Bowsite.com

This is a summary of the cuts the Republican congressional budget committee unveiled today for Social Security and Medicare. From their website. There's other details as well, but it calls for an average 13% reduction in benefits while raising retirement age to 69, and eliminating COLA increases for certain groups.

As I read more into this plan, it also calls for steep funding cuts into the Medicare Advantage (part c) program, which will in turn cause seniors to pay substantially more for the level of coverage they currently have.

If you want a sure fire way to lose an election, suggest cutting Social Security and Medicare.

Trust me the smart people with common sense know who to vote for.

Shane

now, the repubtards are front and center with proposed legislation to raise the retirement age.

great strategy, that'll get you some votes in key swing states. way to sell an agenda the majority of voters are interested in and sure to support.

"Trust me the smart people with common sense know who to vote for." ~ recurve man

you can't make this sh!t up.

meanwhile, biden is in arizona talking about investment in semiconductor manufacturing, and of course trump is in the headlines.....

Wife and I live on our SS. We still have our home, and we pay our bills, but there's not much left over. Cutting 10% or more would really hurt, especially if they reduce the advantage plan benefits. Lots of equity in our home, so if the SHTF, we still have options. There's a lot of people that don't, and if they pass this expect to see a jump in senior suicide, as many could not survive on less.

How many here still believe this is a good versus evil fight? How many truly believe the GOP thought this was a winning platform.

Nothing is as it appears. This is a concerted effort among both parties. Nobody is this dumb.

Ben Shapiro just did a podcast on his opinion of cutting social security. He goes into great detail on why people shouldn’t retire.

I truly feel bad for the older citizens that have paid in their whole lives and now we have this.

Another failing Democrat policy.

Just cut medicaid completely. whats that? 500 billion a year. Problem solved. Make all these baby daddy's in big city's pay up or put them in TWCF at $15/hr for restitution to their families they abandoned.

They will cut SS anyway, Cut VA benefits, then give more to these NEW Comers whatever they want. Housing, wifi, fone, food, $, HC. This is how you get votes and census increases. The more free chit you give away the more in the end you'll have pull back.

Have we learned nothing. Even the Euro's have figured it out. The Euro Economic Power House of Germany is broke! They have and will cut the cord with the migrants. Why crime has risen 3000%. They radically changed their retirement system. Socialist had no problem telling all the folks who rebuilt the place after WW2 " oh yes, we are changing the retirement system to 73. BTW, we have change your medical benefits, and your amounts because the world requires us to help these migrants and this is your part too".

We may have to endure the same fate. The difference is an American is not going to sit idol and take it in the shorts. Just like this NYC case of Squatters taking woman's home! Bunch of locals came and told those squatter terds, "get out while you can, or you be gone off the face for ever". They ran like hell.

I would think the Great Roundup is going to happen one day soon. New GVT Agency to return the southern invasion of all comers illegally. Prolly take 50,000 man agency with special authority in all 50 states to get it done. Several including the Chameleon Haley has spoken of just this happening in public on stage and stump. Prolly pay good, good benefits, get a rifle , shotgun, side arm and all the range time you want, thinskinned armored Victor as well. Sounds like a great exciting opportunity for my grandsons.

Given this sort of thing has been percolating for years as well, it's just more of the same. Bad ideas, from a party whose specialty for over a decade is to put all it's energy into creating fear, obstructing, breaking things, tearing things down and then standing there sweaty and grimy from their efforts pointing at all the people who were trying to stop them or were staring dumbfounded while yelling: "You did this!"

80 million freeloaders on it and its going jump Big League with all these Illegals. Cuz it pays all their HC costs at your local ER.

It"ll be way larger than out Def Budget and your Dem socialist will want to try the Euro Plan where we cut Def down to nothing and push those funds to Medcaid.

Crazy stuff.

The Biden admin ALREADY raised the cost of Medicare to those that get any investment income- they penalize you. My buddy and his wife have pensions, collect SS and they each pay $504 a month for Medicare A&B

But.... An alcholic or drug addict who has paid SS in last 60 months can go to a doctor get a letter who says they mentally deficient and get a minimum of $750/mo and that for any kids every month without the credits. Its amazing and most folks have no idea this going on. Not to mention SS Fraud.

In big city's and person 65 plus who has the credits and receives SS can and often do this. The adopt (on paper) 3-5 fatherless kids and they receive the stipend for each kid $750. Then, they give the drug addict mom back $200-300/mo and keep the rest. Been going on for years. What do you think in the Chi-Town tenements you see, BMW's, Merc's, Caddies, Chargers, all new. Making bank, but folks who worked and stopped for whatever reason will never get their $ out because of credit creep. Pack that in yer pipe!

