The election is over for the republicans
General Topic
Contributors to this thread:
Stix 21-Mar-24
Recurve Man 21-Mar-24
DanaC 21-Mar-24
Stix 21-Mar-24
Mule Power 21-Mar-24
RonP 22-Mar-24
Mike B 22-Mar-24
WV Mountaineer 22-Mar-24
BowSniper 22-Mar-24
DanaC 22-Mar-24
scentman 22-Mar-24
Michael 22-Mar-24
Builder07 22-Mar-24
Brotsky 22-Mar-24
Will 22-Mar-24
KY EyeBow 22-Mar-24
tobywon 22-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 22-Mar-24
Olde style 22-Mar-24
Zbone 22-Mar-24
Builder07 22-Mar-24
Beendare 22-Mar-24
FORESTBOWS 22-Mar-24
xtroutx 22-Mar-24
spike78 22-Mar-24
Builder07 22-Mar-24
Jaquomo 22-Mar-24
TGbow 22-Mar-24
spike78 22-Mar-24
TGbow 22-Mar-24
Builder07 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
spike78 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
RutnStrut 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
TGbow 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
midwest 22-Mar-24
GFL 22-Mar-24
KsRancher 22-Mar-24
KsRancher 22-Mar-24
KsRancher 22-Mar-24
spike78 22-Mar-24
BowSniper 22-Mar-24
KSflatlander 22-Mar-24
KsRancher 22-Mar-24
KSflatlander 22-Mar-24
Builder07 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
Live2Hunt 22-Mar-24
BIGHORN 22-Mar-24
Stix 22-Mar-24
tobywon 22-Mar-24
xtroutx 22-Mar-24
Mint 22-Mar-24
spike78 22-Mar-24
Swampbuck 22-Mar-24
SteveB 22-Mar-24
Stringwacker 22-Mar-24
shade mt 23-Mar-24
Stringwacker 23-Mar-24
Recurve Man 23-Mar-24
Stringwacker 23-Mar-24
midwest 23-Mar-24
HDE 23-Mar-24
Timex? 23-Mar-24
Mint 23-Mar-24
midwest 23-Mar-24
Norseman 23-Mar-24
EmptyFreezer 23-Mar-24
PECO2 23-Mar-24
Mint 23-Mar-24
HDE 23-Mar-24
Timex? 23-Mar-24
MichaelArnette 23-Mar-24
HDE 23-Mar-24
BIGHORN 23-Mar-24
spike78 24-Mar-24
2Wild Bill 24-Mar-24
Franzen 24-Mar-24
Timex? 24-Mar-24
Franzen 24-Mar-24
sasquatch 24-Mar-24
HDE 24-Mar-24
Nyati 24-Mar-24
scentman 24-Mar-24
Tilzbow 24-Mar-24
Beendare 24-Mar-24
70lbDraw 24-Mar-24
sasquatch 24-Mar-24
spike78 24-Mar-24
Nyati 24-Mar-24
HDE 24-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 24-Mar-24
2Wild Bill 24-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 24-Mar-24
bluedog 24-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 24-Mar-24
Norseman 24-Mar-24
bluedog 24-Mar-24
sasquatch 24-Mar-24
Groundhunter 24-Mar-24
BIGHORN 24-Mar-24
Nyati 24-Mar-24
HDE 24-Mar-24
TGbow 24-Mar-24
HDE 24-Mar-24
Stix 24-Mar-24
Timex? 25-Mar-24
DanaC 25-Mar-24
Timex? 25-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 25-Mar-24
DanaC 25-Mar-24
RonP 25-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 25-Mar-24
BoggsBowhunts 25-Mar-24
DanaC 25-Mar-24
TonyBear 25-Mar-24
Timex? 25-Mar-24
Timex? 25-Mar-24
HDE 25-Mar-24
Nyati 25-Mar-24
Brotsky 25-Mar-24
Nyati 25-Mar-24
Nyati 25-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 25-Mar-24
Beendare 25-Mar-24
DanaC 25-Mar-24
Mint 25-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 25-Mar-24
DanaC 25-Mar-24
Panhandle Bob 26-Mar-24
KsRancher 26-Mar-24
Panhandle Bob 26-Mar-24
Mint 26-Mar-24
Mint 27-Mar-24
Nyati 27-Mar-24
Timex? 27-Mar-24
Missouribreaks 27-Mar-24
stealthycat 27-Mar-24
Timex? 27-Mar-24
Glunt@work 27-Mar-24
Nyati 27-Mar-24
Nyati 27-Mar-24
Timex? 27-Mar-24
Nyati 27-Mar-24
Stix 27-Mar-24
Stix 27-Mar-24
Stix 27-Mar-24
Stix 27-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
Missouribreaks 28-Mar-24
DanaC 28-Mar-24
DanaC 28-Mar-24
Thornton 28-Mar-24
Timex? 28-Mar-24
Timex? 28-Mar-24
Grey Ghost 28-Mar-24
Timex? 28-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
Nyati 28-Mar-24
From: Stix
21-Mar-24
The Republicans just lost the congressional elections for 2024. Unfortunately this may drag down Trump's chances too.

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.

From: Recurve Man
21-Mar-24
I guess it was worth repeating.

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

Shane

From: DanaC
21-Mar-24
Does the GOP *want* to lose Florida?

From: Stix
21-Mar-24
Unfortunately, with a number of retirees moving south, this could cost them Fla, NC, SC, Ark, & definetly Arizona.

From: Mule Power
21-Mar-24
69! In other words, they want no term limit on how long we have to work our asses off to support them.

From: RonP
22-Mar-24
before the last mid-terms, lindsey graham is front and center with proposed legislation to limit abortion.

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.....

From: Mike B
22-Mar-24
I know a lot of y'all planned well for your retirement..I tried to, as well, but not much a person can do when your own business goes TU because you're too sick to work.

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.

22-Mar-24
Here we are discussing the idiot ideas from established politicians. Confused by something so dumb it can’t be fathomed.

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.

From: BowSniper
22-Mar-24
Republicans should just ignore the SS and Medicare budget crisis just like the democrats. Let the whole system collapse due to its insolvency, rather than face the political suicide of touching that 3rd rail. And then blame the Democrat spending problem. Play the same game....

