[napscoordinator]

I would make the quarters increase to 120 quarters before you are eligible for social security. Right now it is 40 quarters which is only 10 years. I would stop all SS for anybody who is not eligible period. Kids should not be getting SS unless they have their 100 quarters. Parents should have life insurance to cover a death. People who get Disability SS would only get it at age 70 if they have their quarters. Raise the age to 70. Let’s say a person is 70 and has 115 quarters, they would not receive SS until they receive the other 5 quarters which is another 1 and 4 months. That person would begin receiving SS at 71 and 4 months. There would be no early retirement age. Husbands and Wives would receive separate checks but if you don’t have your quarters then only one check is given until both qualify. I believe SS would survive under my plan. Let’s take away the welfare part of SS! Your thoughts?

[Woodman]

As a person who has already paid SS for 30 years, and is planning on paying it for another 20 years, I think your idea of increasing my time/cost just sucks. That’s OK though because it’s been at least a decade since I realized that My SS payments were never coming back to me. I just plan on retiring without SS while I watch my Union friends retire at 45-55 years old and start their second careers.

[2ndDivisionVet]

No congress would pass, and no president would sign such legislation. Better to scrap the whole program and rely on 401k’s, IRA’s and pensikon plans.

[LowCountryJoe]

Your thoughts?

It's a viable option that should be explored. But, you see what happens based on one reply so far. I like my idea more but then who doesn't like their own ideas?

[John Valentine]

How does a “kid” get 100 quarters? Any such kid would have to 25 years old and started working at birth.

Eliminating the life insurance aspect of SS is OK by me.

What’s the logic of setting an age for diasability? When somebody is disabled, they’re disabled at whatever age. If you want to make them wait until 70, that’s not too understandable, expecially if you want them to complete thier 30 quarters. If they can work, then how the hey are they disabled?

I agree about eliminating the retirement below 65. That’s a drain on the system. Raising the full retirement age to 70 is another idea I an buy into. But you have to let folks who are no longer working take reduced benefits after 65.

Overall the big beef I have is with your 120 quarters deal. I don’t think that people who retire with only 40 quarters get full benefits anyway.

And husbands and wives Can get separate checks, and wifeds DON’T get benefits unless they qualify. I get SS, but my wife (also retired) gets jack. We do NOT get the married benefit and won’t until she reaches retirement age, even though for the past 20 years she’s been nothing but a housewife.

In short, I give you an A for effort, but the thing won’t fly.