Official Social Security Poll

[Scanner]

Social Security Isn't Broken | Dollars & Sense

I know a lot of people think SSI is "broken" but here is an interesting essay on why it may not be.

A lot of people think it's broken or going broke because that's what the Pundits tell them to think.

Truthfully, if any business could declare solvency until 2041 that would be a kick-butt business. Even Microsoft can't say they'll be solvent for the next 30 years without any innovation or business changes or restructures. My guess is. . .if Microsoft remained stagnant. . .they'd be out of business, depleting cash reserves within 2-4 years.

Now. . .all this talk about SSI. . .it's Medicare that looms on the horizon. I think there's just a few years left before we have to start borrowing to pay for senior's and disabled healthcare.

Of course we want to fix SSI. . .because it doesn't need any fixing. Anyone claiming to fix it (Conservatives, George Bush) would get credit like the rooster taking credit for the dawn.

[jc3900]

All I can say to you guys is that the current system will crash! In the end I will be proven right because the numbers just don't add up. All any of these entitlement programs do is prop up a small percentage of the population while draging down the large majority. You guys living in a bubble who think that the United States is in a fine position to just keep wonderful entitlements should go look up David Walker. He used to be the comptroller general for the GAO. According to him, to fund all of our entitlements(not including any new programs like universal healthcare), we would need 8-9 trillion dollars beeing invested at treasury rates. However instead of having 8-9 trillion in the bank, we have nearly 9.5 trillion in debt. Sorry but this house of cards will fall. No one can keep spending forever. It must come to an end sometime. And I am sorry I would rather it end now with a few sacrafices, then having a full blown depression by avoiding the 800 lb gorrilla. Our fiscal crisis must be dealt with now. If you don't think immidiate and drastic action is needed now to change the fiscal cancer this country suffers from, then quite frankly you are either living in a box or a moron. Right now our countries debt is about $30,000 for every man, woman, and child in this country. Yes, the steps we must take now our bold, however the consequences that we suffer by not acting our to great to avoid.

Hopefully, you finally understand where I am coming from. Over these last few posts, it would appear that none of this is important to a lot of you. If you did care about this, I don't know how any of you could fathom keeping monsters around like medicaid, medicare, and social security.

[sweeps]

On-topic article

JC, I appreciate your gusto. But you know what, there is no crisis here. Doing what you are suggesting would in fact cause a crisis.

As Scanner pointed out, there are much bigger issues to deal with, one of which is Medicare and health care in general. This is a real crisis that needs immediate and drastic action.

[Broken Arrow]

Originally Posted by jc3900

I wonder why he has similar views.

The truth? I believe he was ill-informed. He's a good kid, and very bright too.... But my son grew up advantaged in many ways. He's very healthy; not disabled in any way. He doesn't have to rely on government programs. Yet. Hasn't started working either. Grew up in mostly decent middle-class-like Suburbia... and is still living at his mother's house.

Given his current experiences, it's understandable to me anyways, why he would hold certain views, such as wanting a more Machiavellian approach to government. (Even if Machiavelli is oft-times misinterpreted.) Because he hasn't had to suffer yet, wondering if he could ever get help from somewhere, just for a chance to get back on his feet.

And yet, the irony is that he IS in fact, very dependent on social assistance. Not the governmental type, but the familial type. After all, he didn't exactly "opt-out" from our food assistance program, our shelter assistance program, or even our short-term vehicle loan program.

Oh, but you can say, "Well, that's not a fair comparison! That's what parents are suppose to do!" And you'd be right! However, the comparison is still reasonable: Just as parents are obligated to support their children, so too are governments obligated to support their citizens!

If not, then what's the point of their existence?

Like it or not, agree or disagree, we are all "in the same boat", and we are more dependent on each other than we may even realize. But that's OK, because cooperation and support is the superior long-term strategy for survival.

We need Social Security. Period. We need to fix it, but opting-out isn't the answer.

[Scanner]

Broken Arrow:

"Any man under 35 who isn't a liberal is heartless. Any man over 35 who isn't Conservative is brainless."