From: DanaC
22-Mar-24
Yeah, great; counter poor leadership with no leadership at all. There's a winning tactic for you. Not.

From: scentman
22-Mar-24
Any way you look at it the future looks pretty grim, the reality is, the people who were voted in to office don't have our best interests in mind... just their own. scentman

From: Michael
22-Mar-24
This doesn’t surprise me at all.

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.

From: Builder07
22-Mar-24
Maybe in your state. There's plenty of room to cut MEDICAID which has been paying every illegal's HC costs for decades. Also, it pays for the Druggies and Hemp heads getting welfare who have never paid Medicare taxes from work payroll.

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.

From: Brotsky
22-Mar-24
If given the choice today between receiving a SS payout at age XX or never paying into SS again and forfeiting what I have already paid in to the pool, I would 10000% select the latter. I'm 48 years old for reference. I have no illusion that I will ever receive SS and would prefer to not have to continue to pay for everyone else's retirement.

From: Will
22-Mar-24
WV, the GOP has spent 8-10 years promoting a known grifting con man as a literal savior - with golden effigies and pictures showing him as Christ or Christ like. If it's a grand plan, it started years ago.

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!"

From: KY EyeBow
22-Mar-24
+1 Brotsky. Entitlement spending has been WAY out of control for a long time and is responsible for a huge amount of what our country spends our money on. It has to be reigned but it will be painful for all,,,, the people currently paying for it, and those receiving it. Too many receiving and not enough paying!

From: tobywon
22-Mar-24
I agree Brotsky, not banking on SS here as well in my retirement plans. We also have a paid family leave program here, so I have to pay for some father to stay home when wife has a baby. Stay home if you want, but don't make me pay for it. We had to figure it out when we had kids. Many other states have it or are going in this direction as well.

From: Grey Ghost
22-Mar-24
I suspect people who paid into SS their whole life, and are now reliant on it in retirement, like Mike B above, take offense to Brostsky claiming he's paying for their retirement.

22-Mar-24
One world order - slow and simple -in the end ALL will be the same - EVERYONE will own NOTHING — EVERYONE will be POOR .Not now but it will happen ,you are just witnessing the beginning of all NATIONS failing because people put their faith in governments that are only operated to please THEMSELVES.My only suggestion is surround yourself with liked minded people to survive as long as possible and pray to win the battle of EVIL vs GOOD.As sure as it will happen- ALL NATIONS FALL. History can’t be erased or torn done and will repeat because we don’t learn from it.Times will progressively get worst,but for some - in the final days times will be GREAT again when the true government arrives-One that truly CARES for all.For the ones that don’t believe,you can argue,fight,blame,criticize,cry, beg or steal it will still happen some day .CORRUPTION is a BITCH — GOD BLESS

From: Zbone
22-Mar-24
Years ago SS was guaranteed until 2033 if I remember correctly, it was under the Clinton administration...

From: Builder07
22-Mar-24

Builder07's Link
Midicaid is where I would look as GOP Rep.

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.

From: Beendare
22-Mar-24
What are you talking about?

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

22-Mar-24
If you even consider voting Democrat or independent in the coming election your against this country.

From: xtroutx
22-Mar-24
Funny how others say they are paying for my retirement. After 40 years of 45 to 60 hour work weeks, at decent wages, and paying SS tax all those years, I think I paid my fair share of my retirement SS. But hey, feel free to think you are paying for it. I am all for cutting social programs that benefit the lazy able-bodied people that just don't want to work but don't act like collecting SS at retirement age is a freebie. Hell I would be happy if they gave me a 50% lump sum of what I paid in over the years.

From: spike78
22-Mar-24
Yup 2 party’s are the perfect way to dupe the citizens. Pretty soon they will turn us on each other. Oh wait too late for that.

From: Builder07
22-Mar-24
Sure, Look at SS now. They are raising the amount of credits you need every year to get your benifit. 40 credits now. We have millions of Americans who worked and stopped to be Mom's, take care of parents, etc that the SS Dept will not pay out their credits.

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!

From: Jaquomo
22-Mar-24
I sold a house in 2022, and now my Medicare A+B costs $700 a month.

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.

From: TGbow
22-Mar-24
I have an idea...quit forcing people to pay in to SS...it will collapse eventually. You can't support the systems we have in place without very high taxation, just the way it works.

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.

From: spike78
22-Mar-24
I don’t know much about Medicare as I am not retired and I thought since we paid into it every year that it was free when we retire. Why does it cost $700?

From: TGbow
22-Mar-24
None of this stuff is "free" except to those that don't pay in to the system.

22-Mar-24
Yeah, we need to cut SS that so we can spend more overseas.

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

From: Builder07
22-Mar-24
Oh No, your taxed on SS and then your billed for monthly for Medicare part A and B.

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 $.

From: Stix
22-Mar-24
Spike, your medicare premium is based on your income in retirement. After $103k/year per person ($206k for couples) it goes up substantially. The sale of a home or investment income is included for that yearly period if it is a capital gain.

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.

From: spike78
22-Mar-24
All seems like a plan for Agenda 2030. If this is true it is proof that we have a 1 party government.

From: Stix
22-Mar-24
Spike, that's the republican plan. Just google "republican plan for social security and medicare"

From: RutnStrut
22-Mar-24
75 Billion to Ukraine and 150 Billion to Iran is just some of the Dems wasteful spending that could go to help CITIZENS of it's own country. You can't just blame Republicans for something that both parties have screwed up.

From: Stix
22-Mar-24

From: TGbow
22-Mar-24
They have so much wasteful spending it's pathetic. Politicians learned a long time ago if they promise certain individuals something for nothing, they will secure votes. The problem is they're not really giving you anything for nothing...you're giving up something way more valuable than material gain. Both parties have a pretty bad tract record in my state as far as liberty goes...except for the right to life, which I'm thankful for

From: Stix
22-Mar-24

Stix's Link

From: midwest
22-Mar-24
I said the same thing Brotsky said 10 or 15 years ago. If I would have been granted that option, I would be way ahead of what I'm going to collect from SS. But I wasn't so now I'm here to collect what I was promised.

