Posted on 07/12/2019 8:00:05 AM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
LOL! The next 75 years???!?
A lot can happen in 75 years:
I expect that when the Dems come to power they will decry how the military retires are double dipping and work to deduct SS from military retirement.
With Life Expectancy increasing from 61 in 1935 to 78 today, the entire SS System as implemented was doomed to failure.
Of course, a higher Infant Mortality Rate back then skewed the Life Expectancy Age, but that is never mentioned.
SS was designed as “insurance”, not a Government Pension to help the Elderly (at the time) Population with a supplemental source of Income.
Even when Reagan overhauled it increasing the so called “full Benefit” Age from 65 to 67, the early Benefit age was unchanged at 62. That third Rail thing you know.
>>>Social Security is our nation’s most successful social program<<<
Years ago, AARP magazine showed how the SS system is NOT a Ponzi Scheme. They said all Ponzi schemes collapse, and since Social Security has not collapsed it is not a Ponzi scheme.
A few pages farther on, Jane Bryan Quinn had an article on how the SS system is set up. It does not take an idiot to recognize it is set up just like a Ponzi Scheme, and it’s survival is based on new people being forced to sign on at the bottom.
It now takes three workers to support one retiree. When those three retire, it will take nine. When those nine retire, it will take twenty seven.
Now multiply that by thirty million and you can see that in a few generations we will need over a billion people to support those on SS, and we are aborting those future workers at a very high rate.
No wonder the Dems want as many outsiders flowing into the US as they can get.
“Social Security is our nation’s most successful social program...”
How does the author define “success”? What was supposed to be an investment has become a total Ponzi scheme and it’s going (gone?) broke. Hardly any of us will even recoup the money we’ve put into Social Security, much less reap any interest from our investment.
News flash: SS will not be fixed until members of Congress are in the SS system. Then, and only then will Congress end their partisan games and work on a solution.
“...With Life Expectancy increasing from 61 in 1935 to 78 today, the entire SS System as implemented was doomed to failure ...”
It was one of the accelerators as to why it was doomed!
The truth is, it was always doomed because it was set up as a Ponzi scheme. The working generation pays the benefits of the retired generation. That working generation gets its retirement from the next working generation. (see link below) In 1940 the worker to retiree ration was 159 to 1, today its 2.8 to 1 (2013 figure) As long as you have a large number of those paying in compared to those receiving it “sort of works”. Just Like a Ponzi Scheme is a good investment as long as you have a steady stream of “investors” paying in versus those drawing income from it.
https://www.ssa.gov/history/ratios.html
In its present form is not long term sustainable. (I thought the modern politician was all about sustainability! - oh that has to do with the green economy and other fantasies!) Congress of course makes it worst by borrowing from it. Also the hocus-pocus of pretending its not part of the budget is political fraud too. You’re still being taxed for it, the government is still collecting, its part of the budget even if you claim it isn’t and give it the name Fred!
Its my understanding that Medicare/Medicaid is funded in a similar way. I have not been able to find the details to verify.
“Seems to be a bottomless bucket of money available for non citizens ”
And for foreign wars
“. It does not take an idiot to recognize it is set up just like a Ponzi Scheme, and it’s survival is based on new people being forced to sign on at the bottom.”
That’s true of every govt program, including defense and military. Congress makes long term appropriations and hires employees - soldiers - for long term contracts. The funding is all dependent on taxes being paid into the future, just like with Social Security
> Nobody is going to be cutting SS benefits.
The disability rolls can be cleaned up. Just make everybody thats getting a check get reverified every couple of years.
A more likely shift away from early reduced payments is raising the age for full benefits. Currently the law requires those born after 1960 to receive full benefits at age 67. That could be increased to 70 for those born after 1980. This would substantially reduce total costs to the program.
While the SS program was designed as a short term fix for depression related problems it has been continued as a tax and spend program with no residual benefits.
Each year the government spends ever penny received in taxes for SS and other budget items. There is no investment of these funds. The program is treated as a public assistance, guaranteed income benefits program for eligible citizens. It should be designed legislatively accordingly.
7 months into the year, we have spent $150 billion ( with a B), just on illegal immigration. Many government programs don't cost that much all year.
Nobody is even talking about owing $23 trillion right now! Just like AOC says we are all going to die of Global Warming in 12 years, What she leaves out is we will have starved to death naked and afraid long before the temp rises.Medicare is broke and we only cover people over 65 and the same is true for SS. 2 socialist programs will bankrupt the country long before a nuke comes from Russia or China.
The answer is to allow people to opt out of SS sometime before they turn 40 and allow them to give to their IRA more money tax free. A tax hike of about 5% for everyone might extend the SS program long enough for the retiree's to die off. The point is it's broke and has to stop sometime. Moving to a personal savings account of some kind is better than waiting for a crash and homelessness. When the Soviet Union broke up, they had video of retiree's sitting on corners, homeless and begging because the gubmint provided their house, and penniless because the gubmint provided their income. If a government provided your livelihood and owes $23 trillion, you shouldn't count on receiving benefits much longer.
They do. Got a buddy that retired from the Army around the time I did and he now works for social security. Depending on the disability they are reviewed every 3, 5, or 7 years.
He said sometimes it’s stupid though. He told me one time he was reviewing a young man that was in a wheelchair and couldn’t speak and had to have a his mom do everything for him. Said it was a complete waste of time and he believes some disabilities should never be reviewed because they are not going to get better.
Trump said he would NOT cut Social Security - and the Motley Fools are liberal democrats... so this is BS...
Trump doesn’t have the authority to make any changes to social security
This is being questioned by leftist mainstream media clap trap as part of an overall narrative
That said changes are a common just not in the Next decade
Big difference between us and the Soviet Union is that the people in this country are very wealthy. I expect that they will get rid of the cap on the amount of income that is subject to the social security tax (currently $132,900) and cap the maximum benefits available. Since only about 20% of Americans make over $100,000 a year it will be the most politically viable option.
If there a short fall in funding we’ll MORE THAN MAKE IT UP BY DUMPING THE DAMN ILLEGALS OUT OF OUR COUNTRY.
They can’t let people opt out because it’s a ponzi scheme. That would just hasten the collapse.
“No wonder the Dems want as many outsiders flowing into the US as they can get.”
Not just the Democrats. Many (most?) Republicans are on board as well.
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.