So I was taxed on the money I used to build the house, taxed on the value every year, taxed on the capital gains, now being taxed AGAIN on the capital gains since it is considered MAGI.

Thankfully, we can absorb it with no impact to our lifestyle, but for someone reliant on SS for a big chunk of their living expenses, $500 more a month in expenses would be a big hit.

I can't fathom how anyone could think our SS system is a good thing.

So called "conservatives" are all about big government just like the leftist and we should quit pretending it's not so.

Haiti needs billions now so our seniors need to tighten the belt a little more.

What scares me worse is what their idea of a fix will be.

I’ll put my tinfoil hat on and say that means they’re gonna confiscate 401s and pensions. It may not be tomorrow. But eventually they will.

because it’s not fair or equitable that some have money in the bank, pensions and 401s and others don’t. so they will combine it all and re-distribute it.

Bernie and pocahontas will Cosponsor the bill

What i wonder if you retired @45yrs old, figgering you worked form 16-45. You did not pay in for 35yrs. Thats the credit number now how you getting SS. I guess you can but it would be a low number SS check.

What help me was last few years of work I maxed out my required SS payments within just a few months. Once you do that they dont take any out further for year. That really helped my monthy SS payment back to me later. I know it wont last however. You can bet Dems will keep voting and giving up SS to the millions who never paid in. Fix that and it would go alot further.

Guess that why so many retirees got great side hustles for $.

Worse yet, the new Republican plan puts medicare advantage plans on an equal benefit payout as original medicare. In other words by statute, they will pay only 80% of medical bills. To get better benefits, there will be a sliding scale of premiums. For exact coverage as getting now on medicare advantage will cost $1k/ month.

This is a bad plan, that has just sunk any plans for the R's to win congress and will give us 4 more years of the skeleton called Biden.

It's over. No need to have any further political threads on bowsite.

the democrats will of course lie and say the republicans want to cut grannies checks off...but the fact of the matter is...even if the republican plan were to pass "as is"...which it wont...nobody currently in retirement...or anywhere near retirement will be affected. the changes would only apply for those retiring years down the road.

people are living a lot longer than when social security started...so it only makes sense that the retirement age should be raised.

when ss started in 1940 the average life expectancy was about 63...now its closer to 80. children born today are expected to live close to 90.

why wouldnt/shouldnt the full retirement age be raised? it only makes sense to anyone who can do simple math.

that is unless youre a lying politician and you dont have the balls to do whats right and all you are concerned is scaring seniors into voting for you. at least the republicans are being honest about it.

social security was only supposed to be one piece of the pie in retirement. it was never intended to be the whole pie. if you get to retirement age and all you have is ss...you failed.

granted...it was also never intended to pay for people to spend their day fishing and hunting and working for cash...all the while claiming they have a bad back or anxiety or some other bs malady....but by the same token...it shouldnt be the third rail when it comes politics.

the system need to be fixed and we need to stop lying about it.

There you go KsRancher

Not quite lol. They are both bad sources IMO.

neither do i...thats why i spent wisely and invested when i was young...in order to build a retirement nest egg sufficient so as not to have to worry about what the hell ss does. like it or not...reality says that you dont always get what you want.

how many times dont we here on here..."go on that hunt...you only regret the ones you didnt take"..."im going to enjoy it while im young"..."its only money...i can make more"...or enjoy it while youre here cuz you cant take it with you?"

well...guess what...eventually "later" gets here and lo and behold most people want to enjoy it when their old too...and you cant always make more...and you might just live longer than you thought.

The R social security retirement age increase will affect anyone that is age 59 and younger as of today. BUT THE 13% SS BENEFIT DECREASE WILL AFFECT ALL WHO ARE RECEIVING BENEFITS, AS WELL AS A MEDICARE BENEFIT DECREASE/PREMIUM INCREASE AFFECTING ALL.

can you post the source of that? i think you might be misreading it. raising the full retirement age "effectively" cuts the benefit by reducing the number of years you will ultimately collect...but it will not reduce the actual monthly payment.

for example...the last major ss overhaul n 1983 gradually raised the age to 67, effectively cutting lifetime benefits by 13 percent.

gradually raising the retirement age to 70 would ultimately cut average lifetime benefits for new retirees by nearly 20 percent.

