Is Social Security still going to exist in say 20 years (2033)?

[QuarterMillionMan]

I have earned enough credits to qualify for benefits when I retire in 20 years (2033) in the amount of about $1000 a month but I'm not counting on it. I have earned more than the minimum 40 credits required for retirement benefits. However, I will be delighted to get this amount if they and/or I am still in existence in 2033 but I was curious how others perceived the future of Social Security retirement benefits

[kork13]

I'm only 27, so I probably have a good 35-40 years before I fully retire...and honestly, I'm not counting on SS to meet me when I get there. All of my planning to this point and into the future completely ignores the possibility of receiving SS benefits, because there are simply too many unknowns about what will or won't happen to the program over the next 4 decades. It might still exist, it might have a different form or benefit structure, or it might be getting phased out. I certainly don't know, so I'm not going to rely on it being there. With that said, if SS is still there when I retire, great -- it'll give me some sightseeing money while I travel the world.

[PRICEPLUS]

I would operate under the premise that it will not be there. If it is still there then it will be gravy but I suppose it is best to think of worst case scenarios when it comes to retirement.

[dojo]

The pension system in my country is already bankrupt, so I really don't expect miracles. As other already said, if it works OK, that's an added bonus. If not, I'll make sure I don't spend my retirement under a bridge somewhere

[YLTL_Dan]

There will have to be some sort of safety net. It may look different than it does now and it will probably only help the poorest of people, but there's no way it can disappear all together. That being said, it won't be something I want to depend on so I'm planning to live without it!

[kork13]

There will have to be some sort of safety net. It may look different than it does now and it will probably only help the poorest of people, but there's no way it can disappear all together. That being said, it won't be something I want to depend on so I'm planning to live without it!

Good point, and you're probably right. Whether some people agree with it or not, most of America does feel a moral obligation to help provide for the indigent. I don't truly expect SS to totally disappear, but rather for the entitlements to be much more limited. In reality, I expect one of two results: 1) There will be some sort of income- or asset-based limit that says if you earn or have more than $XXXXX, you will receive no SS benefits (or significantly reduced benefits). ... ~or~ ... 2) SS benefits will be dramatically reduced across the board, like a 25%-50% reduction in benefits for all recipients. This appears to be the preferred option (see the linked report below).

The problem that all of us are acknowledging is that the Social Security program is woefully underfunded, and truly in dire straights. If continued on its present course unchanged, the social security trust fund will be completely bankrupt by 2033 (from the horse's mouth: the Social Security Administration's 2013 Trustees Report ). Politics aside (because people get heated), that's troublesome.

[feh]

Yes, SS will exist in 20 years.

[ua_guy]

In broad and generic concept, I too think a safety net will exist, but it's not something I'm personally counting on. It will be in addition to what I already have going for me, or what I've saved.

With private companies literally passing the buck with regards to retirement funding for their employees, and the boomers exhausting SS funding, I think those projecting retirement in the next 30-40 years could be sliding into an interesting situation.

[KTP]

Funny that the SS system is funded far better than most public pension systems but people expect SS not to be there and barely question if public pensions will be taken away.

SS will be there as long as people grow old and are still allowed to vote. If people stop aging or a law is passed that says you can't vote past age 62, then SS might be in trouble.

[bigdaddybus]

From my research on the subject SS is going to have to cut benifit payouts by approximately 22% from current levels/projections. They can do this by cutting payment amounts, taxing more, or raising the age limits.

My wife and I are both on track to receive $2000+ per month (each) when we retire from Social Security. It makes me sick when I hear people suggest that SS benifits be cut from high earners cause they dont need social security. If you are going to take away $4000+ as month from me, who is going to reimburse me and my employer for the $600,000+ we contributed over the course of our working careers? no one. I would gladly take part in a social security buyout, as I have much more confidence in my ability to invest/save my portion.

To me SS should never be the only safety net for a retiree. But as my father always says, "It takes money to make money" and its easy to see how the working poor and some of the middle class arent saving enough to ever have a retirement supported by SS and savings.

It would be nice to see our elected officials take the issues with SS seriouly and make the changes needed to keep it solvent into the future. Good or bad changes, it would enable the willing to make the needed changes to our budgets to meet our retirement goals utilizing SS.

[KTP]

Also, some federal workers don't contribute to SS because they have a federal pension. How could you justify then getting rid of SS and still paying federal pensions?

[bjl584]

It will exist. But probably not as it does now. I'd expect some form of reduced benefits or higher age requirements to qualify.

To be safe, I'm not counting SS in my retirement planning. If I get anything then it's just a bonus.

[JoeP]

I would operate under the premise that it will not be there. If it is still there then it will be gravy but I suppose it is best to think of worst case scenarios when it comes to retirement.

Same here for us. All my tracking and projection charts intentionally exclude social security, and we adjust along the way to meet our retirement goals in lieu of it.

If, by some miracle, we get what our social security statement says we will get, then those payments will be used first, allowing our investments to continue to compound.

Having said that, I feel very sad for people who simply assume that they don't have to plan for retirement, that our government will keep its promises with respect to social security and safety nets, and that "things will somehow work out."

[KTP]

Saying you are not planning on SS is a bit silly. You should count it as fixed income in your portfolio and adjust your investing mix accordingly. If you are going to get $2000 a month at age 66 or 70, then you do not need to be 60% bonds or whatever at age 60...you can take on more market risk for more return.

[rennigade]

Yes...it will still exist in 20 years.

And for my inlaws that like to state otherwise...cant wait to rub it in their face in 2 decades..along with everyone else who keeps saying SS will not exist.