Social Security!

“I pay about 5% of my income into the state teacher's retirement plan.

I put about 25 to 30% of my take home pay into a 403B.

I pay into social security.

I like social security because it's safe money. The third leg of the stool, eh?

Why should I be forced to pay 4% of my income into a government plan that is likely to have overhead and fees that pale against those charged in the private sector.

I am perfectly willing to put money into a safe, very conservative retirement source like social security.

But if the money will no longer be safe, I have better places to put money than in another big government program.

Anyone else feel this way?”

“makes some sense to me. I think Social Security is probably the most successful anti-poverty and social stability legislation evern the US.

I think you have a key point RL... Social Security is about SECURITY. 100% secure investments necessarily have a lower rate of return than risky ones - especially when they provide all kinds of insurance benefits.
last edited: 12/16/04 7:49:30 PM”

“Better to think of it as an Insurance plan instead of an investment plan.
It could pay off big time tomorrow for your wife and kids. Or pay only a lttle for your retirement.”

“RL, I wish I had your confidence that it'll be there. I plan on receiving $0 out SS and have planned accordingly (sounds like you have too). I am a pseeimist when it comes to this.”

“I just think that rather than bring in some wacked out so-called-private-but-really-public investment plan, they should make some small, but significant changes in the current plan.

Drop the benefits for new retirees 5%. Raise the cap on earnings subject to withholding by $20,000. Raise the retirement age by a couple of months. Offer lump sum payments that cheat the beneficiary a little on the actuarial charts.

Let's come up with a thousand little changes that will save the CURRENT system.

Oh, and let's increase immigration, make abortion more difficult to obtain and create a federal budget that doesn't look like an enormous sieve.

Hey, one more idea... Once the system is reformed (hehe), let's set up a quasi-government body like the federal reserve bank to administer social security. Make Alan Greenspan or Warren Buffet the chairman. Let the man safeguard that money slightly off the core budget.”

“I too am making my plans to not have any SS when I get to that age. Of course by that time the system will be so poor my retirment age will be 85. Anytime I am able to keep my own money and put it where I want I'm all for it. But only under a system that the next pres puts into place because as we all know nothing good can come from the Bush admin.”

“But, Nigal, it could be saved, with some small changes over a long period of time.

I don't dislike Bush. He's a nice man. I just disagree with him on this one.”

“Here are some older Social security facts I just found:

http://www.justfacts.com/socialsecurity.htm#Benefits

As of 2001, Social Security is paying an average of $10,140/year to individuals receiving old age benefits.

As of 2001, the federal government defines the poverty level for an individual at $8,590/year.

As of 2001, Social Security is paying an average of $16,920/year to couples receiving old age benefits.

As of 2001, the federal government defines the poverty level for a family of two at $11,610/year.

Poverty level is currently classified as $12,490 in the 48 states and DC, $15,610 in Alaska, and $14,360 in Hawaii.


So when ped says, “I think Social Security is probably the most successful anti-poverty and social stability legislation evern the US”, he has a point. On average, it barely keeps people, who have paid into the system, above “poverty level.”


In my opinion, unless you have an income considered by some to be “rich”, and have paid into the system since your mid-twenties, SS will only allow you to buy a better brand of cat food when you retire. You had better own a house with no mortgage. And you had better live in an area of the country with low taxes. Hello Florida! Of course the more retired people that move to an area, the more services are needed, higher taxes are needed...




More Social security facts:

In general, to qualify for old age benefits, a person must work for ten years, earning at least $3,120 a year.

For workers with average incomes, the government collects the equivalent of 6 weeks worth of their salary in Social Security taxes every year.

Over the course of its life, the stock market has had a 10% return on investment. Imagine 6 weeks salary, invested at 10%, for forty years?