The other significant cost will be the new premium structure proposed by R's for medicare.

can you please post a link to the specific article you read? id like to read it.

not sure thats accurate. pretty sure you can switch back to original medicare whenever you want...as long as its during an enrollment period...no questions asked.

medicare supplement insurance (medigap insurance) which as designed to go along with original medicare is private insurance also...just like medicare advantage. those companies can also stop offering coverage or raise rates substantially.

the same is true if you want to switch medigap companies.

pushing 60 now, still laying block, pouring concrete, pounding nails my goal is to stay healthy so i can work as long as i can, and why not? I have a bit of a different mentality... I don't want gov't freebies...i'll work for my own.

i don't want or need to be rich....

Do ya really trust supposed educated people that are creating such a huge gov't deficit? And while we are talking...medicare, and social security and everything else, wonder what folks did before all that?

dying ain't all that bad boys....gonna happen sooner or later, one way or another..just be ready. "Bidenomics"....good grief who on earth does he think he is? man puts his pants on one leg at a time just like anyone else, unless he needs help.

Everything cost more these days, or are we to blind to see that? that's yer "Bidenomics"

republicans vs democrats....liberals vs conservatives. all squawking about policy's. We plan, we strive...we build great estates, drive expensive cars, and pride ourselves in knowledge without wisdom. and in the end......your left with a 6x6 plot of land.

stripped of your wealth.....your political party....your intellect......there at the end of the road.....you will meet GOD.

100% true. I've always been told that you 'date' your drug plan but you 'marry' your medigap plan. Your medigap plan can never cancel you.... but if you switch...all bets are off. The most important decision that you will make with original medicare is the selection of your medigap partner.

The only thing I’ll add is when you meet God there will be two different things he’ll say. One will be well done my good and faithful servant, two will be depart from me for I never knew you.

Sure gonna be a lot of people wish they had it to do over. Lots of them will have had a career in politics. Sucks to be them.

Shane

They get free healthcare. So that cost is taken from the same wallet. As your SS

You would think even liberals would be a little interested in losing their SS to millions of new citizens the democrats are bringing in.

I feel sorry for those relying on SS as thier retirement income.

i have a relative in that business and while thats true...they can make it so cost prohibitive that you will drop yourself.

SS and Medicare aren't freebies. You worked for them and were forced to pay for them.

Really not interested in the petty bitching of a manager or CEO on when or how much I would work.

As far as those who think it's a good idea to increase the retirement age to 69...sounds good until it's made retroactive and you're forced to go back to work regardless of your "investments" you started when you were young...

youre welcome to your opinion...but it is wrong.

on an individual basis that might be someones preference. however...on an actuarial basis...that is the is the only way it can work without raising contributions (taxes). like i said...its simple math.

in simple terms...if the average 65 year old person lives to age 75...you have to collect enough taxes over their working years to pay benefits for 10 years in retirement.

now...if the average 65 year old person lives to age 80... you either have to collect more taxes during the working years to now be able to pay 15 years in retirement...or raise the retirement age to 70 in order to keep the average 10 year benefit term the same.

and the longer the chicken sh*t politicians push the can down the road...the worse the problem gets.

thats not opinion...its fact.

Or, we can increase taxes on the retired for not putting enough in instead of pulling from the fund that I'm paying into, since they're living longer and pulling a portfolio retirement along with a SS draw...

they already did that starting in 1984.

the full retirement age was also raised from 65 to 67 at that time.

like it or not...its probably time to raise full retirement age again.

thats true...but theres a major flaw in your thinking.

one of the biggest misnomers about ss is that the money each person pays into ss sits in an account somewhere with their name on it... waiting for them to retire. it doesnt.

ss is not a pension or retirement plan...it is an insurance plan. like any other insurance plan...some people receive way more than they pay in...some people receive way less than they pay in...and some people receive none of what they pay in. like any other insurance plan...it cant defy the laws of actuarial principles...and those change over time depending on a number of factors including life expectancy.

the money the current workers pay in pretty much goes out immediately to pay the current retiree (as well as disability) benefits. theres not much to "compound."

current workers paying for current retirees does not mean the system is "broken"...thats the way the system was designed to work from the start.

Once they got into the education system to formulate and control the up and coming thinkers/workers it was and is just a matte of time. This combined with a severe lack of parenting in today’s society will cripple us if it’s not corrected.

Once crippled, I’m not so sure the people affected (the newer younger generation ) will be physically capable of the grunt it will take to repair, and will like just fall further with believing false political promises.

This only gets fixed through educating the next generations and my confidence of that happening is not high.

