Social Security - your thoughts?

#801
#801
Volnanza said:
Good read. Reducing it to a personal level, it's like paying off your credit card with another credit card. Anyone that does that is usually in real bad financial shape. The same can be said for the country. And still, we can't get congress to address the problem, they just kick the can down the road.
Click to expand...
yep, it's all falling on the shoulders of future generations.
 
#802
#802
The Congressional Budget Office says to be prepared for Social Security check payments to be reduced in 6 years due to low funds

“It’ll be an immediate 7% payment cut in 2032, and then an average 28% benefit drop from 2033 onward”

You pay in your whole life and the government spends it and then tells you there is no money left

Congress is literally on record saying they spend out social security money straight from the social security fund

“A potential Social Security shakeup could impact your road to retirement. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is projecting that the main Social Security trust fund is expected to run dry in 2032. The CBO saying retirees could see their monthly checks reduced in just six years time.”

 
#803
#803
jmacvols1 said:
The Congressional Budget Office says to be prepared for Social Security check payments to be reduced in 6 years due to low funds

“It’ll be an immediate 7% payment cut in 2032, and then an average 28% benefit drop from 2033 onward”

You pay in your whole life and the government spends it and then tells you there is no money left

Congress is literally on record saying they spend out social security money straight from the social security fund

“A potential Social Security shakeup could impact your road to retirement. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is projecting that the main Social Security trust fund is expected to run dry in 2032. The CBO saying retirees could see their monthly checks reduced in just six years time.”

Click to expand...

Bush 2 Electric Boogaloo tried to fix this and he was eviscerated by the Ds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#807
#807
BigOrangeMojo said:
Anything the Rs say now about SS is hollow and hot air just like the Ds with gun control....
Click to expand...
Curiously, trumps done more gun control than Biden, and threatened to take guns away from others (trans). But somehow the faithful fail to see the warning signs.
 
#808
#808
Any fix for ss will have to include Medicare. Disability is kind of ignored in these reform debates, but it's a big part of the program.

For me, I'd establish minimum standard of living (housing, food) that included healthcare, but eliminates cash paid benefits and have ss become bond fund for beneficiaries instead of a pension.
 
#809
#809
jvol1 said:
Curiously, trumps done more gun control than Biden, and threatened to take guns away from others (trans). But somehow the faithful fail to see the warning signs.
Click to expand...

Dems had House, 60 seat Senate majority, and the SC in 2009-2010 and failed to pass any meaningful gun control.

I roll my eyes when they call for it now after every maas shooting...
 
#810
#810
They’ll just print more money.

There were enough Boomers to pay for the early Boomers and the generation(s) that preceded them.

There aren’t enough in Generation X to pay for the Boomers and the earlier stragglers.

The demographics trend will reverse or be flat as X, Y, and Z begin to receive benefits.

The Boomer generation didn’t shrink on schedule because the 11 million that have died since 2012 have been replaced by adding that many immigrants in that age range.

So it’s Generation X’s fault or the Boomers’ fault for not having enough kids.
 
#815
#815
Thunder Good-Oil said:
The break even age is probably pushing deep into the 80s.

Trump pushing for tax exempt payments doesn’t get enough attention.
Click to expand...

open social security site has BE around 81/82.

I go back and forth - don't need the money now but every time I see the CBO type stuff I think I better grab it while I can. I'm lucky enough to have a great pension so I don't really need the longevity insurance aspect of waiting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#817
#817
McDad said:
Bush 2 Electric Boogaloo tried to fix this and he was eviscerated by the Ds.
Click to expand...
2 problems;

When the Dems set op the SS law back in 1935 they required that surplus SS taxes collected (instead of being saved and invested) had to be loaned to the Treasury:

Grok: "The original 1935 Act created an "Old-Age Reserve Account" on the Treasury's books (not yet a formal trust fund). It required the Secretary of the Treasury to invest any portion of the credited amounts (from payroll taxes) not needed for current payments in interest-bearing obligations of the United States or in obligations guaranteed by the United States. This effectively meant surplus funds were used to purchase U.S. government securities, which loaned the money to the Treasury (and thus to the federal government) for general use, while the account earned interest.