SS does assure that anyone who has worked for a number of years, will receive some benefit:

Old age benefits for people who turned 65 years old in the year 2000:

Average annual income Average annual taxes Old age benefit
$20,440 $2,535 $9,200
$40,880 $5,069 $14,800
$74,197 $9,200 $17,420




The following applies to people who are still working when they begin to receive old age benefits:

Individuals who earn more than $25,000/year and couples who earn more than $32,000/year pay income taxes on up to 50% of their old age benefits.

Imagine that. You get taxed your entire life to get a meager benefit then, except for those at the lowest income levels, the government taxes that benefit when you collect it. How many ways can government find to double-tax us?




If this were a private sector program, people would call it a pyramid scheme:

In 1999, 82% of the taxes that workers and employers paid into the Social Security system were spent to pay benefits for current recipients.

Ratio of people paying taxes to people receiving benefits:
Year Ratio
1950- 16.5 / 1
1960- 5.1 / 1
1970- 3.7 / 1
1980- 3.2 / 1
1990- 3.4 / 1
2000- 3.4 / 1
2030 (projected)- 2.1 / 1




Is social security discriminatory?

As of 1996, 30 year old black men have an average life expectancy of 2.4 years beyond their full retirement age. (White males - 8.6 years, Black females - 9.2 years, White females - 13.7 years)




The tax rate to support this program has steadily risen:

Social Security Tax Rate
Year Rate
1950 3%
1960 6%
1970 8.4%
1980 10.2%
1990 12.4%
2000 12.4%

Can you say pyramid scheme?




In my opinion, SS is just another “liberal” attempt to protect us from our own stupidity:

As of 2000, 1/3 of Americans have no savings and 1/3 have less than $2,500 in savings.

What is the percentage of Americans who own luxury items such as large color TVs?




SS undeniably does some good for people who, through mental or physical disability, need this program to keep them out of poverty. It does not help those who have never paid into the system, so there is a bottom level of competence required. SS does not protect the very bottom levels of society from poverty.

SS rewards people who make the choice not to save by creating a false sense of security. SS rewards people who do not educate themselves about the benefits of saving.

SS punishes those who put more into the system. By taxing benefits, SS punishes those who help others the most.

If you haven made the choice not to save, the program benefits you more. If you have made the choice to save, the program benefits others more.

I always benefit spiritually from helping others. I hate government programs that force people to reward poor decision making. It always comes down to a balancing act between positive consequences and negative consequences.

I think the system can be improved. I do not have a conservative view about SS. I do not want the status quo. I would not vote to keep SS in a “lock box.””

“I'm pretty confused about this issue. I see this as a financial boon to the financial services industry and, at best, risky to the American people. I am not very experienced in matters such as these, but don't a lot of folks take a real bath when investing in the stock market. Common sense tells me that it can't be a win-win situation for everyone. It is said by a U of Chicago study that the industry stands to make 940 billion dollars off a plan like this over a period of 75 years. That's wonderful for the financial services industry. How about me and the money I have been pumping into this over the last 30 years. I will be 50 next month and not as far from retirement as some of you. The 12.5% that is paid into SS from each and every paycheck helps fund current retirees. My age group seems to be smack in the middle of the ones who could get screwed royally by this.

How is this to be paid for without amounting more enormous debt. Even the White House has conceded that the 2 trillion dollar start-up costs of this program will hardly be offset by private SS accounts. So, where is the money going to come from, assuming the Fortunate Son-In-Chief's promise of no new payroll taxes is true?”

“When SS was setup it was designed to pay only the primary worker. A 1939 change in the law added survivors benefits and benefits for the retiree's spouse and children which is fine.

The thing that I don't like is that a person can receive SS even if they never worked. They are receiving payments based off their spouse. I can see that if their spouse is dead but not when they are alive.”

“Why should I be forced to pay 4% of my income into a government plan that is likely to have overhead and fees that pale against those charged in the private sector.

reformed lurker
7:34:19 PM
12/16/04

rl, who is forcing you to do this? I thought it was a voluntary thing you could do.”