We failed to pass down the toughness and lessons learned from the Great Depression by our grandparents.

im sorry but its not semantics at all.

one of the biggest problems with how people perceive ss is that they dont have any clue what actually is...how it works...and how to keep it solvent.

it would be a "well functioning system" if chicken sh*t politicians on both sides stopped treating it like the third rail of politics...and attempting to buy votes by saying that nothing will or should ever change...and do what is necessary to keep kit actuarily sound.

what do you think would happen if a homeowners insurance company still charged premiums based on what it cost to build a house 40 years ago? would that make sense to any thinking person?

that is exactly what some people expect ss to do...based on life expectancies of 40 years ago.

exactly. my full retirement age is 67 also.

when i first stated paying into the system...it was 65. it went from 65-67 40 years ago.

dont you think its about time to increase full retirement age again...based on what has happened to life expectancy of the last 4 decades?

"There's a lot of young folks these days that are gonna be in really bad shape financially in their senior years."

i agree with you 100%...but its not just young people. many people our age never took advantage of any employer retirement plans...or utilized individual iras either. which is why it is very bad idea to privatize social security..at least all of it. left to their own devices many people would piss the money away during their working years...and they would be destitute come retirment age.

And make it retroactive Ricky. If you currently are not 70, you get to go back to work and put back in what you've taken out and then retire when you hit the new age. Or, you can pay a higher tax than now to make up for it. Fair is fair, right? Afterall, you're drawing out what those who are still working are putting in, and will now have to work longer because those today got to start drawing on it earlier, while living longer, and drawing on money they didn't put in.

actually no. fair is fair but fair is not the way you describe it.

people my age are already working 2 years longer before reaching full retirement age. we did our part.

now its time for the younger people to work a couple years longer before they reach full retirement age. that is what is "fair."

"Afterall, you're drawing out what those who are still working are putting in..."

what do you mean "afterall?" thats how every generation of retirees collects their benefits. thats the way it is supposed to be...and the way the system was designed.

The latest trillion dollar PorkaPotamus bill is a perfect example. It looks like the Republicans are trying to get their act together, but we shall see there are a few RINO Republicans resigning. YEAY. That is a good sign.

I still think we need to limit the massive amounts of money flooding into these politicians pockets through lobbying groups and special interests. There is no way that helps the cause of the average American.

Initiating term limits and no insider trading would be essential too

good posts...you both get it.

Initiating term limits and no insider trading would be essential too”

I’ve heard that similar sentiment expressed here for years! I wonder when it will happen?!!

This is true, BUT it’s something that would be fixed following on generation learning the HARD WAY, not BAILED OUT. Their suffering of their own decisions would make them teach the next generation.

We have forgotten how to do this in all aspects of life because everyone banks on someone else stepping in to save them. It one reason our healthcare is extremely expensive, we do not take care of ourselves and expect the medical field to help manage our horribly managed lives.

For who? Your generation or mine? To be honest, really not interested in yours...

"people my age are already working 2 years longer before reaching full retirement age. we did our part."

Because they lived too high earlier on or lost too much in the retirement shell game. Not younger people's problems that retirees don't get to live it up. Take your lumps, life ain't fair. No, you really didn't do your part.

"now its time for the younger people to work a couple years longer before they reach full retirement age. that is what is "fair."

Don't make me laugh. To pay for retirees that statistically are living longer than planned? LOL.

"what do you mean "afterall?" thats how every generation of retirees collects their benefits. thats the way it is supposed to be...and the way the system was designed."

To last a short and determined amount of time. People are living longer pushing the desire by some to increase the full retirement age. Retirees now are drawing more than what is currently being put in because of the size their generation is. The groups that should be nearing their highest earning potential in salary either aren't there yet career wise, or their not there yet because boomers won't retire leaving high paying jobs open to backfill. By being forced to work longer, the only ones they are paying for are themselves because of the overdraw your generation is doing...

"Because they lived too high earlier on or lost too much in the retirement shell game. Not younger people's problems that retirees don't get to live it up. Take your lumps, life ain't fair. No, you really didn't do your part.

i have no idea what your generation is...but simply put...my generation pushed our full retirement out an additional two years to keep the system solvent for the generation that retired before us.. now its time for the next generation to do the same. as to my personal situation...you have no clue what youre talking about. if social security completely went away...it would not affect my retirement in the least.

" Don't make me laugh. To pay for retirees that statistically are living longer than planned? LOL."

yes...just like the ones my generation did it for. as long as people keep living longer...we will have to continue to make adjustments.

