- 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: Social Security - Help me understand better
Posted on 2/8/23 at 3:49 pm to Flats
Posted on 2/8/23 at 3:49 pm to Flats
quote:
SS taxes are separate from income taxes, everyone pays everyone is eligible for payments.
Do you care to defend your response to this post?
Pretty rich seeing you throw stones ITT.
1
Posted on 2/8/23 at 3:54 pm to Thecoz
quote:
They say the public would not be as responsible if it was self directed… but I guarantee you I did NOT borrow from my 401 before retirement..
My opinion.. leave my investment alone politicians and fix what you broke…. Btw… how is that Washington politician retirement and medical looking.. let’s cut that!
I’ve run the numbers but I’ll do it again. If you take the typical two income middle class household with a couple in their early 60’s, they have earned over that + 40 year period easily over $3 million…..that’s averaging roughly $75k annually.
Now take $3million x .153 = $460k (.153 is the combined tax rate of employee and employer for Social Security and Medicare)
That’s ^^^^^ the amount of Social Security and Medicare taxes paid by this married couple during their working lives, now imagine if that $460k were in a restricted investment, (restricted meaning you have no access to the investment until you are of retirement age) if that money was in a simple bond fund or treasuries or a broad S+P/Dow mutual fund, with an annual return of 4-5% the investment would have grown to well over $1 million dollars by the time that couple retired.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 4:16 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
many of those people are making heaps of money and would like to continue to do so and their employers would like for them to do so also but they can't afford to because the taxation on the ss income would negate most of the gain
If I read you right the retort is not at age 67. At age 67 I asm free to take SS that is 80% of what I would get if I waited until age 70 and still make as much W2 income as I can. Prior to age 67 SS is reduced if you make over a certain amount. So at 67 I will start taking SS. There's no way in hell that I'd take the pittance that I'd get at age 62 and then be forced to make under $22000 a year additionally.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 4:17 pm to Bass Tiger
Social security is a ripoff, but 2.9% of that is for Medicare and 6.2% is being paid by the employer.
Most people absolutely don’t have the discipline needed to save 15% for retirement.
Most people absolutely don’t have the discipline needed to save 15% for retirement.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 4:29 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
This is not true. It is a widely held myth based on the fact that the money is indeed invested, by law, into bonds and the like because it would make zero sense for it to be sitting around losing money with inflation
It’s only invested after covering current liabilities and we are closing in on a deficit within the program. .. the misconception comes in the past whrn yes it was invested in bonds and immediately borrowed against to fund the general budget This is the whole crux of Al Gores lockbox idea which he was correct in desiring to put away.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 4:59 pm to AwgustaDawg
quote:
Social security has been a SMASHING success in every way imaginable and is one of the few things in the US that is almost universally seen as a net positive
I haven't read all of your replies but a lot of them made sense and are rational. Smashing success might be a stretch though. Social Security hasn't kept up with actuary tables or demographic changes. Social Security started when life expectancies were in the mid 60's and we had a vastly different population demographic. The biggest change to SS to address this was moving Full Retirement Age to 67 which hasn't been enough to shore it up. Folks need to be realistic and accept that we need to raise the Full Retirement Benefit to age 70 and possibly move the early number from 62 to 65.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 5:19 pm to Thecoz
quote:
The single biggest problem with SS is the dark nasty secret that our government has been borrowing from the funds for so long that there is no chance of it ever being paid back..
This.
Add SS(as we’ve known for a long time) to the long line of examples, programs, responsibilities, ect that the government screwed up, wasted, and flat out embezzled.
Name one good thing the government runs correctly. A single facet of anything the government controls that is efficient and successful, sans maybe the military. But when you spend more than the next 8 countries combined you sure as shite better not come in first place.
It blows my mind how the anyone in their right mind can continue to vote for the government to have more power, more money, more control, less freedoms for the people, when the government has demonstrated time and time again it is completely inept running anything.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 5:25 pm to southdowns84
quote:
Social security is a ripoff, but 2.9% of that is for Medicare and 6.2% is being paid by the employer. Most people absolutely don’t have the discipline needed to save 15% for retirement.
You would not have a choice with my plan because it's still government regulated but it's your account. Maybe the max amount allowable in equities would be 30% and the rest would be in some type of treasuries/bonds......bottom line it's your account and not some big slush fund that's wasted by the federal government.....it may actually incentivize able bodied people who are sitting on their asses to get out and work or receive nothing.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 5:35 pm to BugAC
quote:
SS is a net drain, and by thte time i retire, i doubt i'll even get what i've been putting in.
I've heard this tired saying since the 70's by my dad and his friends and family. He retired and started drawing SS in 2004 and to this day is still drawing SS payments at 82 years old.
