maybe just maybe ..nobody in washington cares.

Let's see, no Social Security by 2041? Hmmm, I'll be 90 then. As Vice President Dick Cheney would say,

"So?"

In my opinion.. anyone who doesn't take it at 62.. Is a Fool..... (Just my opinion...)

Wray..

Here’s a silly question. If they know this now is Social Security going to reimburse me for what I have paid into it, if the funds won’t be there for me to collect in my retirement years? If not I think I should have the option of stop paying into it.

I am now 31, I have been hearing this since Highschool back in 90's. its nothing new just a new topic to look at for the future Prezzz to grapple

quote:

Originally posted by arcnspark71:
Here’s a silly question. If they know this now is Social Security going to reimburse me for what I have paid into it, if the funds won’t be there for me to collect in my retirement years? If not I think I should have the option of stop paying into it.

Don't fool yourself for one moment that you have been contributing to a trust fund. There is NO trust fund. Workers paying the FICA tax are only contributing to today's retirees.

If you tried this in any other field other than government, you would be arrested, tried and found guilty of executing a ponzi scheme.

Problem is, a ponzi scheme depends on current "investors" to keep the system alive. As with the ponzi, Social Security benefits can only be paid if there are enough currently paying into the system. Remember, American jobs that are outsourced to Mexico, China, Japan or any other foreign nation do not pay into the Social Security system. Neither do workers who are part of the underground economy such as illegal alien day laborers.

Much of the FICA contribution goes into the U.S. general fund in order to make the current budget look better than it actually is.

If anyone is depending on Social Security to even remotely healp them in their old age ought to seriously think again and immediately begin an alternate savings/investment program that is reliable (and legal).

Anyone who depends on the good intentions of government ought to think again. The road to Hell (misery and dissappointment) is paved with these good intentions.

quote:

Originally posted by MarcusLeftcoastus:
If anyone is depending on Social Security to even remotely healp them in their old age ought to seriously think again and immediately begin an alternate savings/investment program that is reliable (and legal).

Or go to work for the rail road they don't pay Social Security.

So, what are your solutions on how to fix the problem? Raise retirement age? Privatize a portion of it? Privatization altogether?

I say a combination of raising retirement age and privatizing a small percentage of SS. Unfortunately SOME people in Washington are focused on the here-now rather than looking into the future and the President is not one of them.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/social-security/

quote:

So, what are your solutions on how to fix the problem? Raise retirement age? Privatize a portion of it? Privatization altogether?

Trusting the federal government to come up with a solution to Social Security is akin to trusting the corner ponzi operator. Too many self-interests involved.

My wife, being a school teacher, is on a seperate program known as California State Retirement System (CALSTRS) which, unlike Social Security, actually takes the employee's contribution and invests it in the market. None of the money goes into the state general revenue fund.

THAT would be my solution for the federal Social Security mess. Any sort of conversion would have to be incremental and not all at once. Retirement dividents would ONLY go to the member investors themselves and NOT to former illegal alien workers living back in their own country as is the case with Social Security itself.

And like CALSTRS, a reformed Social Security program, would need to emply competant money managers to see to the market investing of funds collected from the membership. The revenue (FICA payroll tax) would NOT be diverted into the U.S. general fund. Instead of revenue fattening up an already obese government as does FICA, wouldn't the money be better used as capital investments toward the private sector (more jobs created for once thing)?

The general argument concerning this sort of program is usually, if the market goes down into recession or worse, depression, won't the dividends be lowered. The answer is yes. But wouldn't this system be better then what we have now?

However, I'm not very optimistic that a voluntary solution will come to Social Security. Change will only come as the result of catastrophy as is always the case in a nation which does not see the need of prevention but only acts in reaction to one crisis or another. And as alluded to above, too many fat cats in government are dependant on revenue from FICA payroll taxes.

The best thing that we the individuals can do NOW is to take responsibility for our own futures and invest ourselves. Tax Sheltered Annuities (TSP) programs are good for this. You would need to sacrafice (cut spending) and divert some money but in the long run, it would be well worth it to depend not on government programs but on yourself.

That would be my solution, be it as it may.

mw

quote:

If anyone is depending on Social Security to even remotely healp them in their old age ought to seriously think again and immediately begin an alternate savings/investment program that is reliable (and legal).

Anyone who depends on the good intentions of government ought to think again. The road to Hell (misery and dissappointment) is paved with these good intentions.

Mark, I certainly agree 100%.... While not "depending" on it, you can bet your A$$ the Boatswain's Mate is smart enough to grab the money while it is there. Will there be any left for my kids.. don't know, and there is absolutely nothing I can do about it..

I'm T minus 2 years and counting...

Wray........

You're older than you look Wray!

I had been seriously considering wating till I was 65 or 67 to start the benefit but considering everything, I'll probably hook what I can at the minimum age - 5 1/2 years from now.

If it's not there, it won't be missed much. If it is, then it will be for beer money.

quote:

In my opinion.. anyone who doesn't take it at 62.. Is a Fool..... (Just my opinion...)

Wray..

Absolutely right, Wray. Or even better - as soon as you can go on disability, which pays more and pays it earlier than age 62!

For everyone who doesn't do that, I wouldn't worry too much. There are many ways to eventually fix Social Security, albeit not all are that palatable - like just dropping down the immigrant floodgates and collecting from every swingin' illegal getting paid under the table or getting a paycheck (even easier). Someday the government may have to enhance their collection means...Social Security Collection Police...

...but then also, Social Security, as has been said many times before, was never meant to be a retirees' sole source of income.

I'm there w/ Wray! You want to pay me now ... that I am alive for doing absolutely nothing! For me it goes w/ retirement from AD at 20 or 30 years. I know, I know, speak for yourself. Well that's what I am doing. For me, the moment you are willing and able to pay me to do absolutely nothing, I'll take it.