- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Coming Social Security Crisis
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:46 am to ShermanTxTiger
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:46 am to ShermanTxTiger
quote:
The Govt only runs out of money when its asked to pay back working folks their original investment at a 2% ROI.
That's interesting. Link?
1
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:47 am to RoosterCogburn585
Right on time! The old "let's screw with Social Security" claim!!
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:49 am to GoblinGuide
quote:
I'm a ways out from collecting on SS so I won't claim to be an expert, but doesn't your payment depend at least in part on how much you've worked through your life? The guy with large swathes of unemployment is getting less per month than the guy who's worked since he was 16. If I'm off base can someone explain it better for me?
Didn't they change it a few years back to base it only on the last five years before retirement rather than your entire life?
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:50 am to RoosterCogburn585
Why don't we just get rid of SSI payments. That wasn't part of SS back in the day. Tons of able bodied people refuse to work and get paid by SSI 'because my back hurts.'
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:54 am to bengalfan50
quote:
Woke programs such as, Welfare-Food Stamps-Free Housing and Medicaid are all fine, never having been paid into by participants. Complete Government giveaways.
But the program that has been funded by participants and pillaged by the lying political non contributors is going broke.
If you believe this you are working for the woke agenda.
"Well it's obvious that you are not conservative!"
signed the Bots of the PT
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:55 am to La Place Mike
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:56 am to shinerfan
quote:
Didn't they change it a few years back to base it only on the last five years before retirement rather than your entire life?
No. It's based on your 35 best paid years.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:57 am to ShermanTxTiger
Link doesn't work.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:58 am to RoosterCogburn585
quote:
Ben Shapiro and Larry Fink have both come out and said retirement at 65 is crazy
These people will never work until the age of 65 but it's OK for YOU. If they do "work" they will be taking lavish vacations 6 months out of a year.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 9:58 am to keakar
quote:
if they can print a trillion dollars out of thin air for sending to ukraine, just print another trillion and stick it in the SS acount
Yeah, I don’t understand this either. There is always an endless supply of money for everything else, but unfortunately, they have no more money for Social Security.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:02 am to La Place Mike
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:05 am to bengalfan50
quote:
Woke programs such as, Welfare-Food Stamps-Free Housing and Medicaid are all fine, never having been paid into by participants. Complete Government giveaways.
But the program that has been funded by participants and pillaged by the lying political non contributors is going broke.
If you believe this you are working for the woke agenda.
100%
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:14 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
These people will never work until the age of 65 but it's OK for YOU. If they do "work" they will be taking lavish vacations 6 months out of a year.
I genuinely like Shapiro but he is 1000% wrong here. My full retirement for SS is 67. The life expectancy for me is currently 79.
So those turds are going to give me $3000 a month for 12 years? This comes to $432,000.00. I have already paid that in currently and my employer has matched it.
That would definitely help fix SS. Make people wait until they can collect (no interest) 12 years of contributions back.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:18 am to ShermanTxTiger
quote:
ShermanTxTiger
From the article linked.
quote:
Since we do not know what will happen on the policy front, I focused on the SSA's numbers assuming no change in current law. They found that every age group received a positive return. Among current workers and retirees, the rates of annual return varied by about two percentage points - from a high of 6.52 percent (for single-earning couples born in 1920) to 4.52 percent (for their counterparts born in 1985). So if you wonder whether you will "come out ahead" on Social Security, here are some key differentiating factors to keep in mind:
quote:
A single-earning couple with medium wages, born in 1943, will see a 4.59 rate of annual return, while a single female born the same year - also with medium wages - can expect a 2.49 percent return. (Spousal benefits are also available in cases where a lower-earning spouse had some earnings but so much less that their worker benefit is less than half.)
quote:
The odds here are especially good for women, since they have a higher likelihood of surviving to retirement age and longer lives after retirement. That gives them higher rates of Social Security return - a medium-earning single female born in 1943 can expect a 2.49 rate of return compared with 2.09 percent for her male counterpart.
