- 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 Summary
Posted on 7/10/26 at 11:45 am to FOBW
Posted on 7/10/26 at 11:45 am to FOBW
quote:
Assuming they keep paying, anyone who thinks SS is a bad deal for the recipients is dumb.
If you walked into a financial planner's office as a 22y/o, told him you're going to contribute 12.4% of every paycheck to a retirement plan, and he said "Great! Put it all into 30-yr T-bonds," he'd deserve to lose his license.
Why?
Because 40 yrs later, every $1 invested that way would be worth about $4.50 (nominally). The same $1 invested in an S&P ETF would be worth >$100.
... and SS ROI underperforms 30-yr T-bonds by ~20%.
There is but one beneficiary of SS. That beneficiary is Uncle Sam, the borrower.
0
Posted on 7/10/26 at 12:07 pm to cgrand
quote:
I firmly believe that taking the money on day one (age 62) is the right thing to do.
I'm getting behind this more and more. I won't need it, so I would just invest it but a part of me feels like if it's still fully there for me in 11 years then I want to get in on it before it diminishes. Also, I just don't know if I'll live long enough for it to matter by waiting. My CFP keeps saying since I was the high earner, I should wait till 70 because of the increased benefits for my wife, but she'll be fine
Posted on 7/10/26 at 4:43 pm to cgrand
quote:
I firmly believe that taking the money on day one (age 62) is the right thing to do.
Will likely be my plan as well. I don't understand waiting. If I take payments at 62 vs full retirement at 67 I will have to live until 77 before hitting my BEP. This does not include annual inflation escalations.
If I take payments at 62 and invest 2/3's money taken until 67 with a 10% annualized return for those 5 years I would have to live to 85 for my BEP.
In the second scenario if I die on my 67th birthday then my heirs have an additional $200K in inheritance vs getting nothing from SS.
In my opinion the only financial reason to wait is you actually need the SS payments to offset expenses during retirement.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 5:17 pm to armytiger96
correct
I plan on using every dime of the payment every month to DCA into positions I already hold. I know what I’m doing at this point regarding risk I’m willing to take. Am I’m not willing to risk dying before I get as much of my money back as I can
I plan on using every dime of the payment every month to DCA into positions I already hold. I know what I’m doing at this point regarding risk I’m willing to take. Am I’m not willing to risk dying before I get as much of my money back as I can
Posted on 7/10/26 at 6:26 pm to cgrand
I'm building my retirement home this fall, but once that is done and settled, I'm going ahead and filing. No reason to wait beyond 62.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:41 pm to Tiger in Gatorland
quote:
Are we ready to let old people or disabled people who didn’t save sufficiently, die on the streets?
If I say yes can we not have this idiotic argument. If people were allowed their own freedom and pissed it away. Well life lesson learned
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:46 pm to Ramblin Wreck
quote:
If I choose to withdraw at 62, I will receive less than $3K per month. What a bargain!
you just need to figure out how long you are going to live. The SS Actuaries have our life expectancy around 84 yrs. The summary draw lines all converge at about 84 for if you start drawing at 62, 67 (FRA), or 70. If you plan on living past 84 you will beat the system by waiting until 70. If you plan on dieing before 84 you beat the system drawing early.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:50 pm to ronricks
quote:
I’m 46. If I could opt of SS for a lump sum payout of 50% tax free of what I have contributed to this point I would take it and investing that money would come out way ahead of any SS disbursements I would get. I’d love it if our government let people opt out in such a scenario
Honestly id opt out for 25% even. Just stop making me pay into something that should be illegal
Posted on 7/10/26 at 7:56 pm to DeplorableTerrorizer
well it will be insolvent in 2032 so no matter who is in office or majority in congress will have to do something
First step will be means testing; above a certain net worth will forfeit benefits. That will kick the can a few years. Then benefits will expire at death (no spousal benefits). Then means testing threshold will be lowered, then SS taxes will be raised.