"To last a short and determined amount of time. People are living longer pushing the desire by some to increase the full retirement age. Retirees now are drawing more than what is currently being put in because of the size their generation is. The groups that should be nearing their highest earning potential in salary either aren't there yet career wise, or their not there yet because boomers won't retire leaving high paying jobs open to backfill. By being forced to work longer, the only ones they are paying for are themselves because of the overdraw your generation is doing..."

not even going to try to respond to this as it literally makes no sense.

what does makes sense is this...

"To be honest, really not interested in yours..."

that pretty much says it all. you dont care about anyone else but you. that is obvious.

same.

who knows if i will even retire at 67? i might or i might not. im self employed and i like what i do. im not one of these people that started counting down the days until i could retire the day i started working. i could have retired 15 years ago. i actually feel sorry for those people.

I've known some fine men who ended up being old five and dimers. Even so... good men, money is far down the list on how I measure a man.

The idea that everybody can be financially successful is not correct. Not everybody can be royalty... our capitalist society is a good one but somebody is going to win... some not so much.

(what's this financial planning stuff? Gotta read up on that ;) )

The SS system really isn’t flawed. The main two flaws are the abuse by people who are capable of working and putting in abusing it, and the politicians stealing from it and then just putting and IOU in there.

The generation after the boomers can never work long enough to refill the SS copher they're using- IT'S TOO SMALL!! It will take the three generations after them working and contributing to replace it. Simply put, this generation is too large and living too long that is depleting the fund at a faster rate than planned.

You say it's time for the upcoming generations to work longer? Because that's fair, right? You did it so now everyone else does? Sorry, bud. Still not interested in what you did. The real world doesn't like the idea of bailing out the largest generation that is cashing in on medical advances so they can live longer...

which is why ss was needed…is needed…and needs to be kept solvent by adjusting for increasing life expectancy. same with any other insurance plan that has to pay more as people live longer.

unless and until people come to the realization that SS is an insurance plan and not a retirement plan…they will never get it.

It's because you literally don't understand how SS works for the maximum benefit. There is a reason it is important for younger generations to move up in earnings. When people don't retire when they should, it defers the earnings ability of everyone else.

Debating whether it's a good or bad proposal is irrelevant, so much so that it's a waste of time. The R's just signed their own death warrant in all retiree heavy swing states.

My health, home, auto, insurance combined is my biggest monthly expense..... And it's all basically for a what if situation.

youre more than welcome to disagree...but that doesnt change the facts.

there is a reason ss is actually just a moniker for the Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI)

How Social Security Works

Social Security is an insurance program. Workers pay into the program, typically through payroll withholding where they work. Self-employed workers pay Social Security taxes when they file their federal tax returns.

Workers can earn up to four credits each year. For every $1,640 earned in 2023, one credit was granted up to $6,560, or four credits had been achieved. For 2024, the amounts are $1,730 and $6,920, respectively.

That money goes into two Social Security trust funds: the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund (OASI) for retirees and the Disability Insurance Trust Fund (DI) for disability beneficiaries. These two funds are used to pay benefits to people who are currently eligible for them. The money that is not spent remains in the trust funds

in laymens terms...ss is no different than your other insurance coverages. they protect against a specified "what if" event..."what if" you have damage to your house..."what if" your car is damaged or stolen..."what if"you lose your ability to work due to a disability or "what if" you live too long.

there is a reason payments from ss are considered "benefits."

"Myself personally would rather see an increase in 6.2 % rate rather than forcing folks to work well into their senior years"

two things...

"senior years" is moving target. people are healthier and more active later in life than they were 40-80 years ago. that is undeniable.

nothing is forcing anyone to work later into their "senior years." you can still start receiving benefits at age 62...they are just going to be lower than they would be if you waited for full retirement age. no different than it is now. and if you wait until after full retirement age...they will be higher.

simply put...what you pay into the system (based on your income) provides xx benefits for xx years (based on life expectancy). if you start your benefits early...you get less per month... but you will get them for more years. if you start them later ...you will get more per month but you will get them for less years. if you live beyond you life expectancy...you will still get you monthly benefit for as long as you live. therein lies the insurance.

again...this is not a matter of opinion...it is a matter of fact.

hogwash.

the link you provided proves that i know < b>"exactly" how the system works.

it is you that doesnt understand that if you extend the full retirement age by two more years...yes some people will work longer...but those under them will also have longer to work in order to get the max benefit...just like what happened in 1984 when they raised the full retirement age from 65 to 67. its a sliding scale for everyone.

furthermore...are you really suggesting that your ability to make more money depends on someone else retiring? wow...