--Lower-income workers come out ahead. Low-income workers enjoy higher rates of return by design, because Social Security's benefit formula is weighted toward lower-earning beneficiaries and their payroll tax contributions will be relatively lower. A very low-income couple born in 1943 will receive a 6.79 percent annual return, compared with 3.92 percent for their high-earning counterparts.
I don't see any returns less than 2.09,
Interesting article none the less.
This post was edited on 3/28/24 at 10:20 am
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:19 am to RoosterCogburn585
I never factored SS as part of my retirement. If you are counting on it to be there you will be sorely disappointed.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:20 am to Chrome
quote:
I never factored SS as part of my retirement. If you are counting on it to be there you will be sorely disappointed.
I agree, but that's hardly the point
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:23 am to Chrome
quote:
If you are counting on it to be there you will be sorely disappointed.
If you are implying that it will not be there at all then you will have a pleasant surprise when you find out it will be. Even if nothing is done there will be enough to fund SS for the next 75 years albeit at a lesser amount of 20 to 25 percent.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:24 am to RoosterCogburn585
With 7.3 million aliens rushing across the border, and the government giving them voting rights, free food, free health care, free housing, gun ownership and free $1500.00 debit cards every month, the money has to come from somewhere, and Social Security is one of their targets.
4 more years with this "ROTTEN" administration and they will restrict OUR gun ownership, limit OUR free speech, and rob part of OUR social security. Nothing good will come from this. Total control of the population is one of their hidden agendas and they're right on schedule.
4 more years with this "ROTTEN" administration and they will restrict OUR gun ownership, limit OUR free speech, and rob part of OUR social security. Nothing good will come from this. Total control of the population is one of their hidden agendas and they're right on schedule.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:37 am to RoosterCogburn585
quote:
Recently Ben Shapiro and Larry Fink have both come out and said retirement at 65 is crazy.
Retirement age is 67, not 65.
quote:
What they fail to mention is the tremendous strain people who have never contributed a dime to, but collect from social security.
You have to pay in for 7 years to get benefits. Benefits like SSI do not come from the SS trust fund.
SS is collecting 12.4% of everyone's pay up to the earnings ceiling, that is 6.2% paid by the employee and 6.2% paid by the employer. Together, that is more than most people every put into a 401K. For most people, the most they ever pay into 401K is about 6% from employee and 3% from company match, so the Gov is working with roughly 35% more money than 401K.
Theoretically, there are some non-working spouses that never pay in but get benefits. First, many of them work for at least a few years and pay in, then never collect on their own earnings history, second, 12.4% is enough to cover them anyway.
If the Government can't get it done with 12.4% over 35 years or so, the Government just can't get it done, and wouldn't be able to if the retirement age was raised to 80.
I say don't let them change benefit levels unless it is to increase them ( and it should be increased). The reason is that our government now wastes billions of dollars a year on stupid sh!t, the SS shortfall exists because of stupid government management of SS, and allowing them to reduce benefits will keep them from ever solving the problem and it will just come back worse.
Failing that, issue the present worth of my future SS benefits in the form of T-bills and allow me to put them directly into my IRA without taxes and trade them in my IRA account, maybe over 5-10 years so they all don't get traded away at once, and I will walk away happy with no SS. In other words, you can still kick the can down the road but I will at least have some opportunity to exit before the train wrecks. Yes, Treasury Bonds remain a part of my retirement plans, this way I get to manage them. No one is better at looking out for my best interests than me.
Posted on 3/28/24 at 10:38 am to Tantal
quote:
Yeah. I'm not in Social Security, but there's a reason that cops and firemen retire relatively young. At 50, just keeping up with the training takes a toll on my body now.
Well, thanks for what you do.
This should be obvious for most... our bodies break down in labor intensive jobs. I can't see how most go beyond their 30-40's in those jobs... such as foundries, construction and emergency services. Additionally, there are only so many positions those individuals can be promoted to.
But even beyond that, I've found, for many of us, our mental capacity is affected as we age. I already see impacts in my life and just turned 60. And senior employees tend to be better compensated than younger. So there is incentive to phase them out. I'm grateful to good health and an outstanding employer but I will age out in the next few years, whether I want to or not.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News