“It's not a retirement plan either. It seems to have morphed into that in some people's minds. Like Ewker posted above, it was started after the Depression as a safety net.”

“The scary thing Acr is the number of people that take care of each retired person. Back in the mid-late50s it was something like 45 people for every one person collecting. Now it's way down to lie less than 12. And in 15 years it'll be like 3:1.

I personally don't want the government ot have a single penny more than I can get away with. They have not shown themselves to be very responsable with my mopney in any of their systems. So why should I pay them all this money every single week, they make interest off of it and then I get a fraction of it back when I need it? No thanks.”

“aero, your right it was a safety net. It has been a good one no matter what folks may say.

As far as the statement the money won't be there when I retire. You know I have heard that statement for well over 20 yrs. Guess what it is still there. People are still receiving SS.
Now if Bush changes it I am not sure if it will be there later on.

I could be wrong on this but I do remember reading that if your over a certain age you can't do the investing with the SS money. Bush's plan is designed for the young workers of today not older people.

People have to remember SS was a safety net. You are suppose to be saving towards your retirement like RL said he was.

The only bad thing about saving for your retirement is that if you get a divorce the spouse gets half of it. So make sure you both have retirement accounts.”

“Nigal, you apparently don't have a problem spending it on Iraqi social programs, right?”

““Nigal, you apparently don't have a problem spending it on Iraqi social programs, right?”

Apples to oranges aero. Stay on topic please.”

“They have not shown themselves to be very responsable with my mopney in any of their systems.-Nigal

I am.”

“Military spending is not the same as SS.

Sorry, I'm not bitin'...”

“This is a manufactured crisis. The SS admin projects the system to be solvent until 2042. The OBM says 2052. There is no crisis that requires major restructuring. There are those who have been selling the idea that SS won’t be around in the future for base ideological reasons. Too many people have bought into a lie. The cost to keep the current level of benefits is minor. A tweak or two is all that is in order.

I've been paying into this system for 28 years and gladly accepted the increased payroll taxes in the 80's that were designed to save the system. I'll be royally pissed if this 'reform' goes through.

If anyone votes to undermine SS to benefit Wall Street or ideological reasons, they should be held accountable when they are up for reelection.

For anyone who is interested, Paul Krugman has been examining this issue in depth in his NY Times column. He has a knack for making complex issues understandable to the layperson. Here is today's. The Times charges for articles more than a week old but you can read his older ones free at the unofficial Paul Krugman archive (click on columns). His last two are "Borrow, Speculate and Hope" and "Inventing a Crisis". I urge you to read them.
last edited: 12/17/04 9:14:27 AM”

“Thank you for the link. I would like to read more about this. My first impression is that this idea stinks on ice. i am also having a hard time finding anything that would be useful as far as info on how my questions can be answered...”

“I'll reinforce some random things I already saw posted.

SS is insurance, not retirement. It was designed to force you to depend on other retirement streams for retirement. Its there as insurance to keep you marginally out of poverty if the worst happens and you loose all of your retirement benefits/investments. It is also insurance in case you become disabled early in your life before you are able to save enough to support yourself w/o work. And the money to suport SS won't be gone for a very long time - and that time keeps stretching to a farther point as better estimates are made every year.

There is little to worry about, and don't rely on it as your sole retirement.”

“techntrek, I thought I remembered you saying you worked for SS. Thanks for your input.”

“I actually think that this is going to boomerang back on Bush just like health care did on Clinton. People just don't want grandiose new government programs.”

“No prob.

Yes, much ado about nothing.”

“arclite .... you said a lot of things there, some good......a lot really stupid and insulting.

My parents rely on SS for the bulk of their retirement. They are not "mentally or physically disabled". My parents worked their ass off, survived WWII, the Depression, raised a family, saved what they could and stayed married for 61 years and counting.

They are not being "rewarded for making poor decisions" and don't have a "false sense of security".