In practice, this allowed the government to spend the surplus payroll taxes on other priorities while issuing special securities (or credits) to the Social Security account as a claim on future revenues. Official sources from the Social Security Administration describe it as the payroll taxes being "in effect... lent to the federal government."

SSA has collected about $2.9 trillion in surplus over the years and by law had to "loan" that money to the Treasury purchasing bonds while Congress spent that $209 trillion on items unrelated to social security. So the trust fund has nothing but bonds in it where the federal government effectively borrows the surplus to spend elsewhere, with the trust fund holding IOUs. SS would not be in the mess it is in if the SSA instead saved and invested that surplus instead of having to give it to Congress to spend. Now that they are having dip in the trust fund, Congress must borrow money today to pay back that surplus it spent years ago. (I made a post on this a few days ago, post #799)


The other problem, social security/medicare is insolvent is because most retirees get more in benefits than what they paid in taxes:

AI:
  • For a single man earning the average wage and retiring around 2020 at age 65: Lifetime benefits ≈ $640,000 vs. taxes paid ≈ $466,000–$470,000 (benefits exceed taxes by about 37%).
  • Average-earning couples retiring in recent or near-future years often receive 30–60% more in combined Social Security and Medicare benefits than taxes paid.
  • Lower-income workers see even higher ratios (e.g., benefits 2–3x taxes in some quintiles), while high earners approach a 1:1 ratio or less.
  • CBO projections for people born in the 1960s: Middle quintile gets about 50% more in lifetime benefits than contributions; lowest quintile gets nearly 3x; highest quintile gets roughly equal.
  • Long-Term Trend: By 2055, an average-earning dual-income couple is projected to receive nearly $2.5 million in benefits against $1.4 million in taxes.
  • Contributing Factors: This imbalance is driven by increased life expectancies, rising healthcare costs, and the progressive nature of the social security formula
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider
#818
#818
People solely relying on social security having no personal savings will get hit the hardest when checks get cut.
 
#819
#819
volinbham said:
open social security site has BE around 81/82.

I go back and forth - don't need the money now but every time I see the CBO type stuff I think I better grab it while I can. I'm lucky enough to have a great pension so I don't really need the longevity insurance aspect of waiting.
Click to expand...

If your wages are above the median, you are pushing close to 90 for breakeven...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#820
#820
Denny Hastert and Bill Frist didn't have the balls to help fix the problem. Kicked the can right down the road.
Bass turds.
 
#821
#821
volinbham said:
open social security site has BE around 81/82.

I go back and forth - don't need the money now but every time I see the CBO type stuff I think I better grab it while I can. I'm lucky enough to have a great pension so I don't really need the longevity insurance aspect of waiting.
Click to expand...
We planned as if there would be nothing for us. We're 55
 
  • Like
Reactions: LouderVol
#823
#823
McDad said:
We planned as if there would be nothing for us. We're 55
Click to expand...

63 - similar planning. Just trying to maximize but the missing variable is life expectancy. Reality is that it doesn't make a huge difference taking now vs waiting assuming I make it into mid 80s. Always figured I'd tap it when I found a lake house and use it to pay the mortgage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#824
#824
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#825
#825
BigOrangeMojo said:
By breakeven, Im referring to how long I have to live to receive payments that exceed my contributions plus my employer's contributions (assuming retirement age of 62 and current wages)...
Click to expand...

right - it happens in the late 70s/early 80s for me and I'm above median salary contributions for my benefit amount.

the open social security calculator implies breakeven though doesn't specify it specifically.

for reference, the max benefit at 67 is 4200ish, mine would be 3800 at that age. Average is about 2200 at 67.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top