Doing anything to stop, cancel or even reduce SS is political suicide by any party member of Congress. They love their cushy jobs so they will find a way, but they (Democrats) will always use those same old scare tactics to get people saying exactly what you're saying. They're winning that lie.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 5:36 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
You would not have a choice with my plan because it's still government regulated but it's your account. Maybe the max amount allowable in equities would be 30% and the rest would be in some type of treasuries/bonds......bottom line it's your account and not some big slush fund that's wasted by the federal government.....it may actually incentivize able bodied people who are sitting on their asses to get out and work or receive nothing.
I agree with all of this. It’s just that I have little faith that people will be financially responsible.
I’m actually scared to death the government is going to need to bail out folks that didn’t save enough. Previous generations had pensions. Most people retiring today do not.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 6:27 pm to FMtTXtiger
$1000 invested in the stock market 40 years ago would be about $36,000 today at the market's average growth rate of 9%.
$1000 invested in the SS "Trust Fund" 40 years ago comes out to about $2,200 at the "Trust Fund" interest rate of about 2%. Inflation has averaged about 4% over the last 40 years.
$1000 invested in the SS "Trust Fund" 40 years ago comes out to about $2,200 at the "Trust Fund" interest rate of about 2%. Inflation has averaged about 4% over the last 40 years.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 6:35 pm to Auburn1968
quote:
$1000 invested in the stock market 40 years ago would be about $36,000 today at the market's average growth rate of 9%. $1000 invested in the SS "Trust Fund" 40 years ago comes out to about $2,200 at the "Trust Fund" interest rate of about 2%. Inflation has averaged about 4% over the last 40 years.
No one is disputing this.
$0 invested in the stock market 40 years ago is worth about $0 today. Most Americans are stupid. That’s the problem.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 6:46 pm to southdowns84
quote:
Do you care to defend your response to this post?
Pretty rich seeing you throw stones ITT.
My response that linked the SS page saying that only people who work pay into SS? Everyone does NOT pay. There are people on SS benefits who have never paid a dime, and the second part of his statement was flat incorrect.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 7:45 pm to Flats
social security IS a ponzi scheme,you have 3 people working putting into the system for every person collecting.do you contribute enough in a month to pay a third of a retirees pension? we were supposed to have 15 to 20 working for every 1 collecting
Posted on 2/8/23 at 7:53 pm to southdowns84
quote:
I agree with all of this. It’s just that I have little faith that people will be financially responsible.
I’m actually scared to death the government is going to need to bail out folks that didn’t save enough. Previous generations had pensions. Most people retiring today do not.
You would have no choice but to pay with my plan unless you're working cash or barter. Your paycheck would still show the deductions for Social Security and Medicare but it would be your account and not a huge general fund the government is currently controlling and mismanaging.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 8:00 pm to FMtTXtiger
No one is going to beat Ida May Fuller, (at least on a percentage basis).
The first Social Security recipient, Ida May Fuller
The first Social Security recipient, Ida May Fuller
quote:
On January 31, 1940, the first monthly retirement check was issued to Ida May Fuller of Ludlow, Vermont, in the amount of $22.54. Miss Fuller, a Legal Secretary, retired in November 1939. She started collecting benefits in January 1940 at age 65 and lived to be 100 years old, dying in 1975.
Ida May Fuller worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 9:00 pm to Flats
quote:
My response that linked the SS page saying that only people who work pay into SS?.
No you fvcking idiot. The part I quoted about social security being separate from income taxes. That poster clearly meant everyone that has a job pays into social security, which is a distinction from income tax.
You can try to backtrack all you want, but you were clearly foolish.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 9:13 pm to southdowns84
quote:
You can try to backtrack all you want, but you were clearly foolish.
Read his post, mensa. He claimed that everybody pays, which is false. You repeated it in your challenge, and it’s still false. You don’t have to pay into SS to collect.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 10:12 pm to Flats
quote:
Read his post, mensa. He claimed that everybody pays, which is false. You repeated it in your challenge, and it’s still false. You don’t have to pay into SS to collect.
Jesus raptor riding Christ, that’s clearly not what was being discussed. The first sentence I quoted is as clear as day. It’s why there’s about 10 to 20 posts trying to clarify the distinction between income tax and payroll tax ITT. Numb nuts like you.
Posted on 2/8/23 at 10:29 pm to southdowns84
quote:
The first sentence I quoted is as clear as day.
So is the second one.
I’m not sure why you’re having a meltdown; I linked to the SS page. It’s not as if I was putting out false information, you just made a poor assumption about the part I disagreed with.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News