- Winston Churchill

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by Scanner

"Any man under 35 who isn't a liberal is heartless. Any man over 35 who isn't Conservative is brainless."

- Winston Churchill

What a great quote. Being 43 now, I've struggled with that conversion and Churchill nailed it. In my heart, I still support liberal causes and views, but in my brain I find myself more and more aligned with conservative policy. Finances play into that a lot, of course. As my income and personal wealth have grown, I find I benefit more from the conservative's fiscal policies, tax cuts, etc. At the same time, though, I can't help but see people of mid and lower incomes struggling due to many of the same policies.

jc3900, understand that none of us are attacking you personally, but your world view at 18 or 19 simply isn't the same as it will be when you are 30 or 40 or 50 or 60. When I was your age, I probably shared your views for the most part. As you further your education, expand your horizons, travel the world, build your fortune, etc., your positions evolve and change.

[cooliemae]

Originally Posted by Broken Arrow

Like it or not, agree or disagree, we are all "in the same boat", and we are more dependent on each other than we may even realize. But that's OK, because cooperation and support is the superior long-term strategy for survival.

We need Social Security. Period. We need to fix it, but opting-out isn't the answer.

I agree 100%. If it wasn't for all of you paying SS my mother-in-law would be living with my wife and I right now. =)

Joking aside, my mother-in-law raised 4 children, got divorved while raising the 4th child (my wife), was laid off from her job, and has bad arthritis. The SS she receives is the only money (besides the money my wife and I send her) she has to pay the bills and support herself. If the SS dried up, I don't now what we would do!

And I'm sure we're not the only ones facing problems like this.

[Hypersion]

No,

SS is my safety net incase the !@#$ hits the fan.

[jc3900]

jc3900, understand that none of us are attacking you personally, but your world view at 18 or 19 simply isn't the same as it will be when you are 30 or 40 or 50 or 60. When I was your age, I probably shared your views for the most part. As you further your education, expand your horizons, travel the world, build your fortune, etc., your positions evolve and change.

Do you really think I will change? Oh if only you really knew me. Most likely I will get educated, see the world, experience life and become more grounded in my current beliefs.

Oh, but you can say, "Well, that's not a fair comparison! That's what parents are suppose to do!" And you'd be right! However, the comparison is still reasonable: Just as parents are obligated to support their children, so too are governments obligated to support their citizens!

Broken Arrow: You should really go see the movie 1984, I think your statement fits the movie perfectly.

Like it or not, agree or disagree, we are all "in the same boat", and we are more dependent on each other than we may even realize. But that's OK, because cooperation and support is the superior long-term strategy for survival.

We need Social Security. Period. We need to fix it, but opting-out isn't the answer.

And here is where the flaw is. I don't want to be in your boat. I want freedom to do as I wish and that is something you are not understanding.

[Daylily]

Ah to be 18 again....

NO I would not opt out of it. I pay my portion and DH pays the full portion because he is self employed. I would not opt out of it because the dollars I put in now are used to help support my parents who are currently drawing social security. I hope all the 18-year olds out there don't have a choice to opt out because I need them to help fund SS when it's MY turn to collect.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by jc3900

Broken Arrow: You should really go see the movie 1984, I think your statement fits the movie perfectly.

See, now if I had made that comment, being more "mature" (a.k.a. older) I would have suggested reading the book.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by jc3900

Do you really think I will change? Oh if only you really knew me. Most likely I will get educated, see the world, experience life and become more grounded in my current beliefs.

Agreed. Your bottom line may not change but I'm willing to bet that your overall thought process on the issue will involve various shades of gray rather than just black or white.

[jc3900]

I hope all the 18-year olds out there don't have a choice to opt out because I need them to help fund SS when it's MY turn to collect.

This is exactly why SS is a scam. 5 people in the beginning support the first person who collects it. Then you need 25 people to cover those 5. Then you need 125 people to cover those 25. If I was running an annuity/insurance product like this I would be rich, only at the expense of the system crashing and average young person like myself losing out.

