No Middle Class Tax Hikes?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

fine and dandy if that were the case but it is not ( general fund.)

whether direct or not funds go to paying for everything including Obama's aunt he barely knows, all of the illegals treated through e-rooms or not, their children etc. The families who have nothing to show but maybe an appearance on Maury or Jerry both black and white who seemed destine to nothing but gestation and repeat X2 ( start at 15.)

Truth ( say tough love ) hurts but as our President said these are tough times!

These may be tough times but the govt. isn't cutting back....grown over 50 plus % since the great one took office.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

1) Your whole life? Really?

2) Both you n' Danzig are so sure you'll see very little of it. Do you base this on anything at all? Are you saying you are pretty sure you're gunna die on the job at age 55, or something like that? You seem pretty sure.

3) This program was started because it was needed. I see no signs that it is no longer needed. People just don't like paying for it. Perfectly healthy people having trouble stomaching the fact that sick and/or old people are getting money to live. I think there are 2 types of people against Social Security. Some (mainly men) are just selfish. That's not unique. Then, there are a group of people (often women) that object to it on the basis of fairness. Unfortunately, people aren't challenged in "fair" ways. Some people die of a heart attack on the job. Some people die at 88. Is it unfair for the former to have their money used to give checks to the 88 year old? Well, it's called shared risk. Even the person who died on the job probably had a loved one live a long tme, and get more than what some would call "fair." You will never have a totally fair world. You can only have a civilized world.

Yes I am sure I will see very little of it. Even in my SS statement in the mail they said they will be running low on $$ by 2036 (which is way before i can start collecting) and that i will be getting about $300 less than i would be getting now.. and consider inflation and what now.. $700 per month will not even be enough for food by the time 2045 comes around. and yes i will pay MUCH more into it than I will ever see. That is a fact.

The only people it is good for are the people who get it now and will in the next couple years. thats it. screws the future generations and that is factual.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

These may be tough times but the govt. isn't cutting back....grown over 50 plus % since the great one took office.

We are in a recession recovery. We need to be spending short-term now, not saving.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Yes I am sure I will see very little of it. Even in my SS statement in the mail they said they will be running low on $$ by 2036 (which is way before i can start collecting) and that i will be getting about $300 less than i would be getting now.. and consider inflation and what now.. $700 per month will not even be enough for food by the time 2045 comes around. and yes i will pay MUCH more into it than I will ever see. That is a fact.

The only people it is good for are the people who get it now and will in the next couple years. thats it. screws the future generations and that is factual.

Nobody is ignoring Social Security. It has already been "scheduled to go broke" twice in it's lifetime, and it has been adjusted-helped? That was known when it was first formed. It is fine through 2025, - not "in the next couple of years that's it" as you mistakenly think - and when it gets close to not being fine, we don't - and haven't - just stood by wringing our hands, doing nothing about it. We change things to fix that.

I don't understand why you and 'Zig don't think that will continue.

And I can only assume that you are thus independently saving 10-20% of your gross income every week, taking care of yourself, because you "know" you won't have social security to live on - right?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nobody is ignoring Social Security. It has already been "scheduled to go broke" twice in it's lifetime, and it has been adjusted-helped? That was known when it was first formed. It is fine through 2025, - not "in the next couple of years that's it" as you mistakenly think - and when it gets close to not being fine, we don't - and haven't - just stood by wringing our hands, doing nothing about it. We change things to fix that.

I don't understand why you and 'Zig don't think that will continue.

maybe it has something to do with the advice, repeated many times, not to count on it and to set up other retirement savings? or am i supposed to just ignore that?
revenue will be exceeded by expenses in a few years. that's certainly not debatable. retirees are always funded by the employed, with more retirees on the horizon, along with less workers-it's not hard to see how things will go. it's already been difficult enough with revenue currently exceeding outlay. witness changes to retirement age over the years. it will get worse, and benefits will continue to decrease.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/16/yo.../16retire.html

But unless something is done to reform the system, the trust funds will begin to lose money in 2016 and run out by 2037, though Social Security tax income would be enough to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2083, said John Shallman, a Social Security spokesman.

None of this bodes well for younger generations, who will probably end up paying more in Social Security taxes and receive less in benefits. Many younger people don’t think they’ll get anything at all. “It’s more likely that they would reduce the benefits for younger people and go after the next generation some more, which is pretty awful,” said Professor Kotlikoff. “But it’s the way Congress works all the time.”

[Riot]

maybe it has something to do with the advice, repeated many times, not to count on it and to set up other retirement savings? or am i supposed to just ignore that?

?? Nobody was or is ever supposed to depend upon Social Security for retirement. It has always been "a retirement supplement" to prevent people from having zero. It is not supposed to be somebody's entire retirement income, but it is there as your safety net. Everyone is supposed to take care of themselves, and save their own retirement money!

