Posted on 10/20/2015 5:31:34 AM PDT by UMCRevMom@aol.com
People consider themselves "entitled" to the type of benefits that they receive and believe that our budgetary problems are being caused by the types of benefits that they don't receive. In other words, their benefits are legitimate, but the benefits that they don't receive are an abuse of the system.
They tend to feel the same way about taxes. They often support the types of taxes that they don't pay and oppose the types of taxes that they perceive are being imposed upon them (directly or indirectly).
no, it is NOT a cut. a cut is when you go from 100 to 90. when you stay at 100 it is NOT a cut. costs may be outpacing the benefits, but the benefits are NOT cut. they remain stagnant. you’re falling tor democrat methods of calling stagnant funding levels cuts, in other words NOT getting a raise is a cut in pay?
It is not a cut in the size of the check.
It is a cut in spending power.
It is a cut in the amount of goods and services you can buy.
i see your point, but it is not a cut in benefits. the cola in social security was in response to the huge inflation rates from the 70s. everybody agreed upon the measurement used to figure out the raises - especially when it was tied to fuel prices - heating costs, etc. now that cost driver has gone down, people want to change the indicies to reflect whatever driver is politically convenient. be careful what precedence you set today it might bite you later on when fuel costs rise again
They didn't do anything wrong. Until the economy collapsed, financial planners were telling them savings would pay at least 4% interest and riskier stocks and mutual funds would most probably do as well or better.
What many Seniors are resorting to are annuities and second mortgages. That's going to affect the wealth of future generations, since each one destroys a person's savings.
The best thing the generation that expects to inherit anything could do is sit down with the folks and have an honest discussion. It might make a lot of sense to help them rather than have all their assets taken over by vultures. Another possibility for the next generation is to pay for life insurance policies on their folks. I know that's harsh, put it might be the most realistic way to get some money passed on to the next generation.
My insurance paid for my hearing test which was very low priced. I had to come up with $$$$$ to pay for the hearing aids as insurance did not cover them.
Meanwhile here is some passed info about Social Security!
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/history/ssa/usa1964-2.html
Self-Supporting
“The program is designed so that contributions plus interest on the investments of the social security trust funds will be sufficient to meet all of the costs of benefits and administration, now and into the indefinite future—without any subsidy from the general funds of the Government.
Both the Congress and the Executive Branch, regardless of political party in power, have scrupulously provided in advance for full financing of all liberalizations in the program.”
And HERE is where your money goes! Read and weep!
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#n4
Yesterday we were graced with the privilege of standing in line at Kroger behind two non English speaking illegal aliens and their two anchor babies using a WICK check to pay for their groceries. I just stood there in silent fury as I realized if we cut off the illegals from welfare maybe the SS recipients could get a COLA raise. But that would be racist I guess.
This is what you could have been making if iot was privatized. The politicians took care of themselves by stealing from all of us.
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.
Your numbers do not make a lot of sense. If the worker is now making $26K, 30 years ago, assuming a 3% inflation rate, the worker would have made $11K, Putting inside 12% per year and adding 6% return on the cumulated amount gives a nest egg of about $153K, yielding about $9K per year. The Forbes article includes no details, forcing assumptions to be made. Can you show your numbers?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.