SS was a liberal scheme.....to protect old folks from the the harsh realities of life.
Just because some people don't have as much as others doesn't mean they are some parasitic loser.

You "always benefit spiritually from helping others" huh? BLECH!! Save your magnaminous love for someone else. Dad would peg you for a pompous a$$ in a heartbeat.

BTW

What do you call a Gator Fan with half a brain?

Gifted”

“Yeah arc! Take all your pompous facts and figures and shove 'em up yer ass sideways! LOL!

You've been quite humorous lately Jo. I like it. :)”

“JO makes a good point. Most of what my parents saved went towrds medication and my Dad's sickness in general to keep him alive 12 years longer than the docs gave him. My mom has to live on SS. She now lives with us, and her SS check is still about 800 dollars over making her eligible for medication under this so-called Medicare reform bill. So, I pay a lot of her expenses and her medication. This is a woman who worked all her life and never took something for nothing. Let me tell you, this burden isn't making my ability to save any money any easier.”

“I heard someone on the radio who said that SS could be made solvent by pegging reimbursements to cost of living rather than to wages. Wages go up faster than cost of living.

I'm not sure how good the math is behind this, and it would mean that someone depending on SS would slip farther behind the average wage earner - but it would keep alive the insurance aspect without demanding major expenditures.

Anyone know more about this?”

“So few people of the oldest generations (70+) were told to save for retirement, and those that did, didn't save enough. Many expected to work until they died. Part of the problem is that health care advances expanded their lives and that left a gap with no retirement savings to fill that gap.

People today incorrectly think that SS is now supposed to fill that gap and provide a comfortable retirement, which wasn't the goal at all. Its there to keep you from being a beggar on the street.

As a government employee my retirement will consist of Social Security, pension, and TSP (gov't 401k). Over half of the income is expected to come from the TSP. If I were irresponsible and didn't save anything in my TSP the pension and SS would keep me off the streets, but forget about dinners out or cruises to the Carribbean. Moral of the story - save the max amount allowed in your 401K, IRA, etc. Social Security is insurance.”

“Treebeard, check out the website I posted. It basically says the same thing you and violin talk about. The present system isn't broke yet.






JO, anyone would peg you for a cynical jacka$$.




“Just because some people don't have as much as others doesn't mean they are some parasitic loser.”

Where did you come up with this logic, moron? What rock did you crawl out from under?




My quote: “SS undeniably does some good for people who, through mental or physical disability, need this program to keep them out of poverty.”

Your interpretation: “My parents rely on SS for the bulk of their retirement. They are not "mentally or physically disabled". My parents worked their ass off, survived WWII, the Depression, raised a family, saved what they could and stayed married for 61 years and counting.”

What are you talking about you absolute $hit-hed? Do you even understand the concept of logic? My wife is disabled. She can’t drive, she can’t see, she can’t work. So the freakin’ flip what. How stupid are you?




You’ve missed the banana boat JO. You misinterpret and lack logical reason. How do you manage to type?

Is it any wonder that you only posted 26 bowl picks for a football contest with 28 bowl games?

Your parents may not be mentally disabled or parasitic losers, so what are you, adopted?”

“My Dad worked hard saved money with the best of them.
Nobody's going to tell me he or my Mom wasted time or money. This cracker couldn't shine my Dad's shoes.

Nigal.....what arc passed for fact is pure opinion and yeah....it was pompous BS.

gee Nigal....two compliments from you in as many days. Listen dude......I'm spoken for.

Treebeard....you are a good man for taking care of your Mom like that. Our parrents sound very similar. In the spirit of the holidays, peace guy.”

“"I heard someone on the radio who said that SS could be made solvent by pegging reimbursements to cost of living rather than to wages. Wages go up faster than cost of living."
-Pedxing

SS payments are currently increased annually based on cost-of-living. Not wages.

