The Myth of Social Security Insolvency

>I for one would feel better if it were 2.5 trillion in gold and silver bullion.

And the national debt was at least 2.5 trillion higher?

 

I would not raise the cap on the taxes. I have posted my proposal to fix Social Security before, the main tenet of which is to allow a SS opt-out. You can never take benefits, but you do not owe SS tax. You simply pay a pct of income as an opt-out tax. One of the things SS needs is contributors who will never be beneficiaries.

As a minister, I too had the right to CO out of SS. But since I took Pell Grant money to go to Bible college, i didn't feel it was right though I do believe the govt has no business giving money to people to study Christianity, Islam, etc., or to retired pastors, priests, rabbis, etc.

 

>>>I for one would feel better if it were 2.5 trillion in gold and silver bullion.

>>And the national debt was at least 2.5 trillion higher?

>How would gold increase the national debt?

The Treasury would have sold 2.5 trillion more national debt to make up for the loss of funds that could no longer be spent for current budget needs. If you put money into your IRA and the transaction causes you to increase your credit card balance to buy groceries you are not saving money.

 

Or maybe they could have learned to just spend less?

Perhaps the little accounting gimmick of shifting the money for Social Security to the General Fund made it easier to just spend instead of trying to figure out how to do with less.

 

Of course it's a Ponzi scheme. They're paying out benefits now with income they're receiving--now.

There's no real plan for addressing future needs.

Yep...wholeheartedly agree.

I think the reason we'll never see this happen...is because the folks in charge of SS know how wildly successful those with a plan would be . 'Twould be a mess, indeed....

But that's just MHO.

 

>Of course it's a Ponzi scheme. They're paying out benefits now with income they're receiving--now.

So how would they pay out benefits now with money they will receive in ten years? It isn't a ponzi scheme because the legislation doesn't claim it will invest the money and doesn't claim the money goes into personal accounts. It is a record of payments which is used to calculate benefits which the Treasury will pay out of the Treasury because legislation tells them to, NOT because you have a contract which tells them to.

SS Administration disability statistics for 09. Would you also purchase your own disability insurance?:


Highlights 2009

Size and Scope of the Social Security Disability Program

Disability benefits were paid to over 8.9 million people.
Awards to disabled workers (970,696) accounted for over 89 percent of awards to all disabled beneficiaries (1,081,983).
In December, payments to disabled beneficiaries totaled about $9.1 billion.
Benefits were terminated for 630,074 disabled workers.
Supplemental Security Income payments were another source of income for about 1 out of 6 disabled beneficiaries.
Profile of Disabled-Worker Beneficiaries

Workers accounted for the largest share of disabled beneficiaries (87 percent).
Average age was about 53.
Men represented nearly 53 percent.
Mental disorders was the diagnosis for about a third.
Average monthly benefit received was $1,064.30.
Supplemental Security Income payments were another source of income for about 1 out of 8.

 

The whole problem is when the government we voted in voted to allow funds in the SS to be transferred or loaned to the federal government. This is not right and I think most people, even government workers do not agree with this.

This is the reason we should have a chance to opt into funds if we wish. Of course, we do that in the Army anyway and there are matching funds given up to a certain percentage, its not a big percentage but it suppliments our retirement.

Private industry can do the same, but its a free country and they don't have to go beyond the law to keep their workers happy and productive.

Now that China is in economic trouble, it will be interesting to see what happens economically and militarily in the entire world.

 

>The whole problem is when the government we voted in voted to allow funds in the SS to be transferred or loaned to the federal government.

It was the government we voted in after Hoover - FDR - who allowed it. Nothing has been changed but how the budget was written. Nothing has been changed about the spending.

 

I don't know the specific time, I thought it was later, during the Nixon era. I did not write what I really mean. Instead of Federal government I mean general budget. At one time the government could not spend SS money like the general budget; once the law was changed, the government could borrow from the fund. Sort of like Jim Baker using designated money on projects they were not designated for.