It’s gonna get ugly. I would advise anyone approaching 62 to take the money now
First step will be means testing; above a certain net worth will forfeit benefits. That will kick the can a few years. Then benefits will expire at death (no spousal benefits). Then means testing threshold will be lowered, then SS taxes will be raised.
It’s gonna get ugly. I would advise anyone approaching 62 to take the money now
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:10 pm to Ramblin Wreck
And that's not the worse part. Thanks to Joe Biden and his mafia democrat pals most likely Social Security benefits will NOT be there for you when you decide to retire.
Why do I say that? Back in the eighties Congress came up with a tax plan designed to save S/S. Joe Biden and the democrats pulled the old bait and switch and stole the so-called Social Security Trust Fund.
I was there I watched in disgust on television as the majority democrats in Congress voted to do away with the Social Security Trust Fund and simply treat the Social Security taxes paid by the employers and employees as just another government income stream.
To me the plan appeared to be workable. The existing funds plus the monies from employer and employee S/S taxes would grow the fund enough to where the money would be there when those Baby Boomers retire. Even at simple interest return the Trust Fund would grow sufficiently to more than cover benefits for future retires.
The move so incensed Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) that he pranced on the floor of the Senate glaring at his colleagues and blurted out,"It's official we stealing from the American people".
Joe Biden and his crooked mafia democrat pals went on to steal some more. Even putting illegal aliens on Social Security.
Social Security was our money. It's money paid by workers and their employers. They stole it. Social Security is now an illusion. The S/S monies they stole is included in that $ 38 trillion dollar debt that hangs over every single American man, woman and child.
Joe Biden and the mafia democrats stole everything. Don't believe me? Do your own research.
Why do I say that? Back in the eighties Congress came up with a tax plan designed to save S/S. Joe Biden and the democrats pulled the old bait and switch and stole the so-called Social Security Trust Fund.
I was there I watched in disgust on television as the majority democrats in Congress voted to do away with the Social Security Trust Fund and simply treat the Social Security taxes paid by the employers and employees as just another government income stream.
To me the plan appeared to be workable. The existing funds plus the monies from employer and employee S/S taxes would grow the fund enough to where the money would be there when those Baby Boomers retire. Even at simple interest return the Trust Fund would grow sufficiently to more than cover benefits for future retires.
The move so incensed Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) that he pranced on the floor of the Senate glaring at his colleagues and blurted out,"It's official we stealing from the American people".
Joe Biden and his crooked mafia democrat pals went on to steal some more. Even putting illegal aliens on Social Security.
Social Security was our money. It's money paid by workers and their employers. They stole it. Social Security is now an illusion. The S/S monies they stole is included in that $ 38 trillion dollar debt that hangs over every single American man, woman and child.
Joe Biden and the mafia democrats stole everything. Don't believe me? Do your own research.
This post was edited on 7/10/26 at 8:19 pm
Posted on 7/10/26 at 8:52 pm to faraway
quote:
without knowing your age, we can't really say much about it. if you're 60, that's a good deal for you except you can't leave any of it to your family.
OP says this was over 40 years. If that money would have been invested monthly in the S&P 500 starting 40 years ago, it would be worth more than $10,000,000 today … and he could leave it to his family.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:03 pm to cgrand
quote:
well it will be insolvent in 2032 so no matter who is in office or majority in congress will have to do something
It has to go away right now.
Im in my 30's and willing to forfeit everything I have paid in right now under 2 conditions:
1) I never have to pay into it again
2) my kids never have to pay a nickel for whatever kind of shitty replacement the government rolls out immediately after.
Social security is a fricking revenue stream for the government and it needs to be taken out back and shot right now. Its going to be ugly for someone. Id rather it be me than my kids.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:25 pm to OysterPoBoy
quote:
How long do you plan to live?
It doesn’t matter. That $500,000 would probably be a million now. That would spin off That would spin off $50k per year without lowering the buying power of the principle. He is saying he would only get $36k per year from social security, and that is starting sometime in the future, so the million bucks would be even more then. And the 50 grand we spitballed doesn’t even include degrading the principle.