Wages only go up faster temporarily, then cost-of-living catches up and overtakes. Its a big pendulum that balances out over the long run. So even if they changed payments to some kind of average wage increase, long-term there would be little difference.

Reference: http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/COLA/
last edited: 12/17/04 1:53:28 PM”

“Thanks, JO! Back at ya! :)”

“Another windfall for Republican campaign contributors... surprise, surprise.”

“JO, you are nothing but a pathetic little geek hiding behind your keyboard.


You appear to have trouble talking about spirituality:

You "always benefit spiritually from helping others" huh? BLECH!! Save your magnaminous love for someone else. Dad would peg you for a pompous a$$ in a heartbeat.
JOmama

If someone who talks about spirituality is a “pompous a$$” you really are morally bankrupt. I’ve heard stories from the news pundits about “liberals” who squirm when the subject is brought up. These folk had no idea what “moral values” people were talking about in the election exit polls. Now I see the type of person they were talking about. You are such a perfect example of a morally bankrupt scumbag.




You misinterpret what I say:

Arc: “SS undeniably does some good for people who, through mental or physical disability, need this program to keep them out of poverty.”

JOmama: “My parents rely on SS for the bulk of their retirement. They are not "mentally or physically disabled".

I mention social security benefits for the mentally and physically disabled. What does that have to do with your parents NOT being mentally or physically disabled?

“Nobody's going to tell me he or my Mom wasted time or money.”
JOmama

You seem to want to go on and on with your irrelevant rants about your mommy and daddy. You’re a pathetic idiot.




You accuse me of having “half a brain” and being “gifted” when it’s you who can’t count to 28 and who enters a contest behind by 55 points before it even starts. You apparently have nothing better to do than waste your time. You are a pathetic loser.

Why do you bother to insult everyone’s intelligence? I’ll answer that: because you haven’t got a clue. You project your own stupidity upon others.

You aren’t even gifted, JO.




“Nigal.....what arc passed for fact is pure opinion and yeah....it was pompous BS.”
JOmama


Let’s get our facts straight. I post figures from a website, and I make comments that I EXPLAIN are my opinion.

JO, not only can’t you count to 28, you obviously can’t handle reading comprehension.




“This cracker couldn't shine my Dad's shoes.”
JOmama


Cracker huh? It’s a good thing you didn’t call me a kike, wetback, eyetalian, or n…r. None of those would have fit either, but the politically correct among us would have screamed BIGOT! Cracker doesn’t appear to be on the politically correct watch list. You probably thing you’re safe using such words, you slimy little bigot.


You’ve obviously got a daddy complex. Has daddy been sneaking into your bedroom at night, to peg you? Is that the hillbilly way?



Don't bother coming on the footballpalooza hike, JO. You'd stand out (or in your case, squeal) like a square peg.”

“That was a pretty impressive little rant arclite. Are all gator fans so thin-skinned and insecure? I really was impressed with your point-by-point rebutalls and counter insults, the JOmama stuff and all. Kind of like Rush Limbaugh does.

Me....a liberal? HA! And soul-less too. Ooooh!

Screw your little contest. I posted predictions from a list that was on TT. 26, 28, who cares. Oh no!!!! I won't win. Like the gators this year.

Hey, I didn't like your comments and I commented back at ya. BooHoo! About the worst I said was calling you a cracker...LOL...from your response you've probably heard worse. I officially apologize for insulting your long suffering ethnic group.
If you can't handle that stuff how ya gonna survive.

Go on with your rants and threats dude. Footballpalooza? Oh man.....sounds like a great time....so sorry I got blacklisted. So what would you do ifin I did come? You, Cooter and the boys gonna lynch me?”

“nothing like a thread changing over to name calling. Good ole TT, can't you feel the love...lol”

“JO - blacklisted? What is that referring to?”

“Go arclite! ;-)
LOL”

““Nigal.....what arc passed for fact is pure opinion and yeah....it was pompous BS.”
JOmama


Let’s get our facts straight. I post figures from a website, and I make comments that I EXPLAIN are my opinion."