I had a not-for-profit Christian radio station and a guy who would sell time to one of the churches we broadcast on Sunday; he kept giving them a list of our record company costs (BMI, SESAC and ASCAP). By doing this, we could not spend the money on anything else because it was then designated because the church gave us the money for that particular item. It was a REAL problem. I kept telling him that, you can list some of our bills and that we just break even (which is true) but make it clear to the church it is the station manager's option at what needs to be spent first.

 

Already have, and have done so for 9 years... :thumbs:

Don't you hate it when someone's viewpoint and actions are consistent? Kinda messes up your argument, eh?

 

>Already have, and have done so for 9 years...

Why? For your old age? Consumer Union recommends against getting nursing home protection as insurance way in advance.


Statistically, it is claimed that the poverty rate of old people would be doubled if not for SS. Do any of you believe that the old people who are now retired would have saved enough extra during their work years, if anything at all, if there had been no SS?

It is claimed that for many retired people, their paid off house in their only asset. Does this sound reasonable?

Most people who were alive during the '29 depression worried or at least all their lives about getting old. I did. A big weight was lifted from my head when I got my 20 years in my pension system. Any of you have this experience? Like getting your 20 years in the military? Wasn't it great when you got your time in?

In the bad old days most every small city had at least one major industry where one could get some kind of job as long as you could pull yourself in to work. That is no longer true. Most of those manufacturing jobs went off shore. With the young people there is no employer or employee loyalty.

Hypothetically, say that SS is somehow phased out over the next 30 years. Do you think the people who are born this year will have accumulated sufficient assets to retire 60 years from now?

If so, why do you think the old people were in such bad financial shape in the years prior to 1934? Does anyone think that old people were in good (even acceptable) shape prior to WW1?

For an interesting history see http://www.ssa.gov/history/briefhistory3.html

If anyone thinks that modern kids would be better able to control their lives than the kids born in 1850, please explain why.

(Believe it or not, I was on your side for the first 25 years of my work history, from 1962. I joined the John Birch Society in 1963.)

 

You're so cute...believing this.
I never thought I would ever see a real life person defending this.
Hoy! Che!

 

Because they are the people who actually believe in America. They are the ones who keep your right to post stupid quotes like you did before.

 

That's so cute!
You actually believe that!

 

I want the government out of our life.

 

>I want the government out of our life.

The government or our government? Whose government do you prefer? What's keeping you from going there?

You say that you don't want any government? Tough, because there is no unclaimed land on the face of this planet. Have you considered obtaining a boat and living in international waters?

Who is "our," Kemosabe? I'm pleased that we have a government that at least through local ordinances attempts to provide a civilized environment. Remember your history? When the continent was in the process of being stolen from the Indian People? It was said that some pioneers did not want to settle where they could see their neighbor's cooking smoke. These were people who did not chose to be civilized, to live with others under a social contract, outlaws. They wanted to live outside the law. Not saying they wanted to violate the law . . . they wanted to establish their own law, be their own government, be king, maybe be god.

 

Of course, had I not bought disability insurance, you would have busted my chops for intellectual dishonestly. Just can't win...

Social security is a terrible deal:

-it makes a terrible return on investment.
-it's inherently unfair. I pay in x amount, but then die earlier than expected. With a private retirement account, my heirs get that money--because it was my money. In the SS plan--the government keeps it. Yeah, that's fair.
-SS has proven itself to be short-sighted as well as terribly slow to adapt to change. Great example: For years, our SS number was ubiquitous. I even had it in the 1980's on my checks. Now, it's the gateway to ID theft. Not only was the SS administration woefully slow and incompetent in fixing this issue, but theystill have no plan in place for dealing with SS number theft/misuse. Their primary response is, "That's too bad--hope it all works out for ya." Or...just for fun, try to get customer service from anyone at the SSA. The only good thing is that if lots of people would have to do it...we'd have lots more conservatives.