One important part of retirement planning is an honest assessment of your life expectancy. Never mind what the actuarial tables say, how is *your* health? Medical history? Family medical history? How long did your parents and grandparents live? Etc.

If you're one of those people who says "all the men in my family die before they're 70", I suggest you retire *yesterday*.

im not necessarily saying i agree with the income penalty...but if that was your "plan"...you didnt plan very well. it not like it is anything new. the income penalty has been in effect for our entire working careers.

it has actually gotten better because the penalty used to be applied regardless of age. now it only applies to those under full retirement age...which is currently 67.

it is said that most people spend more time planning a vacation (or a hunt) than they do planning their retirement.

edit: the fact is everyone has access to a plan, but it may not be an employer sponsored plan. some states have a plan for private sector employees, and of course your bank, credit union, or myriad of online brokerages.

as a whole, we do a poor job teaching about finances. i can't imagine how many, particularly younger people, don't know about and aren't taking advantage of the ROTH ira.

excellent advice...with an emphasis on "planning." actuarial tables only work for the averages.

the most important thing is to familiarize yourself with exactly the way the system works long before you ever plan on needing it. if you wait until you want to retire (or anywhere close) to figure out how ss works...you didnt plan very well.

Got an extra hundred dollars? Don't save it, go get a new tattoo!

I was lucky, because 40+ years ago my father told me bluntly that Social Security was not going to be enough, when I reached retirement age. Helped me set up an IRA that has done OK for me. But starting in my 20's was *key*.

The Constitution “recognizes that Texas has the sovereign right to defend itself from violent transnational cartels that flood the state with fentanyl, weapons, and all manner of brutality,” - Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton.

i agree...but we sure to a bang up job teaching them how we are killing the environment by cooking on a gas stove... what "white privilege" is...how they can identify as a different gender... or how they can go about getting their student loans "forgiven"

look...i agree that we could do a better job teaching about personal finances but at the end of the day...if a person can research a hunt...which new bow to buy and how to tune it...or what cell phone plan is best...they can sure as hell figure out what a roth ira is and how it works.

its just easier say its the governments fault...and play the victim.

it is obvious by this thread alone...that a whole heck of a lot of people have never bothered to read a single thing about what social security is and how it works.

that might be true...but you actually have to do it. ss is insurance for those that chose not to.

"it is you that doesn't understand that if you extend the full retirement age by two more years...yes some people will work longer...but those under them will also have longer to work in order to get the max benefit...just like what happened in 1984 when they raised the full retirement age from 65 to 67. its a sliding scale for everyone.

furthermore...are you really suggesting that your ability to make more money depends on someone else retiring? wow..."

Ricky, Ricky, Ricky...my friend, we aren't talking about ME. We are talking about the entire population up and coming as a whole. Economists are the ones saying that, not me. If you really think that just working longer will fix it, you're more clueless than you appear. Working longer has nothing to do with it. Increased contributions has everything to do with it.

thank you for posting that...did you bother to read it?

"With rare exceptions, life expectancy has been on the rise in the US: it was 47 years in 1900, 68 years in 1950, and by 2019 it had risen to nearly 79 years. But it fell to 77 in 2020 and dropped further, to just over 76, in 2021. That's the largest decrease over a two-year span since the 1920s. Yet life expectancy figures represent averages totaled from hundreds of thousands of people sorted into specific groups, and some groups fare much better than others:"

did you happen to catch the "with rare exceptions" part? that article was written in 2022.

do you suppose one of those "rare exceptions" just might be a worldwide pandemic?

do you think deaths due to drug overdoses increased or decreased as a result of literally two years of isolation and economic shutdown?

do you think the fall in life expectancy is going to continue like that post pandemic?

do you really think that the next few decades of ss policy should be made based on what happened in a 2 or three year window?

i appreciate you posting the article...it shows youre actually looking into the situation...unfortunately it just doesnt say what you think it does.

"Working longer has nothing to do with it. Increased contributions has everything to do with it."

ummmm...you do realize that working longer before collecting benefits is increasing contributions...right?

good grief...

if you invested had all the money that you paid into house insurance over the years and you never had a claim...couldnt you leave that money to your heirs?

is house insurance a ponzi scheme too?