22-Mar-24
i agree that it probably isnt the best time to discuss this politically...but the fact of the matter is we should have been raising the full retirement age all along.

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.

From: GFL
22-Mar-24
Shouldn’t have to depend on social security to retire. Biggest portion of our country is called lazy.

From: KsRancher
22-Mar-24

From: KsRancher
22-Mar-24
Dang Stix. That news source leans so far left they are falling over

From: KsRancher
22-Mar-24
DP.

From: spike78
22-Mar-24
Ricky just because I live until 80 doesn’t mean I want to work until I’m 69. Most people are beaten and broken by then. I know my back and arms could use an early retirement. Not to mention my sanity.

From: BowSniper
22-Mar-24
Just go back to the pre-covid Federal budget and you save almost 3 trillion PER YEAR compared to Bidens latest budget proposal. Could fund SS and Medicare no problem.

From: KSflatlander
22-Mar-24

KSflatlander's Link
"Overall, we rate Slate, moderately Left Biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favor the left and Mostly Factual for reporting due to proper sourcing but a few failed fact checks."

There you go KsRancher

From: KsRancher
22-Mar-24
Yep. They are farther left than Fox is right

From: KSflatlander
22-Mar-24

KSflatlander's Link
"Overall, we rate Fox News right biased based on editorial positions that align with the right and Questionable due to the promotion of propaganda, conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, the use of poor sources, and numerous false claims and failed fact checks. Straight news reporting from beat reporters is generally fact-based and accurate, which earns them a Mixed factual rating."

Not quite lol. They are both bad sources IMO.

From: Builder07
22-Mar-24

Builder07's Link
The KSFL site itself is a sham without any scientific methodology. One read thru Politofact Bias will tell you all you need to know about Davis Van Zandt. A shuckster.

22-Mar-24
"Ricky just because I live until 80 doesn’t mean I want to work until I’m 69."

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.

From: Stix
22-Mar-24
Ok, I just chose an article to post. But all you need to do is search "republican plan for Social Security" and they'll be plenty of sources to choose from.

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.

From: Live2Hunt
22-Mar-24
LOL, later get here faster than you think. Party, get married, have a kid and before you know it, your a grandpa looking at retirement.

22-Mar-24
"BUT THE 13% SS BENEFIT DECREASE WILL AFFECT ALL WHO ARE RECEIVING BENEFITS..."

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.

From: BIGHORN
22-Mar-24
Frankly, raising the retirement age to 69 shouldn't be a problem because people are living longer now days, and it would take a lot of money to pay them longer as they age. Also, I think that anyone that would sign up for Medicare Advantage should have their head examined. It is not a government program. Advantage is private insurance companies and private doctors. They get their money through Medicare payments. You have to sign up each year to get your coverage but if the private insurance company no longer offer certain coverage you would have to look elsewhere or try to get back into regular Medicare if possible. To give people more and more from the government budget is called Socialism. Look at all the illegals that are taking up the Medicaid budget. This has to be STOPPED. They can get hospital treatments for free because they are poor and the hospitals have to increase their charges to cover their losses. Instead of saving money for retirement citizens have been buying more expensive home and new cars or trucks and enjoying the good life. Now, when they want to retire, they want the government to supply them with benefits and funds to enable them to live the way they are accustomed to over the years. Whose fault is that? NEVER SPEND MORE THAN WHAT YOU MAKE! Have a budget and that should include a savings plan for retirement and stick to it. The government is not responsible for taking care of you. Only for National Defense!!! Now, our idiot President is sticking taxpayers for paying off student loans. Hey, we paid to get our kids through college and no one helped us. Enough of this crybaby conversation.

From: Stix
22-Mar-24
Ricky, the 13% reduction I'm referring to is based on the average of total elimination of Cola benefits for sme and the chain weighted reduction for the others.

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

From: tobywon
22-Mar-24
I didn't take Brotsky's comment that way and don't easily get offended, especially on an internet forum. I read it as this....if SS is on its way out and will be done and over by the time he retires (and me too for that matter), I'd just rather stop paying into it now and save on my own as I have been doing for over 35 years now. So if money taken out of my paycheck now for SS that is not available later when I retire because the system is done, I'd rather not pay into it anymore now (which happens to go to someone who is retired and payed into the system). I don't see how that is offensive to anyone. I think anyone that is retired now can agree. If they worked 60 hr work weeks for 50 years paying into the system and then it wasn't there when they retire, they'd be pissed and understand.

22-Mar-24
"Ricky, the 13% reduction I'm referring to is based on the average of total elimination of Cola benefits for sme and the chain weighted reduction for the others. 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.

From: xtroutx
22-Mar-24
I am not offended by any means. Everyone has a right to their own opinion. I have 3 children that are in their 40s and will be in the same boat. It's sucks.. All I was saying is I paid for my SS and am now collecting my SS. No more no less. I am collecting what I paid for not what someone else paid for. All I can say is at least my children where old enough to realize the problem and young enough to still be able to do something about it.

From: Mint
22-Mar-24
There is no " Republican Party Plan" just like there is no "Democrat Party Plan" or "President Biden Plan" since they all know the other side will use it against them. What will happen is that a BiPartisan Commission will be put together and really screw things up and nobody will be blamed.

From: spike78
22-Mar-24
Ricky I’ve lived cheap my entire life and invested in most investments and sue to our worthless government I’m not sinking but I’m sure not swimming pretty.

22-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
" You have to sign up each year to get your coverage but if the private insurance company no longer offer certain coverage you would have to look elsewhere or try to get back into regular Medicare if possible."

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.

From: Swampbuck
22-Mar-24
Our future was left behind with a hanging chad!! We’ve been screwed ever since

From: SteveB
22-Mar-24
Zero chance this will happen. Political suicide by the republican hands and they know Biden would never sign it anyway. There will be no serious talk of this prior to the election. Period.

From: Stringwacker
22-Mar-24
I'm told that if you chose an advantage plan (as opposed to medicare/medigap) that you can never go back to medicare with a supplement without being questioned about your health status. Medigap programs can deny you if you don't enroll during your 65th birthday enrollment period.

23-Mar-24
”Medigap programs can deny you if you don't enroll during your 65th birthday enrollment period.”