But unless something is done to reform the system, the trust funds will begin to lose money in 2016 and run out by 2037,

Yes. I am sure the system will be "reformed" a bit, as it has been before when it has "threatened to hit bottom" previously.

though Social Security tax income would be enough to pay about 75 percent of scheduled benefits through 2083, said John Shallman, a Social Security spokesman.

So it appears the absolutely worse case scenario - if we do nothing at all to adjust Social Security ever again - is that everyone that pays into it will receive at least 75% of their benefits through 2083.

What's the Social Security takeout now, 6.25%? (Don't know for sure). If someone works 50 years (age 20 to 70) and averages out to $50,000 a year over the lifetime, they would pay in about $3125 a year, or $156,250 to Social Security over their working 50 year lifetime.

When they retired, what they paid in (no interest) if directly dispersed back to them would cover $700 a month for 18 years, or $900 a month for 14 years. So, in this example, seems pretty likely one will get out more than they paid in if they live the average lifespan. Anybody else is free to do a more accurate calculation, this was off the cuff.

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Riot

We are in a recession recovery. We need to be spending short-term now, not saving.

that was a non-sequitur!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

Nobody is ignoring Social Security. It has already been "scheduled to go broke" twice in it's lifetime, and it has been adjusted-helped? That was known when it was first formed. It is fine through 2025, - not "in the next couple of years that's it" as you mistakenly think - and when it gets close to not being fine, we don't - and haven't - just stood by wringing our hands, doing nothing about it. We change things to fix that.

I don't understand why you and 'Zig don't think that will continue.

And I can only assume that you are thus independently saving 10-20% of your gross income every week, taking care of yourself, because you "know" you won't have social security to live on - right?

Riot this may be your worst post yet. When did I say "in the next couple of years" when i clearly wrote 2036 in my post. it is you that is mistaken.

and yes.. right there in the LETTER THAT SS SENDS YOU EVERY YEAR it said that funds will be low by 2036 and that I would be getting $700 per month instead of $1000 per month. So stop lying already Riot. And I'm not old like you are so I wont be even collecting until 2045 but probably later when they raise the ages over and over I'll probably be collecting in 2055.

You think $700 will do ANYTHING for me in 2055???? Consider inflation and that $700 I'll get when I'm old will be like getting $350 per month to live off in todays age.

And I do know I wont have social security to live on. unless i want to live in a daggone cardboard box. And no I dont save 10% of my gross income. I dont make enough to do that. I work in insurance, I'm not a vet or anything.

[Danzig]

it would be nice if they had put the funds in a separate account, and only used it for ss. but no, the money got spent like it was limitless. ss is funded by what the govt wants to pay out, not by what you put in. why they ever billed it as pay now, get it back later, i don't know. they don't want to cut off ss after a certain income level to retirees, as they continue to treat it as being other than an entitlement. but it's not. they need to just quit the whole charade.

[Riot]

Riot this may be your worst post yet. When did I say "in the next couple of years" when i clearly wrote 2036 in my post. it is you that is mistaken.

I was referring to where you said it was only good for the people that were going to get it in the next couple of years. Not the 2036 part at all.

and yes.. right there in the LETTER THAT SS SENDS YOU EVERY YEAR it said that funds will be low by 2036 and that I would be getting $700 per month instead of $1000 per month. So stop lying already Riot.

Lying? What am I lying about? That's a silly thing to say.

Like everyone else I get letters from social security, too. It's an estimate. Based upon today, what you have contributed to date, based upon current rates of disbursement Yes, funding going forward is obviously anticipated to change, but that amount of change, and the amount you are estimated to be getting will only remain accurate as relayed today if nothing at all is done to change anything current. That's highly doubtful.

You think $700 will do ANYTHING for me in 2055???? Consider inflation and that $700 I'll get when I'm old will be like getting $350 per month to live off in todays age.

But in 2055 it will be darn better to have that, than have nothing - right?

And what do you think people get from Social Security today? Social Security isn't a retirement plan anybody is supposed to depend upon for good retirement income. It's a fail safe, a safety net from zero, is all.

And I do know I wont have social security to live on. unless i want to live in a daggone cardboard box. And no I dont save 10% of my gross income. I dont make enough to do that. I work in insurance, I'm not a vet or anything.

Income doesn't matter. I'm dead serious, it doesn't. I know people that make tons of money and have nothing. It doesn't matter how much money one makes, it matters how much one keeps.

Yes, even if one makes minimum wage, one can figure out how to save 10% of their gross income. If not 10%, then start with 5%. The younger you are, the easier it is, the less you have to put away a week, the more you have time and compound interest on your side to make you financially comfortable and independent.

I'll bet you can find $1 a day not to spend, right? Maybe $10 a week? You'd be shocked how much money that adds up to, over 30 years, with compounded interest. That's your retirement. Do it!