United Soverign Americans did the research in Ohio and uncovered massive discrepancies; ( summary from the linked article)

The day after certification in 2022, the Ohio statewide voter roll database showed:

58,209 resided in an apartment or in a mobile home lot but had no unit number as required on their voter registration application to ensure proper delivery of mail, including mail-in ballot material.

4,143 were older than the oldest person in the U.S. at the time or were too young to legally register.

6,348 had a date of birth that was different in 2022 than it was in 2020.

253,486 voters supposedly registered on January 1st, 84,221 voters registered on another Federal holiday and 201,693 voters registered on Sunday -- all times when Ohio boards of elections and state offices are closed.

120,094 had registration dates in the 2022 state voter file that were earlier than their registration date in the 2020 file. 59,025 people were listed as registering to vote before they were born. ( gotta love that one!)

243,583 had state identification numbers that had changed since 2020, even though federal laws require each voter be issued “a unique state identifier.” 34,233 had 2 to 5 registration records with different state identification numbers, making it possible for them to vote more than once.

"In the aftermath of Donald Trump's loss in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, the American Thinker published a variety of articles that had claims of election fraud.[5] Faced with a lawsuit from Dominion Voting Systems, Lifson acknowledged that the site had relied upon "discredited sources who have peddled debunked theories".[6] The American Thinker likewise admitted that its election claims were "completely false and have no basis in fact" and that "it was wrong for us to publish these false statements."[7]

of course im offended...

...just as offended as I am about my neighbor who got a few hundred thousand dollars when his house burned down...and ive never been fortunate enough to collect on my house insurance. all ive ever done is pay in.

frickin ponzi scheme...

And those who retire under the Galveston model do much better than Social Security. For example:

A lower-middle income worker making about $26,000 at retirement would get about $1,007 a month under Social Security, but $1,826 under the Alternate Plan, according to First Financial’s calculations. A middle-income worker making $51,200 would get about $1,540 monthly from Social Security, but $3,600 from the banking model. And a high-income worker who maxed out on his Social Security contribution every year would receive about $2,500 a month from Social Security vs. $5,000 to $6,000 a month from the Alternate Plan.

where are you getting those figures mint? if a person maxed out contributions every year...their monthly payment would be 3822.00 at full retirement age.

"The maximum benefit depends on the age you retire. For example, if you retire at full retirement age in 2024, your maximum benefit would be $3,822. However, if you retire at age 62 in 2024, your maximum benefit would be $2,710. If you retire at age 70 in 2024, your maximum benefit would be $4,873.

Seeing some guys screw up investing in IRAs and 401(k)s by getting too greedy. Got into the .com tech bullshit and didn't get out fast enough. A 'balanced portfolio' ain't flashy, it just works.

in the galveston plan...what do the beneficiaries get if they are totally disabled?

what if a person moves from those three counties? how can a plan like that possibly be portable?

I also noticed that the article you linked was from 2011. I have not been able to find a single article beyond that.

it would appear that there are major differences between the two plans...some better for the galveston plan and some better for ss. some of those differences are in the areas of portability...disability...spousal or dependent benefits...indexing for inflation...single vs married employees...taxation of benefits...among a number of others.

very interesting read...

Choice between FRS Pension Plan or Investment Plan.

Optional 457 deferred comp (unfortunately I see a lot of folks not taking advantage of this)

Social Security

FRS DROP - Only for folks that chose pension. Basically your retire, but keep working for up to 8 years (12 for teachers). Monthly pension check goes into the DROP account earning an annual rate of 4% compounded monthly. COLA is applied every July.

My last day in DROP, should I choose to stay that long, is 5/31/2028 and I'll be 65 that year.

The link is to the article which is several years old. One main difference in the plans is one is solvent and the other is not obviously. And GG it's a comparison not what I would choose if i had a choice to invest on my own or put into the plan.

i noticed the article was from 2011 after i posted the question...thanks.

at the end of the day...if the galveston plan is still solvent (again...i havent been able to find anything on it that is recent) it is no doubt in large part due to the strict limitations placed on it compared to ss...which is much broader...and acts much more like the insurance plan that it was always intended to be. its a lot easier to stay solvent when the plan is limited to returning only that which a person contributes...plus interest. what the participants in the galveston plan gain in one area...they lose in another.

ironically...just the mention of doing what is necessary to keep the ss plan "solvent" for future generations...by placing some additional limits on it...is what is at issue here and what has some people in such an uproar.

interesting. most private disability plans are for a specified period like 5...10...or 20 years and will only insure up to 65% of someones income. also...im not aware of any disability plan that would pay a benefit beyond 65 (normal working age). they dont exist...at least not in my state.

id love to know where to buy a plan like that. if you could pm me the company...id sure be interested in buying one.

