- 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
udtiger's plan to save Social Security
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:31 am
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:31 am
1) 55 and older - in system. Benefits not subject to income tax.
2) 45-54 - can stay in system like 55+, or can do hybrid 50% SS and 50% self directed mandatory account. They have to forego 50% of what they have contributed to SS. All of employer's share goes to SS as well as 3.75% (half of employees share). Can put 3.75% in their own account, that they own. Account had to be at least 50% US Treasury instruments. Pre-tax (so reduces taxable income). SS benefits not subject to tax. Self directed account subject to 10% flat tax from dollar one once withdrawals start.
3) under 45 - can stay in system or can opt out completely. Must forego all.contributed to that point. Same as #2 except the entire "employee's" 6.25% goes into the self-directed account. 15% flat tax.on withdrawal.
4) self-directed accounts owned by the account holder and are heritable. There is no requirement for withdrawal. On death, the applicable tax would apply (either 10 or 15% depending on which choice).
This would fund the system going forward, would greatly extend its life, and would likely result in the system dying on its own as more and more under 45 would opt out.
Over time, as the number of potential beneficiaries go down, the taxes going into SS could be reduced (or the percentages shifted)
2) 45-54 - can stay in system like 55+, or can do hybrid 50% SS and 50% self directed mandatory account. They have to forego 50% of what they have contributed to SS. All of employer's share goes to SS as well as 3.75% (half of employees share). Can put 3.75% in their own account, that they own. Account had to be at least 50% US Treasury instruments. Pre-tax (so reduces taxable income). SS benefits not subject to tax. Self directed account subject to 10% flat tax from dollar one once withdrawals start.
3) under 45 - can stay in system or can opt out completely. Must forego all.contributed to that point. Same as #2 except the entire "employee's" 6.25% goes into the self-directed account. 15% flat tax.on withdrawal.
4) self-directed accounts owned by the account holder and are heritable. There is no requirement for withdrawal. On death, the applicable tax would apply (either 10 or 15% depending on which choice).
This would fund the system going forward, would greatly extend its life, and would likely result in the system dying on its own as more and more under 45 would opt out.
Over time, as the number of potential beneficiaries go down, the taxes going into SS could be reduced (or the percentages shifted)
20
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:34 am to udtiger
quote:
udtiger's plan to save Social Security
You have an interesting way of speaking, lol.
This post was edited on 12/22/24 at 9:35 am
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:37 am to udtiger
Why should you be taxed on your own money if your opting out when a 40+ yo has been paying into it for 20+yrs and forfeiting that money?
Or are you saying that money will be transferred back to that person? Nvm I reread it statement above stands.
Or are you saying that money will be transferred back to that person? Nvm I reread it statement above stands.
This post was edited on 12/22/24 at 9:39 am
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:38 am to udtiger
It's worth talking about.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:41 am to udtiger
Not one Dem vote because it phases out the marxism.
And they’d have their propaganda outlets demonizing the plan and anybody planning to vote for it.
And they’d have their propaganda outlets demonizing the plan and anybody planning to vote for it.
This post was edited on 12/22/24 at 9:43 am
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:42 am to udtiger
Right now what is the current level of payroll tax revenue for SS and Medicare? What is the current level of SS and Medicare payments?
Are payroll taxes too low?
Are payroll taxes too low?
This post was edited on 12/22/24 at 9:43 am
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:42 am to udtiger
quote:
3) under 45 - can stay in system or can opt out completely. Must forego all.contributed to that point.
No.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:43 am to udtiger
Have larger families and quit relying on gooooooooooooooooooberment for a retirement benefit. Pressure politicos to stop the goooooooooooooooberment pension insanity and cap them no higher than $4,500 monthly.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:45 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
quote:
3) under 45 - can stay in system or can opt out completely. Must forego all.contributed to that point.
No.
You do realize that money is not there, right?
Also, it's not required. You can opt for the other choices.
But you can bet that at least 80% of all new workers will choose #3, which alone will be a boon to the system.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:48 am to udtiger
Do Milton Friedman's plan implemented in Chile with minor adjustments based on their experience.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:49 am to udtiger
Have you run investment tables on this to indicate potential future income at say, age 62, age 67 and age 70 retirement years? Fun to put things in writing as abstracts, but it's just blowing smoke up people's asses if you've not run the numbers and accounted for average loss of jobs and thus, decreased funding of the numbers using data from Dept of Labor or inflation.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:50 am to udtiger
quote:
udtiger
There are ways that the rinos and dems refuse to talk about because that would promote harmony and solutions.
You will get the boo crew (like Roger) telling you that there is no other way but "Insert Lincoln Project/RINO) talking lines.
I like the general idea of what you are getting at.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:53 am to udtiger
I am 45 and would absolutely forgo my money in if I could opt out now
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:54 am to udtiger
quote:
You do realize that money is not there, right?
You realize that’s not my problem, right?
Perhaps if I had chosen originally to have 12% of my pay put towards social security and then later decided I didn’t want to do it, you may have a point.
But I didn’t get to make that decision, it was made for me. The people that made that decision can figure out how to get me back my “contributions” they decided I had to give.
quote:
But you can bet that at least 80% of all new workers will choose #3, which alone will be a boon to the system.
Correct. At a certain point in the not too distant future, your solution fixes the problem. Even more reason for the people that decided to take the “contributions” of everyone under 45 to repay those debts.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:54 am to udtiger
80 year old ponzi schemes are hard to undo. Everyone needs to stay in it and government needs to pay back every penny they have stolen from the SS trust fund. Problem solved. Once the money is paid back to make SS solvent for the next 40 years, make it voluntary or whatever you want.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 9:58 am to udtiger
quote:
3) under 45 - can stay in system or can opt out completely. Must forego all.contributed to that point.
So can you write that off as a loss on your income tax?
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:02 am to udtiger
Bush, Jr. proposed gradual movement to private accounts, starting at something like 5%. Dems screamed that everyone will become homeless and die. They're gonna do the same thing again.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:03 am to udtiger
The government just needs to treat SS just as it was intended when first passed. Set it aside as the peoples money and keep their hands off of it. Then to correct all their theft of the funds from the previous years, the government should have to allocate 20% of all foreign aid funding, other entitlement funding, and discretionary spending funding to SS.
Its a simple concept of using the people tax money to pay the people first. The same concept taught for individual investing of pay yourself first.
Its a simple concept of using the people tax money to pay the people first. The same concept taught for individual investing of pay yourself first.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:13 am to Open Your Eyes
quote:
You realize that’s not my problem, right?
Perhaps if I had chosen originally to have 12% of my pay put towards social security and then later decided I didn’t want to do it, you may have a point.
But I didn’t get to make that decision, it was made for me. The people that made that decision can figure out how to get me back my “contributions” they decided I had to give.
I agree with you on that. My solutions:
- Starting on opt out, you get a % per month until you get your money back. Whatever that % is runs through retirement.
- At 60, payments start.
The general idea is that Social Security is fixable. But again, you will have RINOs and DEMS screaming to high heaven.
Posted on 12/22/24 at 10:14 am to Zach
quote:
Bush, Jr. proposed gradual movement to private accounts, starting at something like 5%. Dems screamed that everyone will become homeless and die. They're gonna do the same thing again.
The time.has come for hard choices.
Once people know they can stay in SS if they wish, that people close to retirement are protected and the young know they can get the frick out, coupled with X and other social media bypassing the media mouthpiece, I think it would be different this time.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News