Options
Social Security benefits when we retire
Eliot Rosewater
Posts: 2,659
Who here thinks that social security benefits will be available when they retire? Most of us are far from retirement so this means 20-30 years from now. Those who don't think they'll be available - What would you do to fix the system?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Well, it's kind of sad, I got my pay stub right here, hold on...
I paid $53.11 into the Canadian Pension Plan (CPP) this pay alone.
Supposing I work until I am 65 and I started working when I was 18.
I will have paid nearly $60,000 into CPP by the time I retire. It won't be there when I retire. I also paid $22.58 to Employment Insurance and $206.47 in Federal Income Tax.
To fix it, I would get rid of programs like mother's allowance, disability for lazy people, etc... I'd make natives pay tax of some sort.
I don't know what you gotta do in the states though. I guess none of this really applies down there.
Bush: "By the year 2042, the entire [social security] system would be exhausted and bankrupt."
In what the BBC calls "highly unusual," a State of the Union Speech was interrupted by a chorus of "No's," booing, and heckles from some of the members of Congress in attendance. This happened immediately after the above Bush lie. As Shields mentioned on the PBS wrap-up, and as Brooks concurred, if adjustments are not made, by 2042, as they have been made before, 3/4 of the funds promised would still be available. The entire system would neither be exhausted nor bankrupt. -- Politex, 02.03.05
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_12/005312.php
At this point, it is NOT Social Security. It's just another tax - i.e. money that is taken from us that we'll never see.
And yes, I'm not counting on one penny of it when I retire. If I get anything, it will be a bonus.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
Social Security has been modified before, and if necessary can be modified again. However, it is not the massive failure those on the right like to make it out to be. You will be getting a few pennies from it, know, don't worry.
No, were paying a tax to a goverment that blows it all on war and tax cuts for those who do not need it.
Oh, btw, how can a factory worker be middle class? Seems like an oxymoron to me!
And, too, if people could rely on goverment to stand up to big business who take the blue collar jobs to countries and their EPZ zones, if it would tax those bastard multinationals like they should, then maybe everyone would have a job at a decent, living wage, and those people that do, would have no need to go on welfare.
Here's a possible solution: stop stealing the money in the first place.
There are tens of thousands of my dollars sitting in a government trust fund somewhere earning 2% interest until someone else decides to steal it. If I had been permitted to keep that money, I certainly would have no one to blame but myself if I "don't have benefits when I retire".
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
To the best of your ability, max-out your 401K...that will save you money on current year taxes, and hoepfully, your employer will match a portion.
Also, a Roth IRA is a great bargain......the distributions your receive when you retire will be tax free.
If you do have a 401K, etc, take an active role in managing your investements.
~Michael Bolton
But...there are people who will need social security or something similar. Inevitably certain people need financial benefits, especially when we live in such a rich/poor society where trends suggest it's only getting richer and poorer. I find some sort of social security program imperative to maintain some sort of social responsibility.
So....I guess this isn't an individual thing, like everyone has been thinking. I'm thinking larger than just me or you, but the nation as a whole. Something is needed. Not everyone has a 401k. Some people will need help when they're older. Can anyone please offer their opinion on how to make this a possibility? Even if it's just sticking with what we've got....I dunno. I know that I respect a lot of you guys and I know that many of you are incredibly intelligent, that's why I'm asking this question here. I'm glad the train is up and running so we can talk about this some more.
Your entire message here seems to imply that just because "some people" will "need financial benefits" it becomes the responsibility of other people to provide those benefits. You appear to refer to this as "some sort of social responsibility".
Let me ask you this: what about the "social responsibility" of those in need? Theoretically speaking, the person you're demanding provide the financial benefit has already provided much to society if his/her money was earned honestly by trading with other members of society for mutual benefit. However, I see no evidence that your person in need has provided any comparable benefit to society. Or does "social responsibility" only apply to someone who is rich?
Let me see if I understand this. Are you saying that the "problem" with social security is that people wish to take out more than they put in?
Inflation applies to all money whether or not it's held by the government or not. Certainly the returns on Social Security have not outpaced inflation, but this is not a problem somehow unique to social security. Furthermore, if Social Security returns exceeded inflation it would not necessarily solve the financial crisis. The financial crisis extends from a system that believes you may extract more than you put in, which is exactly what I talked about in my previous post.
Take the money they are holding back now and bury it in a sack in your backyard. That will give you a much greater return then we're currently expecting.
...are those who've helped us.
Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
My solution is this: disband the system. Eliminate it entirely. Stop stealing money from people with a foolish promise that you'll give it back someday. Stop pretending that you can put a nickel in a piggy bank and that, years later, 500 people can all extract a quarter from that piggy bank just because you want them to be able to.
I'm sorry, but this is a solution for individuals. I don't really think that's a bad thing considering the fact that "nations" do not retire, nor do "nations" require money for interpersonal trade. I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that by "nation" you mean either "the poor" or "everyone", so I'll respond here as such:
To retire with money, a man who has not earned any money or has spent the money he did earn has two choices: alms or theft. Both require receiving something from another party. The only difference is that the first is done willingly, the second is done by force. If a "nation" decides that it is just to steal money by force from those who earn it and give it to those who do not, your system is doomed anyway.
please explain. i am midle class, and i work in a factory??
here is my plan.
currently 14% of my earnings go into social security.7 % comes directly out of my pay, and the other 7% comes from my employer. my employer obviously considers this a labor expense. i understand that some people are not as fortunate as me and will never have enough to save on their own. so i would propose to tax my earnings at a rate of 4%. put this money into the social security pot. then, let me opt out of social security and let me invest the other 10% back into my 401K, or even just a savings account at my local bank. working people would be far better off in the future, and we would still be contributing 4% of our earnings to others.
one thing is for sure, its weird to know that there are MANY people out there that would rather rely on the Gov't to fund their retirement..than to prepare for it themselves.
May I assume that you have no problem then if social security benefits must then be cut by approximately 70%?
why would they have to be cut?? most people would opt out and never receive any benefits.
So your solution is to bribe people with their own money??? You think that by telling someone that being able to keep 10% of their 14% would cause them to celebrate and opt out of the system?