"Under every metric SS is a bad deal since the Government set it up like a ponzi scheme and not as insurance or investment."

that is easy to say...but its simply not accurate. its set up just like an insurance plan because thats exactly what it is.

but unlike most private plans...it insures everyone regardless of their health...it pays full retirement benefits...for life...after only working 10 years (40 quarters)...it is portable...offers dependent benefits...and it has a cost of living adjustment. granted...it may or may not perform as well as a straight investment plan...but it is much more than that.

comparing ss to a retirement only plan...which only returns ones own investment plus gain is like comparing a homeowners polity that covers all risks...for whatever it costs to make the repair...with a plan that only covers wind damage...and the benefits are limited to what you paid in premiums plus interest.

we are 35 TRILLION in debt ... print 2-3 trillion, put it in SS and there, done

this isn't hard guys, charge the national debt to 100 trillion or 300 trillion then default - its the ONLY way out anyway, might as well spend like sailors until that time

thank the last 20 years of Congress - both parties did it, there is no saving us from that debt now

im sorry but it most certainly is. that is why it is officially called Old-Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance (OASDI)...and it indeed does have reserves...called the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance and the Disability Insurance Trust Funds which currently have between 2 and 3 trillion dollars in reserve. (see link)

your talking about two different things. yes...the trust funds which hold the reserves are investments (government securities)...but the social security program itself is insurance.

no different than an insurance company having their reserves in a variety of different investments.

in exactly the same way that if a person with no spouse or kids pays on a homeowners/auto/disability policy for 20...30...40 years and dies before ever making a claim.

or how about if a person buys a 20 year level term life insurance policy and doesnt die within 20 years. what happens to all the money paid in?

you literally just described the difference between insurance and an investment.

in·sur·ance

1. a practice or arrangement by which a company or government agency provides a guarantee of compensation for specified loss, damage, illness, or death in return for payment of a premium.

in the case of ss the "specified loss" is the loss of earnings due to a worker's retirement, disability, or death.

thats certainly your prerogative. you can call it anything you want...but that doesnt change the facts about what it is...what it isnt...and what it was designed to do.

"If I pay into SS and die before I use it with no dependents then my payout or return is zero."

you keep going back to that but for some reason you cant grasp the difference between "insurance" and "investment."

on the flip side...what if you start paying into the ss system at age 25 and become totally disabled at 40...collect disability benefits for the next 27 years...and then collect retirement benefits for 20 years after that? what is your "return" then? pay in for 15 years and collect benefits for 47 years.

if all you had was a private investment account that you paid the same amount of money into...how long would that have lasted?

insurance is predicated on the notion that some people will collect substantially more than they ever paid in...and some people will collect substantially less than they ever paid in...if any at all.

that is the only way insurance can work.

"It also acts as a disincentive for people not to save for future with the thought that they will just live on SS."

people who are savers and investors are going to save and invest regardless of ss. it is a discipline.

people who spend every dime they make...if not more...are not going to all of a sudden become savers and investors just because they dont have to pay into ss. that is a fantasy.

like it or not...if it werent for the fact that ss is compulsory...a substantial segment of the population would eventually be destitute.

As long as I can remember (I am 70 years old now) people in and out of government have been warning that SS is not solvent. Which is actually the least of our problems - the government can print any amount of money it needs. (And yes, I understand that's how inflation is born.)

(And as the OP points out, they can screw with it any way, shape, or form...)

You can pretty much sort out people on the financial intelligence scale by whether or not they did what you said, and chose to rely on SS, or to save for themselves.

Traditional IRA's have been around since the mid-70's. Those who chose not to put a damn dime in one, hey, how's that working out for you?

agreed. the notion that if a person just wasnt forced to pay ss tax they would invest that money somewhere else and live happily ever after is actually laughable. :)

Traditional IRA's have been around since the mid-70's. Those who chose not to put a damn dime in one, hey, how's that working out for you?"

not to mention that people have been saving and investing long before iras ever existed. it doesnt take an ira to put money away for the future.

It would be interesting to see what just $10 a week would have built up to if you started in 1975. (I don't have the math!)

pretty much....but not all income is subject to ss tax.

probably not...thats why ss is so important...at least as a mandatory foundation. lots of people have tough times...but as long as you can work 40 quarters (10 years) throughout your adult life...youre guaranteed to retire with something.

pretty sure thats been my point all along.