lockbox would merely delay the inevitable but at the very least you create a window so that deliberate reforms can take place. The current administration/Congress is driving the country towards a catastrophic failure which will likely necessitate draconian measures.

No it is not. The soluability is the problem and you even admit to it. Quit blaming the side issues for the main problem. I liken it to the Tax-cut debate - you say the deficit is because of the tax-cut when infact it is because the gov't out-spends it's means(income). I'm not saying, however, that he side issues don't contribute to the problem, it is just that I look to the root of the problem for answers.

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
You are right -it is a greed "me" situation. The old people saying that they deserve it and that "the gov't promised me..." and us young uns who say "I want to save and spend that money for myself" Both "me" positions and not in dispute. The problem comes in when the Gov't decides to mess with the "me" argument. The Federal Gov't shouldn't be taking from one to pay another when the ones they take from will never see the return. Stay out of my checkbook(kinda like those who scream stay out of my bedroom)

Social Security is a disaster!

CkG

More like, keep out of my checkbook, but open yours up if I need something!