Anyway, this is another problem with SS. It FORCES people to join. What if I don't want to join and it is a really sucky return and a sucky program for helping the less fortunate. I can't do anything. SS works only by lifting up a very small minority at the expense of screwing everyone else. (hey that kind of sounds like socialism) Oh wait.... THAT IS SOCIALISM.

[Broken Arrow]

Originally Posted by jc3900

And here is where the flaw is. I don't want to be in your boat. I want freedom to do as I wish and that is something you are not understanding.

Why does that sound so familiar?

If that's how you really feel about it, why not just go ahead and go? Nobody's going to stop you. You're pretty much a legal adult now. You can even leave the country if you want. My son is contemplating Japan, by the way. Seriously.

But you see, you are free. Free to seek the... freedom that you are looking for. And once you renounce your citizenship, then you'll also opt-out of its government programs. Problem solved.

And I say all that without sarcasm or coldness, but with the sympathy and hope that you'll find what you're looking for out there. Whatever comes out of it, I'm sure it'll be a great life experience.

Like I said, my son wants to go to Japan, and frankly, I can't think of a reason why he shouldn't. If that's what he really wants out of life, I say, "Why not?" The same for you.

[jIM_Ohio]

Originally Posted by jc3900

This is exactly why SS is a scam. 5 people in the beginning support the first person who collects it. Then you need 25 people to cover those 5. Then you need 125 people to cover those 25. If I was running an annuity/insurance product like this I would be rich, only at the expense of the system crashing and average young person like myself losing out.

Anyway, this is another problem with SS. It FORCES people to join. What if I don't want to join and it is a really sucky return and a sucky program for helping the less fortunate. I can't do anything. SS works only by lifting up a very small minority at the expense of screwing everyone else. (hey that kind of sounds like socialism) Oh wait.... THAT IS SOCIALISM.

JC- you are correct in that SS is a socialist program.

Government sponsored health care plans would also be socialist- do you support that?

I remember seeing FICA taken out of my first paycheck when I was 16 years old. Who are they and who gave them permission to take my money?

If you do not want to pay SS, I suggest you do any or all of the following
a) don't make any earned income (live on the street for example or hide all income from the IRS)
b) earn 1099 contractor income and run from the IRS a few years later when you do not resolve the issue.
c) move to a country with lower taxes. More than likely this will be a third world country. You may not even get running water.

What do YOU see as governments role in society? List the bad things and list the good things. You cannot only get the good without accepting some of the bad. Those are the compromises every adult makes in life. From the sounds of your posts- you tell us what to think and state opinions as facts.

All I can say to you guys is that the current system will crash! In the end I will be proven right because the numbers just don't add up. All any of these entitlement programs do is prop up a small percentage of the population while draging down the large majority.

There is nothing factual in the post you wrote this in. It might be true, it might not be true. It is a prediction at best. I think it is a bad prediction- here are the FACTS as to why:

When SS was founded (by FDR in the 1940's), it was created when democrats (who often suggest socialist like programs) ran the white house and both sides of congress. I doubt such legislation would pass today based on partison voting.

It was founded to provide benefits around age 63 and the average life span of an adult was around 67 years old. In addition SS replaced close to 80% of the average person's income. Improvements in health care are what is causing the perceived lack of solvency. The general trend in the last 70 years has been to
a) raise the age a person can collect SS
b) not raise the benefits to level of spending needed
c) tax the benefits for high income retirees (there is a 50% tax on SS income above a threshold)
d) raise the SS tax paid by the working class

All the above have happened more than once and are FACTS. I have yet to see you post anything more than trolling opinions in the 2 threads on the subject.

One issue though is the government raised the age for benefits one year when life expectancy increases by 3 years or 5 years. This is what happens when the people making the decisions need to get elected.

So while in your quote you claim the numbers don't add up, you need a better equation than simple addition and multiplication. You need to factor in the policy changes which will pay the benefits needed and how to elect the people to make those changes. That is how democracy works. Democracy is FREEDOM. You are free to elect who you want to assuming the majority share your views.

I am guessing you live at home right now. Who provides your food, clothing and shelter? If your parents kicked your butt out on the street, what is your worst case scenario? Think about worst case- that is what SS is for.

