Posted on 07/12/2019 8:00:05 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
Social Security is our nation's most successful social program -- but it's also in some pretty big trouble. According to the April-released Social Security Board of Trustees report, the program won't bring in enough revenue over the long term (the next 75 years) to cover outlays to beneficiaries, inclusive of cost-of-living adjustments.
The silver lining for seniors who are dependent on Social Security as a major source of income is that the program is in no danger of disappearing or going bankrupt. Recurring sources of revenue, such as the payroll tax and the taxation of benefits, ensure that there will always be money to divvy out to eligible beneficiaries.
But the bad news is that Social Security is facing an estimated funding shortfall of $13.9 trillion between 2035 and 2093. If this shortfall isn't dealt with by adding revenue, cutting expenditures, or some combination of the two, retired-worker benefits could fall by as much as 23% within the next two decades. That means Social Security's future is in our elected lawmakers' hands.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
Nobody is going to be cutting SS benefits.
Hell, the Dems are out on the stump promising to INCREASE them.
They’ll tax anything and anything rather than get their political heads handed to them on this issue like GWB did.
worst political advice ever
That’s weird huh? Seems to be a bottomless bucket of money available for non citizens welfare and upkeep. Maybe we should renounce and move south jump the border back here and seek assylum(sic) here in the U.S.
You sure don’t hear much anymore about what a disaster Bush’s “private accounts” would have been with the Dow at 27,000
I reach age 66 early next year. I have had a substantial income in IT so my benefits will be hefty, especially adding in my wife’s SS (half of mine). And it’s not taxable.
And living, now in Kentucky, with real estate taxes so low they are practically non existent, and the house and property paid off, we can live pretty comfortably on that. Absurdly so, actually.
But I am pretty adamant about beginning benefits while Trump is still president. Who knows what kind of crazy stuff his replacement will try.
SS is taxable. Something is going to be done about SS my guess is a phase out of early retirement but who knows.
1) Allow people to opt out. If you're still working you can opt out of paying into it from now on, knowing you'd have less SS benefits in the future.
2) Allow people who've already paid into it get their funds out, perhaps with some interest. Again, no future benefits.
Few people will stay into it, so nothing is "taken" from them. Most people will opt out/cash in. This will be a huuuuge cost up front, but it's do-able and IMHO a much more bearable pain than letting it get bigger & bigger forever and ever. The SS trust fund now has $2.9 trillion (as of end of 2018). How much is needed to payback to everybody who already put in?
Here’s an idea - why don’t we let in at least 100,000 unskilled, uncivilized, illegal parasites each and every month from anywhere in the third world?
That should make things better!
When an article starts off with a lie, the rest is suspect. Social Security failed to live up to its initial promises. It failed to live within its initial tax rates. The author must love give-away programs.
You left out “diseased”
>>>Social Security is our nation’s most successful social program<<<
Flawed Premise in the very first sentence...
It’s not a social program.
It’s a vote-buying Ponzi scheme.
That, my FRiend, was only foreplay.
And why do we need gazillions of government programs staffed by gazillions of overpaid, generously bennied bureaucrats to distribute welfare?!
Snort.
Same reason kids no longer get a Classical education, eh....
Social Security started out as a Ponzi scheme, and only the first few who got in on the ground floor hit the big pay off, while the rest have been relying on the continued pay-in to be there to cover THEIR future benefits, as their contribution has already been spent (or pillaged by the shenanigans done just about every year on the budget).
Social Security would have been MUCH more successful if it had been privatized years ago, and it would have been on a sound fiscal by now.
But, but we were promised! Way back in 1964!
https://www.ssa.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 went. Read and weep.
https://www.ssa.gov/OACT/ProgData/fundFAQ.html#n4
Well, 85% will be taxable while I continue to work, but at least I won’t ahve to give it back (after age 66, anyway). But if my only “taxable” income is SS, it will not reach the threshold of being taxable until some unforeseen rule change comes along.
The idea is to not earn any taxable income while getting SS.
“Here’s an idea - why don’t we let in at least 100,000 unskilled, uncivilized, illegal parasites each and every month from anywhere in the third world?
That should make things better!”
Totally agree! I think that number is far higher.
If you allow people to opt out who’s going pay for next month’s Social Security checks?
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.