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

From: shade mt
23-Mar-24
Figure i'll work till i physically cannot, and why not? what on earth else would i do sit around on the couch and spend time on social media, or watch TV?

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.

23-Mar-24
good post shade...

From: Stringwacker
23-Mar-24
"the same is true if you want to switch medigap companies."

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.

From: Recurve Man
23-Mar-24
Shade I couldn’t have said it better.

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

23-Mar-24
18 million new US citizens that came over the border. Make no mistake. They will never leave.

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.

23-Mar-24
"Your medigap plan can never cancel you...."

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

From: Stringwacker
23-Mar-24
I have an 'issue' policy so its price increases can only be due to inflation...as opposed to "age attainment and inflation" in hopes that those increases will be minimized in the future. Very few people take advantage of this.

From: midwest
23-Mar-24
"I don't want gov't freebies...i'll work for my own."

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

From: HDE
23-Mar-24
I really don't have any issues working well into my 60's or even 70's as long as I'm calling the shots.

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...

From: Timex?
23-Mar-24
Blew my ankle out at work at age 60 , went on workers comp disability, after 4 months my overall health both physically & mentally were in the toilet......called the comp people said I want to go back to work......like shade, I'll work till I physically can't & perhaps more importantly because I want to , makes a huge difference. My house will be paid for in less than 2 years, then a small home equity loan for a new roof, I will be 100% debt free by age 65....have considered taking money from my Ira & paying the house off now, but the tax penalty just isn't worth it.

Social security........I have mixed feelings..... in my case my body is so worn out that not working is worse than working,,,,I start rusting quickly.....

But to say because people are living longer you have to work longer is flawed imo.

From: Mint
23-Mar-24
You can cancel your Medicare Advantage plan and go back to original Medicare but you have to do it in the yearly enrollment period. You will need to pick another supplemental plan for the dug coverage. Sometimes a Medicare Advantage is best since you aren't paying any additional premiums but you are paying for copays and have deductibles. It all depends on where your health is and whether your Dr's will accept Medicare Advantage Plan.

From: midwest
23-Mar-24
Advantage plan for me. Soon...

From: Norseman
23-Mar-24
Matthew 8:26

From: EmptyFreezer
23-Mar-24
https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/democrats-misleadingly-claim-republicans-plan-would-end-social-security-medicare/

23-Mar-24
"But to say because people are living longer you have to work longer is flawed imo.

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.

From: PECO2
23-Mar-24
I start collecting SS next month! So, I'm going to need Brotsky and the rest of you to keep paying into the system and keep it afloat. Thanks in advance!

From: Mint
23-Mar-24
With all the covid deaths with regards to the elderly how come that didn't extend the solvency. Maybe covid didn't really affect normal life expectancy.

From: HDE
23-Mar-24
"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."

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...

From: Timex?
23-Mar-24
Did a simple Google search.... The "average" middle class person including their employers 6.2% match has paid into ss 470k. At a 65 yo retirement age,,,,,

I'm not educated, but this amount of $$$ at simple interest compounded should be quite the pile of $$$$$$

This is why I feel the system is flawed.

You owe the government $$$ your debt is charged 5% compounded daily....plus applicable penalties

23-Mar-24
OP is not wrong

From: HDE
23-Mar-24
Timex? - we don't owe the gov't anything. They take via extortion...

From: BIGHORN
23-Mar-24
HDE, People living on SS can hardly make it now, but you think that they should tax these people during their retirement just because they are living longer. Are you in favor of food stamps for them? I had to laugh at your response. When we retired at the age of 54 our house and vehicles and everything we owned was paid for and we had a very comfortable pot of money saved up. We are able to do what we would like to do but we still watch our budget because we would never want to ask our kids for help. Don't spend more than what you make or have in your savings. We help our kids and grandchildren because we have the funds. However, if we see that they are not living within a budget we don't give them help. The place that we retired from pays for ALL of our medical bills. Yes, that is really nice but when you consider that it was determined at one time to be the deadliest place on earth and most of our friends have died from cancers or heart problems you would understand why they pay for all these medical bills. They matched with 8% the 8% that we put into our 401k accounts. That's 16% for both of us plus the 16% that they put in as matching funds. Of course, we had other investments too so that built up over our working years. I have to agree that not everyone has a place like this to work at.

From: spike78
24-Mar-24
Amazing the government can somehow find money to blow on other countries but where oh where will they find it to fund SS.

24-Mar-24
"Or, we can increase taxes on the retired for not putting enough in instead of pulling from the fund that I'm paying into..."

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.

24-Mar-24
"The "average" middle class person including their employers 6.2% match has paid into ss 470k. At a 65 yo retirement age,,,,, I'm not educated, but this amount of $$$ at simple interest compounded should be quite the pile of $$$$$$"

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."

From: 2Wild Bill
24-Mar-24
"It is when a people forget God, that tyrants forge their chains." - Patrick Henry

From: Franzen
24-Mar-24
Very enlightening thread. Quite interesting how the opinion "changes" once one is drawing, or close to drawing, the benefit (aside from a couple standouts). I should get 100% of "mine", regardless of whether a future generation might get 0% of theirs. Make no mistake, the current SS-Medi payer is paying for those drawing benefits (that is simply how the broken system works). Some of those posting above might be truly what the system was designed for, but I tend to think appreciation is more in order than taking offense. A lot of this is exactly what our modern government desires, really.

24-Mar-24
"Make no mistake, the current SS-Medi payer is paying for those drawing benefits (that is simply how the broken system works)."

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.

From: Timex?
24-Mar-24
Ricky......I was born in 61,,, my full benefit age is 67.........

Bighorn............my previous job had a 7% 401k match, I contributed 10% for 17% total. My current job only offers a 3% Ira match, I contribute 17% for a 20% total.........

My current job is a relatively small trash removal company with roughly 25 employees, fair pay & good medical insurance, I've tried to get the company Ira contribution amount increased, "BUT" there's such little participation in the Ira program from the other employees.......this just completely dumbfounds me.... It's free money their leaving on the table,,,,but ya can't beat it into their head with a hammer......they want their $$$ in their hand on Friday, not in some account they can't easily access.......