Don't forget he accussed me of hitting on him for complementing his humor. I apologize to the guy for being mean, I leave him alone and even give him complements and this is what I get?

Some people want to be unhappy... LOL!”

“...aaaand back to Social Security.

Those fear mongers who claim that SS will not be there when they retire.

In its current form it would be, but benefits could be diluted or delayed.
Diluted would be like a bankrupcy, you may only get paid 80% of what you are due but that is still a long way from nothing which is what a lot of other countries have.

Some of the alternatives are not so nice. Delayed is discriminatory against those with a genetic disposition to die young, or who have worked in jobs that shorten lives. They pay in but never see any benefit.

I work for a company that does have a pension plan. I unofficially advise people who are retiring. A excel projection of the company pension gives the average life expectancy of an employee using a declining balance. I tell the retirees what this age is and advise them to take a look at their family history, how long did their parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles live. This is the best basis for deciding whether to take the pension, or to take a cash balance and invest. This way short lives can at least give some of what they earned to their family, and long lives are less likely to have the pension evaporate over time.

Another consideration is major illness, a hospital will empty your investments but cannot touch your pension. So how those relatives died is also extremely relevant.

SS is one leg of a three legged stool.
The other 2 are (opinion only)
Personal pension plans; Co.,pension, 401K, IRA etc.
Personal savings and investments, including any real estate owned.

we already own these second two so I am against GW on changing the first. People already have the means to save for their own retirement and invest.

I worked as a consultant for a while for a telephone company and was absolutely appalled at how many people had their entire 401k invested in the company stock, and this was well before it crashed. Enron is not the only company where poorly advised employees took a bath. I can easily foresee the same happening with the Bush plan.

To make it work it should be preceded by teaching investment fundamentals in high school and early college as a mandatory course for at least 10 years before implementing this kind of change.”

“Ah jeez...somebody's got to troll, pick on the right-wingers and get their goat. They do it to the left-wing liberals all the time.

Hey Nigal..... :))

that's a double-chinned happy face for you.”

“JO - what are you talking about being blacklisted?”

“I'd laugh at that Jo but I don't want ya to think I wanna have sex with ya. Ah what the hell, LOL!”

“I'd have to wager that any idea that manuka and I are both completely against is a bad one that deserves to die a thousand deaths.”

“Dayhiker....I can't come to Footballpalooza because I called arclite a CRACKER. Heck....it was a cracker on cracker remark.

Pssst! WTF is Footballpalooza anyway?”

“JO, the folks on the FB thread have had several trips together. Arky mentioned that he and a buddy were thinking of taking a trip to the Smokies and the timing coincided with chili's move to Knoxville. I emailed the folks that were in on the first one and asked if they'd like another go. Everyone said yes. It was mentioned on the FB thread that the trip might happen. I actually should announce the thing. There are folks like you, Nigal, Wounded Knee and others that post there. The general plan is the weekend of 10/23 to try and have a foliage type trip with some elevation gain. Maybe Gregory Bald. Then intent was not the exclusive, that was my fault.

You can come, especially since you called arc a Cracker. He's yet to show up to one of these trips either. There's always some crisis. I hear he's big on drama, though I haven't witnessed it myself.”

“Arc and Jo on the same trip huh? Maybe we could get Buddha B!tch and me to go to. All we need is one more ticket and we could go pay per view.”

“Buddha B!tch, now that's funny. I emailed him some stuff about unions last week and didn't get a response. The subject was about how in union jobs one person works and 38 people stand around. The email had a photo with a nude girl on a scaffolding laying bricks on a house. All the workers were standing there watching. I figured he'd at least get a chuckle out of it. Guess not.”

“If the girl was nude she couldnt have been carrying a union card.

No wonder BB was not amused, prolly doesnt like scabs”