It is socialist. It is a wealth transfer system. But I would hold the opinion is not transferring much wealth. Consider that the average income of a person in US is probably twice as high as the max benefit most will receive from SS. And I am guessing the people which qualify for max benefit also get that benefit taxed based on other income they receive when in retirement. I hear of $700-$1000 SS checks being common, and my monthly benefit on my statements is projected well north of $2500/month last I checked.

The USA has one of the biggest middle classes in the world (I believe it is the biggest). What this means is the average income in the US (which is around 40k) is quite high relative to same standards in other countries around the world.

Think about that. Avg income of all tax payers is just above 40k. Half above, half below. I think the median income is slightly higher. SS probably pays an average benefit of around 24-25k. This assumes a person qualified for the FULL benefit. I am guessing the average benefit based on the SS statements I receive. I could be proven wrong on this.

I am guessing you have not seen a SS statement. It shows a few things.

It shows how much I have paid into system.
It shows what my expected benefit is when I reach SS age
It shows what my current benefit is if I were to become disabled, or what my wifes benefit would be if I died today.

As I analyze that for 5 minutes when I read the statement (once every two years), and I see a few things.

1) to qualify for FULL benefits, you must work a certain number of units (and contribute to system during those units). I think a unit is 3 months. I think a person needs to work around 80 units, which is 20 years, to get full benefits.

So even if person is eligble based on AMOUNT contributed, they may have not gained eligibility based on length of time worked to receive that benefit back.

2) What changes could government make to take away that benefit from me.
a) increase that unit measurement (make me work longer and I would not be eligble, because I plan to retire before then)
b) decrease my benefit (I am OK with this, SS to me is beer money- I make much more than the average income above).
c) increase the age I can receive a benefit
d) some combination of a-b-c

What I would do instead of forming unfounded and unsubstantiated opinions is to LEARN.

I think I read you are 18. Are you going to college? The learning does not stop once you leave HS. It does not stop once you leave college. I have learned more between ages of 23 and 35 than I did before age 23.

If you come across less confrontational and less like a two bit troll, some of us smarter types might even be willing to help you.

Wait, I forgot, you oppose SS, you don't want to help anyone.

[bjl584]

Jim, very profound post. JC, you should listen to Jim. Anyway, If I were given the option to opt out, I probably would, however, I do not see that as an option. My goal is to make my SS check my "beer money" as Jim stated and not be dependant on it. I am currently agressively saving and investing so that this will be the case. I'm not a big fan of socialist programs either, but there is good and bad in everything. We live in the greatest country in the world for a reason.

[Scanner]

Another suggestion to not pay SSI is to start a business, form a subchapter S corp. and then have all monies paid to you in the form of dividends, instead of income/profit.

You pay a tax on dividends (along with other corp. taxes) but I don't beleive you pay into SSI and Medicare on it.

Buy your own disability insurance (if available) and fund your own retirement (even though you would still get a basic SSI check when you retire). You see, you could theorectically not pay in and still get money back. . .what kind of deal is that? You'd also get "free Medicare" when you turn 65 or were disabled one day. A great one for you who hate's socialist programs.

Voila. . .problem solved.

You can pay your accountant galore to find ways to escape taxation.

[bjl584]

I believe that if you work for the railroads you are covered under a different form of benefits. I think you pay more than if you had to pay into SS, but the benefits are greater.

[jIM_Ohio]

Congress does not pay into SS either, maybe JC could become a politician?

If congress paid into SS, I assume it would have been reformed by now.

[disneysteve]

Originally Posted by jIM_Ohio

Avg income of all tax payers is just above 40k. Half above, half below. I think the median income is slightly higher.

Not quite right, Jim. Median is the middle of the pack. Average is the total of all the entires divided by the number of entries.

Example:

5 people. 2 earn $10,000/year. 1 earns $15,000/year. 2 earn $100,000/year.

So you have 10, 10, 15, 100, 100.

Median is 15, as that is the number in the middle.

Average is 10+10+15+100+100/5, or 47.