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

From: Franzen
24-Mar-24
If it were a well-functioning system, instead of a broken one, we wouldn't be having this discussion... Play semantics however you want.

From: sasquatch
24-Mar-24
The leeches of this country that are hell bent on tearing it apart for personal gain, have gotten their nails dug very deep.

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.

24-Mar-24
"If it were a well-functioning system, instead of a broken one, we wouldn't be having this discussion... Play semantics however you want."

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.

24-Mar-24
"Ricky......I was born in 61,,, my full benefit age is 67........."

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.

From: HDE
24-Mar-24
"...like it or not...its probably time to raise full retirement age again."

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.

From: Nyati
24-Mar-24
Social security was established in 1935. Average life span for a male was 60.

Average death was 5 years before they were eligible for social security.

In 2024 average male life is about 79. Eligible age for social security in 2024 is 67.

So the average time someone will be on social security is 12 years.

The money has to come from somewhere. Either increase SS tax, increase retirement age, or both.

They didn’t save the money to prepare for boomer generation, they spent it like drunken sailors.

From: scentman
24-Mar-24
I opted to retire at 63, the money I take in till I'm 67 is a bonus to me because you never know what the future holds... I live a modest comfortable life so I'm thankful for what I have. scentman

From: Tilzbow
24-Mar-24
What I haven’t seen discussed is the high probability this proposed change won’t impact anyone posting on this thread. The last increase in 1983 only affected those born after 1959 so if this proposed increase was implemented in similar fashion only those born after 1999 would be impacted.

24-Mar-24
"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.

From: Beendare
24-Mar-24
It’s disheartening to me to see the obvious; we essentially have one Unipart in the United States. He bent on doing everything except helping the American people..

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

24-Mar-24
nyati and tilzbow...

good posts...you both get it.

From: 70lbDraw
24-Mar-24
“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”

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

From: sasquatch
24-Mar-24
“ left to their own devices many people would piss the money away during their working years...and they would be destitute come retirment age.“

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.

From: spike78
24-Mar-24
I love how they talk about life expectancy being greater now. When my father was 65 he had heart issues and did live longer but barely could walk without being out of breath. My mom is now 80 but has lived for the last 7 years with dimentia and doesn’t know who I am so honestly this BS about living longer so therefore you should have to work longer is rediculous. Life expectancy means nothing if your quality of life sucks after your legal retirement age.

From: Nyati
24-Mar-24
spike78, you didn’t think that 50 years ago the people that died at an earlier age had health issues in the years leading up to their ultimate death ?

Most weren’t just completely healthy one day then dead the next.

Modern medicine has provided a longer life span. Some people are healthy until they die, others are not and that includes all ages .

There are 20 yr olds with bad quality of lives and there are 80 yr olds with good qualities of life. Just depends on genetics, how well someone takes care of themselves, how well some doesn’t take care of themselves, and just pure good or bad luck.

From: HDE
24-Mar-24
"actually no. fair is fair but fair is not the way you describe it."

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...

From: Grey Ghost
24-Mar-24
The government's definition of "retirement age" was never a consideration for me and my wife. We set and met our financial goals in order to retire when we damn well pleased. If/when we draw SS, that will just be a little extra fun money. I'll be sure to toast you working stiffs who are paying for it. ;-)

From: 2Wild Bill
24-Mar-24
SS = Never was a lockbox and the politicians bought votes with missappropriated funds.

24-Mar-24
"For who? Your generation or mine? To be honest, really not interested in yours..."

"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.

24-Mar-24
"The government's definition of "retirement age" was never a consideration for me and my wife. We set and met our financial goals in order to retire when we damn well pleased."

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.

From: Grey Ghost
24-Mar-24
IMO, unless you've suffered unexpected financial hardships, if SS is a major part of your financial plans for retirement, you've done yourself a disservice.

From: bluedog
24-Mar-24
I disagree with you guys.... all men are not created equal in their abilities. This holds true when it comes to achieving monetary success. Not everybody has the talent .

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.

From: Grey Ghost
24-Mar-24
Dan, financial success and being "fine men" has nothing to do with it. I know a lot of fine men who suck at financial planning, too.

From: Norseman
24-Mar-24

Norseman 's embedded Photo
Norseman 's embedded Photo
For Bluedog

From: bluedog
24-Mar-24
It was the doing themselves a disservice part..... some do as good as they can and it isn't enough to give them extra. No fault of theirs.... just the way it is.

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

From: sasquatch
24-Mar-24
SS is a good system to help the “majority” be able to afford basic life needs should things go bad.

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.

From: Groundhunter
24-Mar-24
What a stupid post.

From: BIGHORN
24-Mar-24
sasquatch, You hit the nail on the head when you said that Politian's rob the SS bank and just put an IOU in there. This has been going on for many years and that is why there is not enough now to pay the people that have retired. They are using the SS funds to pay for government entitlement programs. Check it out. FDR started the SS program and when the money was to be given back to retirees it was supposed to be tax free. Then, the government started to "borrow" surplus SS revenues with the intent to pay it back but they over borrowed and never paid anything back in. That is the problem that we have today.

From: Nyati
24-Mar-24
Then you have to pay tax on your SS which was a tax to begin with

From: HDE
24-Mar-24
Ricky, Ricky, Ricky...

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...

From: TGbow
24-Mar-24
It's called "legalized extortion".

24-Mar-24
“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.”

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.

From: HDE
24-Mar-24

HDE's Link
"...not even going to try to respond to this as it literally makes no sense."

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.

From: Stix
24-Mar-24
My reason for originally posfing this is not to debate the pro's & con's of SS and the current Rep proposal, but more to make the observation of the proposal: It's an election losing proposition. A majority of the electorate will not dissect it intelligently.

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.

From: Timex?
25-Mar-24
Ricky I do understand your thoughts on the issue.....

But disagree with , it's insurance & not retirement.....

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

Pensions, ira's 401k & like it or not ss for a lot of folks is their retirement plan.....

I don't intend to stop working until I physically can't......I'm far from wealthy, but don't struggle financially, but also live extremely conservatively.