Posted on 7/10/26 at 9:31 pm to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:Sorry amigo, it’s the law.
It has to go away right now.
Im in my 30's and willing to forfeit everything I have paid in right now under 2 conditions:
Posted on 7/10/26 at 10:38 pm to soccerfüt
So what are the solutions to save SS?
If they cut it by 20%, I can live with that. Projected 2800 at 62 yo, 3500 at 65.
20% off
2240 at 62
2800 at 65.
Straight robbery considering my combine contributions with employer will be in excess of 500K by 62yo.
If they cut it by 20%, I can live with that. Projected 2800 at 62 yo, 3500 at 65.
20% off
2240 at 62
2800 at 65.
Straight robbery considering my combine contributions with employer will be in excess of 500K by 62yo.
This post was edited on 7/10/26 at 11:29 pm
Posted on 7/11/26 at 5:10 am to soccerfüt
quote:
Sorry amigo, it’s the law.
Oh I know. A young high earner like myself must pay so the old people today can get their checks because its their money and they need it now.
It needs to fricking die, right now.
Posted on 7/11/26 at 5:16 am to faraway
quote:
I'm not smart enough to calculate the most accurate numbers, but if he had saved 250,000 and put that in S&P 500 in 2015, that would be worth about $1.1m now. I figure the 250k is conservative for where he was in 2015.
Imagine if he had just been buying a little bit for the past 30 years.
He'd be worth well over 10 million
Posted on 7/11/26 at 6:10 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:No. You think you know, but you don't. And that's a problem, because it leaves you as a patsy misplacing blame.
Oh I know. A young high earner like myself must pay so the old people today can get their checks because its their money and they need it now.
If someone buys a US Savings Bond, must a young high earner like yourself pay for it. Yes, insofar as the money for repayment must actually come from somewhere, you as a taxpayer eventually do pay for it.
Does that mean the buyer of the bond is ripping you off, or is greedy, or is a suckling attached to the government tit? Nope. He bought a US debt obligation and, IAW the 14th Amendment, he is due repayment on his investment.
The only difference between that, and SS, is the "buyer of the bond" above is doing so voluntarily. SS otoh, is obligatory. It forces one to invest in US Debt obligations. With SS, "the buyer of the bond" is given no choice as to the purchase, the type of bond, the length to maturity, or the amount of the 'investment.' All of those parameters are dictated to him. The ROI is pathetic, and is wholly determined by the government.
Here's where it gets especially lovely. If the government simply stipulated a paltry 3.6% avg ROI on SS contributions, SS would be solvent w/o adjustment for the next 100yrs and beyond. But because the government is both the borrower, and the dictator of terms of the borrow, it awards an avg ROI of just 3%.
That 3% borrow is a phenomenal deal for the government.
It is the cheapest, most reliable debt vehicle Uncle Sam possesses.
Which means government will do everything in its power to perpetuate the rip off. Eventually such perpetuation involves lying and scamming young high earners like yourself, insisting that you MUST pay even more "so the old people today can get their checks (which have already been paid for buy those old people)." You've bought into the scam.
Posted on 7/11/26 at 6:41 am to cgrand
quote:Which is actually another pot of BS the government is cooking up to feed you.
Social Security Summary
well it will be insolvent in 2032 so no matter who is in office or majority in congress will have to do something
We are currently running 34% annual deficits in the general fund.
Meanwhile SS, via its SSTF, remains $2T in the black.
But SS is outspending revenue at 20%/yr, which will eventually zero out the SSTF.
At that point, SS will actually be in the red to the tune of 20% per year.
However, the presumption that a 20% deficit would constitute "insolvency" while a 34% deficit is "business as usual" is audacious.
Posted on 7/11/26 at 8:21 am to Lesalli
quote:you can look up online in about 5 minutes.
haven't gotten a report mailed in over 10 years. I was curious about mine.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News