1 in 3 Florida retirees who receive Social Security survive solely on government checks

Sun Sentinel ^ | 1/23/12 | Donna Gehrke-White

[Nachum]

A third of Florida's nearly 3 million retirees, 65 and older, now rely entirely on Social Security, according to an analysis by AARP. "Folks have spent down their assets," said Jeff Johnson, AARP interim director in Florida. More Floridians are likely to end up only on Social Security than retirees in the rest of the country: A quarter of U.S. retirees, 65 and older, have only their monthly checks as income, Johnson said. Many of the most strapped are Florida's oldest, he added. Florida seniors, 80 and older, are about three times as likely to depend

[bgill]

I can hear the death panels gearing up.

[WOBBLY BOB]

Obamanation

[Bluebird Singing]

Yep.

[pabianice]

Wouldn’t such a low income require living with their children?

[oh8eleven]

Third of Florida's seniors ...
Well, whose fault is that?
Another way to look at this is that TWO THIRDS of Florida's seniors have more than SS to rely on.

[Persevero]

Yes, they are a dependent class.

The ss system neatly removes incentive for providing for your own retirement AND decreases your ability to do so. It absolves kin from the responsibility of caring for you, too.

So you become a dependent of the state.

[patriot08]

Rick Santorum: ‘Cut Social Security now, even if painful’
http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0oGdW5stx1PLmsAHC9XNyoA?p=santorum+cut+ss+now&ei=utf-8&fr=slv8-&xargs=0&pstart=1&b=11&xa=1_dZ3utkcQtdEo19WW8jMA—,1327433964

[Hans]

Relax, the raid on retirement money is still the number one mission of our ‘financial community’, no other game in town. The 2/3rds of seniors in Florida who still have a bit of cash pulling in the monstrous return of half a percent or perhaps 3 percent will soon be parted from their money and Goldman-Sachs will give a great burp of appreciation.

[ozzymandus]

Whose fault is that? Were they dumb enough to believe the government’s lies?

[Enterprise]

Note to GOP candidates going to the Florida primary:

If you people don't get out there with ads about the death panels, the proposed 500 billion dollar transfer of funds out of Social Security, and the proposed cut back in fees to doctors who treat Medicare patients, and pin these directly on the DEMOCRATS, then you are history's biggest effing fools!

[ozzymandus]

Whose fault is that? Were they dumb enough to believe the government’s lies?

[oh8eleven]

The ss system neatly removes incentive for providing for your own retirement
BS. I'm a baby boomer and I can remember since high school being told & taught that SS was just one part of a "three legged stool."
That some don't get the message - or choose to ignore it - is their fault not the system's fault.

[MachIV]

Excellent question. I believe prior to the enactment of SS in the 1930’s, that is pretty much how society took care of the elderly. I remember a “Poor Farm” building being torn down in the early 70s where I grew up. I think it was perhaps a safety net prior to the policies of the 30s, but I suspect it was an exception rather than the rule.

[dfwgator]

Where are their kids, are they not financially able to assist them?

[moovova]

I wonder how many of these seniors lost a nest-egg when the democrats destroyed the real estate market?

[Nachum]

Rick Santorum: ‘Cut Social Security now, even if painful’

I have long maintained that the only way to save Social Security and Medicare was to gradually increase the age of qualification. Most are aware that the entire scheme was based on the age of qualifying for the benefit being older than the age that most Americans died.

[KrisKrinkle]

“Susan Badger, 86, lives solely on her $1,051 a month Social Security check. She owns a condo at Beverly Hills Condos in Hollywood but has a reverse mortgage to help with expenses like doctor bills and car. (Sarah Dussault, Sun Sentinel / January 19, 2012)”

So she’s not living solely on her Social Security check. She has an investment in real estate upon which she is drawing as needed.

[Venturer]

You hit on the answer:

Many of these people retired with $200,000 or more in savings. They intended to live off the interest and Social security. Interest rates at .10 to .95% just do not cut the mustard so they deplete their principle to survive. When the principle is gone they reverse mortgage their homes.

People today put their money in 401K’s and when the market drops they lose that, How is that working out for todays savers? These people had stock that went to crap. They had pans for their old age the same as the now generation, but those plans do not work in an economy likes ours is today.

Today the Government is working to kill pensons, they are telling young people to save for their retirement. I point out what happened to these people who did save for their retirement. They got screwed when the banks started paying almost nothing in interest, the market sunk, and everything went to crap.Todays generation is looking at working until they die. There is no way in hell they can save enopugh to pay off the Governments debt, put their kids through chool and save enough principal to live off of. Because they damn sure cannot live off the interest.

[Venturer]

LOL How much could you afford to help your parent?

How are you planning for your own retirement?

many of these people were comfortable ten years ago when they retired.

Low interest rates, bad stock markets,inflation, Lowered assessments on their homes and higher taxes ate up their nest eggs. We will see how todays 30 year olds make out in todays economy when their retirement approach’s.