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

When I was young and strong I was proud of the fact that I could carry a 12' x 30' roll of carpet on my shoulder & install an entire house of carpet by myself in a day......but now at age 62 , every hour of every day my body let's me know that I abused it in my younger years....I work now because my body needs to work & not necessarily because I need the $$$

To me the ss math doesn't add up, can't remember the exact #,s but I considered collecting my ss at 62 & just continue working the numbers were roughly ss 1.400 Monthly & the most I could make without penalties was 18k yearly if I wait till 67 my ss will be 2.400 with zero work penalties.......

I absolutely do not understand the penalties for someone that is willing to continue working at nearly 1/2 the ss payments as compared to waiting 5 more years.

Insurance is incase something bad happens.... Your saying ss is for just incase someone didn't plan for their future.

25-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"Ricky I do understand your thoughts on the issue..... But disagree with , it's insurance & not retirement.....

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.

25-Mar-24
"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."

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...

From: DanaC
25-Mar-24
I retired nearly 5 years ago at 65 1/2. Had I waited until 66 I'd be getting a bit more in my monthly SS, *but* the six extra checks I got came out nearly $10,000. Rough estimate is that I'll start losing a bit of money - over all - at about 80 years old. If I live that long!

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*.

From: Timex?
25-Mar-24
Mostly agree other than my plan was to start collecting ss at 62 and continue working, being a functional tax paying member of society,,,,,was just gonna invest the extra income & not change my conservative ways one bit. Ss is structured so my benefit would be completely nullified, "penalized" is the word they use, by my current income.........

By the people, for the people, my ASS.....let's not forget the average middle class worker including their employers match contributes roughly 470k to ss in their lifetime.

25-Mar-24
"Mostly agree other than my plan was to start collecting ss at 62 and continue working, being a functional tax paying member of society,,,,,was just gonna invest the extra income & not change my conservative ways one bit. Ss is structured so my benefit would be completely nullified, "penalized" is the word they use, by my current income........."

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.

From: Grey Ghost
25-Mar-24
"let's not forget the average middle class worker including their employers match contributes roughly 470k to ss in their lifetime."

Yup, and they will receive around $670K in benefits. That's not a great return on their investment, but it's something.

From: DanaC
25-Mar-24
Can get a better return on a 401(k) or IRA, but I'd love to know what percentage of workers in the private sector have and/or do not have one of those. (I'm not talking about "access to" but who actually contribute to one.)

From: RonP
25-Mar-24
about 85% that have access to a plan participate, according to google. seems high to me and is not my experience with employees.

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.

25-Mar-24
"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."

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.

From: Grey Ghost
25-Mar-24
Here's what the BLS says:

In March 2023, 73 percent of civilian workers had access to retirement benefits, with 56 percent of workers participating in these plans.

So, somewhere around 40% of all workers have retirement accounts.

25-Mar-24
Run the math at even just your half of the 7.65% FICA tax and your investments alone will drastically outearn future social security income and still allow the other 7.65% from the employer to fund Survivors and Disability insurance. Givernment is too busy finding Ukraine and Israel than they are their own citizens, but they could reallocate foreign funding to cover folks who have already paid in 40 credits and if you have 30 credits or below you shouldn’t be mandated to pay 7.65% FICA and instead have the option to fund your own retirement. Drop it to 3.82% from employer and employee just to find Medicare.

From: DanaC
25-Mar-24
RonP, I see for too many young people who think that "what I want today" matters more than any planning for tomorrow.

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*.

From: TonyBear
25-Mar-24
Supreme Court recently ruled against Biden admin and it's open border policy. Alot of Conservative justices appointed by Republicans.

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.

From: Timex?
25-Mar-24
Danac......... It completely dumbfounds me.....my employer only offers 3% Ira contribution,, better than nothing , , most where I work make 1k+ weekly, so simple math, you do the minimum 3% to get the 3% match. Not to mention this 3% is pre tax. So your $30 contribution is probably only gonna change your pay maybe $ 10. So roughly your gonna see a $ 40 monthly reduction in pay to be putting $240 into an Ira. Myself personally contribute 17%

You can't beat it into their head. I've been trying to get the company contribution raised for years & the other employees prefer hourly wage increases.

From: Timex?
25-Mar-24
Ricky........... I got an extremely late start at buying a house & saving,,, considering that I'm extremely happy with my life,,,,,my main concern is my heart disease...2 heart attacks resulting in 4 stents & I'm fairly certain that there's a split chest & bypass surgery in my future if i live that long. it's not myself I'm concerned with but my wife's financial security if I die, putting an extra $1400 a month away now would go a long ways towards securing her future,,, Just to be clear we live simple & want for basically nothing.... But absolutely not what most would consider wealthy.....at least not financially.

25-Mar-24
"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."

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.

25-Mar-24

25-Mar-24
"Run the math at even just your half of the 7.65% FICA tax and your investments alone will drastically outearn future social security income..."

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

From: HDE
25-Mar-24

HDE's Link
Ricky, this link is for you. Good luck with your longevity of life stance...

"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.

From: Nyati
25-Mar-24
Why should someone that invests their money and knows how to take care of it be penalized and have to subsidize the people that don’t or won’t manage their retirement income ?

Social security is a Ponzi scheme. Someone that starts investing their money in their 20s can far outperform what SS will give them later in life, and if they die before they get it can leave it to their heirs.

From: Brotsky
25-Mar-24
What you guys that are retired should be offended by is the fact that all that money you paid into SS paid for someone else's retirement too. You weren't paying for yours; you were paying for those that retired before you. Only difference is that you're actually getting some benefit from SS, I likely never will. You guys aren't offended by that though because you're getting yours....or mine as it were. Like Nyati said, a giant Ponzi scheme that only works as long as you force young workers to dump money into it all their lives...and keep moving the goal posts of retirement further away.

25-Mar-24
"Ricky, this link is for you. Good luck with your longevity of life stance..."

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...

25-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"Social security is a Ponzi scheme. Someone that starts investing their money in their 20s can far outperform what SS will give them later in life, and if they die before they get it can leave it to their heirs."

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?

From: Nyati
25-Mar-24
Covid definitely was a major cause of the decrease in lifespan . Elderly people with comorbidity factors which most elderly people have were most susceptible to the virus. Now that the pandemic is over life expectancy will start to increase again.

Another factor though a lesser impact but no less important is the recent fentanyl crisis. Over 150 people a day are dying from fentanyl and related synthetic opiates . Most of these are in the 20-40 yr old age range which helps pull the overall average lifespan down.

From: Nyati
25-Mar-24
Insurance is a Ponzi scheme until u need it. LOL

The difference is that you have a choice if you want to or not want to pay for house insurance. At least once you own it free and clear and don’t have a Lien or mortgage. Banks and mortgage companies should have a right that the property is insured because it’s their money being involved.

With SS you don’t have a choice as to whether u pay into it or not . That is if you work.

From: Grey Ghost
25-Mar-24
"What you guys that are retired should be offended by is the fact that all that money you paid into SS paid for someone else's retirement too.

Yep, the money I paid in funded my parents retirement, just as the money they paid in did for my grand parents. That's how the system was designed to work. I have no problem with that.

I also don't think the solvency issue is as bad as some of you hand-wringers think. Yes, the SS reserves are projected to be depleted by 2033. But, ongoing SS taxes will continue to cover around 80% of scheduled benefits thru 2100. The system isn't suddenly going to shut down. I'm confident we'll find a solution to cover the 20% shortfall.

From: Beendare
25-Mar-24

Beendare's Link
The election is over if we don’t have fair elections. …and there is now evidence in many locations of cheating, fraud and discrepancies.

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.

From: DanaC
25-Mar-24
American Thinker. Yet another of your awesome sources.

"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]

25-Mar-24
"What you guys that are retired should be offended by is the fact that all that money you paid into SS paid for someone else's retirement too."

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...

From: Mint
25-Mar-24

Mint's Link
If you want to see how much we got screwed just look to Galvaston Texas since the Government workers their opted out of SS. They pay in the same amount but get $215,000 in life insurance, better disability and usually twice to three times the amount ss pays at retirement, and it's your money if you die early so it goes to your family.

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.

From: Grey Ghost
25-Mar-24
That Galveston Plan is basically an IRA that uses structured bank notes instead of standard instruments, like mutual funds, to invest in. The structured notes are still linked to the stock market. They pay a typically low guaranteed interest rate, with some downside protection. If I had that option versus simply investing the money in my IRA, I'd take the latter.

25-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"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."

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.

From: DanaC
25-Mar-24
" If I had that option versus simply investing the money in my IRA, I'd take the latter."

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.

25-Mar-24
one other thing that should be mentioned...

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.

26-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
for anyone interested...here is a rather detailed comparison between the galveston plan and traditional social security. as with everything...the devil is often in the details....and there are many details. it would appear that the galveston plan is basically a 403b plan with some add ons.

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...

26-Mar-24
Florida's system for government employees ain't too bad, at least I think it's going to work for me anyway.

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.

From: KsRancher
26-Mar-24
Holy smokes. That 4% monthly would turn into some real money

26-Mar-24
Sorry, corrected it annual rate is 4% compounded monthly. Still a good deal.

From: Mint
26-Mar-24
"where are you getting those figures mint?"

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.

27-Mar-24
"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."

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.

From: Mint
27-Mar-24
Well if you wanted to add a disability option it would be very inexpensive. I pay $13 a month and if I'm disabled I'll get $8,000 a month tax free for life. Under every metric SS is a bad deal since the Government set it up like a ponzi scheme and not as insurance or investment. I agree with you something has to be done but I realize once again the American taxpayer gets screwed while we fund and pay for the world including people that hate us. If the Republicans had anyone with a brain every time so new entitlement program is pitched by the Democrats they should state that we need to fund social security first.

27-Mar-24
"I pay $13 a month and if I'm disabled I'll get $8,000 a month tax free for life."

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.

From: Nyati
27-Mar-24
that is easy to say...but its simply not accurate. its set up just like an insurance plan because thats exactly what it is.

Social security is not an insurance plan. Insurance companies by law have to have specified money set aside to be able to pay claims. Each state has an insurance commission that set rates and assures the company is solvent and able to pay claims.

IF social security had saved money that was taken in in a trust fund it would be similar but it wasn’t. They spent the money on everything else. If an insurance company did that they would be out of business and in prison

From: Timex?
27-Mar-24
I'm not educated on the subject, but my experience about 2 years ago with a workers comp claim. They averaged my weakly wages from the previous 6 months & paid me 80% of that weekly, and that was tax free......my boss is a good man & continued to pay the company's contribution to my medical insurance, I paid the rest. Don't know how long workers comp would have continued to pay me, because I voluntarily went back to work, but the doc's were already talking permanently disabled.

27-Mar-24
In any event, the democratic party has become the party of the squad and the frantic soccer moms. I cannot imagine any decent normal T male aligning with that kind of garbage.

From: stealthycat
27-Mar-24
GOP should NEVER look to do ANYTHING negative to SS except eliminating it maybe

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

From: Timex?
27-Mar-24
I could be wrong,,,,,but i was told a while back the last time the national debt was zero was during the Clinton administration........

If it's true, ,,,Oh gasp...

From: Glunt@work
27-Mar-24
Not "debt" , "deficit". Debt may have never been zero since we started.

27-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"Social security is not an insurance plan. Insurance companies by law have to have specified money set aside to be able to pay claims."

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)

From: Nyati
27-Mar-24

Nyati 's embedded Photo
Nyati 's embedded Photo

From: Nyati
27-Mar-24

Nyati 's embedded Photo
Nyati 's embedded Photo

From: Timex?
27-Mar-24
Sure am glad I've been putting 20% away for 20 years........just wish I'd have the option to start 20 years sooner.

No worries, life is good.

27-Mar-24
nyati...

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.

From: Nyati
27-Mar-24
I can see where SS disability is an insurance in case a person gets disabled. They can collect a benefit.

But if a person with no dependents turns 65 then applies for SS but then dies the next day before collecting a penny and no wife or kids to collect dependent benefits , how is that an insurance?

From: Stix
27-Mar-24

Stix's embedded Photo
Stix's embedded Photo
I thought Bush II raided the social security trust fund and it was never paid back

From: Stix
27-Mar-24

Stix's embedded Photo
Stix's embedded Photo

From: Stix
27-Mar-24

Stix's embedded Photo
Stix's embedded Photo

From: Stix
27-Mar-24

Stix's embedded Photo
Stix's embedded Photo

28-Mar-24
"But if a person with no dependents turns 65 then applies for SS but then dies the next day before collecting a penny and no wife or kids to collect dependent benefits , how is that an insurance?"

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.

28-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
"Social Security is the nation’s largest federal program. As a social insurance system, Social Security is funded primarily with payroll taxes paid by covered workers and employers, and it provides monthly cash benefits to insured workers and their family members when the worker experiences a loss of earnings due to the worker’s retirement, disability, or death.Social Security provides benefits to people of all ages, including retired workers, disabled workers, spouses, former spouses, surviving spouses, and dependent children. For many beneficiaries, Social Security represents a sizable share of total income and serves to keep them out of poverty."

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
Still not buying it. I make a conscious decision to either buy insurance or not. If I decide to buy insurance then I shop for options for best coverage or rates. With SS I have no choice to pay or not to pay and certainly have no options for companies.

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

If I had a choice to invest that money into a private retirement account and still have no dependents I can still chose a person(s) and/or a charity to leave the money to.

SS is still a Ponzi scheme whether it’s promoted as “insurance “ or not. It also acts as a disincentive for people not to save for future with the thought that they will just live on SS

28-Mar-24
"Still not buying it. "

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.

28-Mar-24
Democrats, the party of the unhinged soccer moms, the squads, and men with low T. Real men are exiting the party.

From: DanaC
28-Mar-24
"It also acts as a disincentive for people not to save for future with the thought that they will just live on SS "

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?

28-Mar-24
"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."

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.

From: DanaC
28-Mar-24
No, but the IRA allowed you to invest pre-tax, and see more of your money compounded over time. And still way too many people failed to take advantage.

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!)

From: Thornton
28-Mar-24

Thornton's embedded Photo
Thornton's embedded Photo
Just testing my phone on a ridiculous thread. Dang thi g won't load pics. Probably didn't do an update

From: Timex?
28-Mar-24

Timex?'s embedded Photo
Timex?'s embedded Photo
As yall argue back & forth about ss & it's definition yall need to keep in mind & this is just a guess on my part,,,,but I'd presume the majority of the bowsight community is middle class or above......

Lower middle class & lower class folks are depending on ss to them its not an insurance policy.....it's 100% their retirement plan.

This is from the 2010 census, the 2 counties that make up the eastern shore va, ,Accamack at top, Northampton at the bottom.

Check out the median household income.....it's not surprising that both these counties vote blue.

Ricky....... I openly speak about my past & trust me I'm extremely fortunate to be in my current situation.....but the first 20 years of my marriage I struggled terribly to pay doctor bills & keep a roof over our heads.......just a hunch, & nothing personal but your words / perspectives seems to be coming from a person that "hasn't " endured many hardships in their life, or at least not financially.

From: Timex?
28-Mar-24
Thornton......... The answer to your kunnundram is at the top of the page,,,it's called the new topic tab......if you can't figure it out, pm me & I'll help ya with it.

From: Grey Ghost
28-Mar-24
Just thinking out loud.....what if the government offered a dollar for dollar income tax credit for wealthy retired individuals who opt out of receiving their SS payments? I mean, to some retired folks SS checks are peanuts compared to their other sources of income. If they opted out for a income tax right off, their benefits could be used for folks who actually need them.

28-Mar-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's embedded Photo
Ricky The Cabel Guy's embedded Photo
"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!)"

From: Timex?
28-Mar-24
Ricky........ I remember clearly, it was 1980, the ira advertisement was if you deposited $100.00 per month for 30 years , it would yield 1 million dollars.

I also remember clearly when my 13 month old son became diabetic & spent a week in intensive care, the bill was 8k. I sold my fathers guns to help pay that debt......hard times brother, I've been there......

Matched set exhibition grade rem 1100 410,28,20,12 gage skeet gun set, browning bar 7mag, Charles daily ou 20 gage magnum rem 1100 goose gun & 2 more field grade 12 & 20 gage 1100s.

Breaks my heart to think about it, but hard times call for desperate measures......

You think $100 a month in an Ira was on my mind ??????.

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
If it’s an “insurance” it’s the only one that’s mandatory by the federal government. A handful of liberal states have made it mandatory that one has to have health insurance.

Depending on what you do other insurance is compulsory such as auto insurance if you drive or malpractice insurance if you’re a physician, or home insurance if u have a mortgage. All other insurance is elective and by choice.

But depending on what someone does they can go thru live never having insurance other than the federally mandated SS “insurance “

28-Mar-24
"If it’s an “insurance” it’s the only one that’s mandatory by the federal government."

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

28-Mar-24
"You think $100 a month in an Ira was on my mind ??????"

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.

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
If it’s an “insurance” it’s the only one that’s mandatory by the federal government. A handful of liberal states have made it mandatory that one has to have health insurance.

Depending on what you do other insurance is compulsory such as auto insurance if you drive or malpractice insurance if you’re a physician, or home insurance if u have a mortgage. All other insurance is elective and by choice.

But depending on what someone does they can go thru live never having insurance other than the federally mandated SS “insurance “

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
If it’s an “insurance” it’s the only one that’s mandatory by the federal government. A handful of liberal states have made it mandatory that one has to have health insurance.

Depending on what you do other insurance is compulsory such as auto insurance if you drive or malpractice insurance if you’re a physician, or home insurance if u have a mortgage. All other insurance is elective and by choice.

But depending on what someone does they can go thru live never having insurance other than the federally mandated SS “insurance “

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
If it’s an “insurance” it’s the only one that’s mandatory by the federal government. A handful of liberal states have made it mandatory that one has to have health insurance .

Depending on what you do other insurance is compulsory such as auto insurance if you drive or malpractice insurance if you’re a physician, or home insurance if u have a mortgage. All other insurance is elective and by choice.

But depending on what someone does they can go thru live never having insurance other than the federally mandated SS “insurance “ ?

From: Nyati
28-Mar-24
Sorry, only meant to say that once

  • Sitka Gear