Posted on 10/28/2017 3:57:33 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Many Americans rely on Social Security benefits to see them through retirement, but how much should they really be depending on those checks?
Not very much, experts said.
Social Security is not being used as it was intended, said Ric Edelman, executive chairman and co-founder of Edelman Financial Services in Fairfax, Va. and author of “The Truth about Your Future.” When Congress and President Franklin D. Roosevelt created the system in 1933, the program was designed to be a safety net for Americans — for those who had no financial support. Now, “a great many Americans are relying heavily on Social Security to maintain their lifestyle in retirement.”
More than 66 million people received Social Security and/or Supplemental Security Income in August, more than 46 million of which were Americans 65 and older. Social Security makes up a majority of cash income for 61% of elderly beneficiaries, and a third rely on this benefit for 90% or more of their income, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a governmental budget policies think tank based in Washington, D.C. The average monthly retirement benefit under the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance was $1,326, according to the Social Security Administration.
Retired workers received an average of $1,371 while spouses of retired workers received $714 and children of retired workers received $659. “Social Security is funding as last resort, and if it goes away there is no government program to serve as a fall back,” Edelman said. “This is the fall back.”
How did Americans get here?
Unfortunately, it’s a familiar story: many Americans just haven’t saved enough for retirement, either because of poor planning or an inability to put money away for their futures.
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
True, but I always see things like this:
https://www.ipe.com/reports/special-reports/global-defined-contribution/chile-chilean-pensions-under-pressure/www.ipe.com/reports/special-reports/global-defined-contribution/chile-chilean-pensions-under-pressure/10018671.fullarticle
“Concerns that meagre pension benefits will force people into poverty post-retirement have led Chilean workers to demand the nationalisation of the system. Throughout 2016, several mass demonstrations were held in Chile’s largest cities in support of the cause.”
But it keeps rolling on! There were changes made by their socialist President in 2008(?), but they didn’t damage the system.
For clarity's sake, 401Ks get wiped out when you liquidate them. It wasn't dollars you owned, it was stock. Nobody took your stock. It was always in your pocket until you decided to sell it. Smarter investors who kept their stock have even more.
#1 mistake in investing: buy high and sell low. (Now who would do that?!)
Back to reading DesertRhino's spot-on comments.
Funny. It doesn’t seem like a last resort when paying into the system, especially for the self employed.
It would have been so easy to fix it back when it had the huge surpluses. Clinton, of all people, wanted to use some of the surplus to pay down US debt, but the Congress wouldn’t allow even that small amelioration of the problem. They had projects they wanted that surplus for!
There plainly will be no governments left on Earth after the assault on Jerusalem, so who is going to write the checks?
Gee, I always heard: "No man knows the day or hour, except the FATHER."
Last I knew YOU are not the the FATHER.
BUT I do believe you are a Pharisee!
Thanks for that info.
“Meager benefits” suggest people are not saving/investing as they should.
Perhaps a two tier system - one that is government run similar to our SS, and the other, for those who have the discipline to invest in the market.
What Happened to the $2.6 Trillion Social Security Trust Fund?
Mark
except you have it upside down.
Do you work for the US Gov’t?
When does welfare run out of money?
I don’t need it, but when I turn 70 I’m sure as hell going to collect it. I “contributed” to the fund, so I have no qualms about withdrawing from it.
This is “conditioning” and an attempt to persuade people Social Security won’t be around and we should not depend on it and forget about it etc etc ... which is all nonsense.
Social Security WILL be around as voters will demand they get the money they paid into it.
“Oh but it will exhaust by 2030”. No it won’t. Since when have politicians worried about things like that. The checks will still continue and they will just print more money.
I sure hope you're right! But can you explain your reasoning?
One thing that seems to be overlooked is that many folks had nothing left to save after the S.S. was taken out of their checks & consequently must try to get by on it after retiring. Only thing you can do that might help a little is to hold off retiring as late as possible,start drawing S.S. as early as practicable & saving back as much as you can of this. That’s about the only way that some can have at least a little savings. Thanks to the practically non-existent interest on savings,it’s not much help either.
Nope. It takes 7 dollars today to buy what one dollar used to buy
They lost $20,000 out of $25,000 ?
What was it invested in?
There can’t be any reasoning that jives with “But of that day and hour no one knoweth, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone.”
Close...actually, when SS was set up, life expectancy was 62.
Now -realize that that means there were people living past 62, but - less than half of ‘senior citizens’ would live to draw SS. AND- they would not draw SS for that long.
Compare to now...the life expectancy is 77...and a fair number seniors living into the 90’s
In the 1940’s - there were about 40 workers paying into Social Security for everyone drawing a SS pension. Now - it is about 3...soon to be 2.5. The system is a Ponzi scheme that makes Bernie Madoff look honest.
“social security... will be nothing but extra “play” money for me.”
That was basically what my father thought of SSI payments.
Unfortunately for me after my Ex raped me with a divorce and got most of my 401K $$$ (then the 2008 crash got what was left). I’m back to square one at 53 years old.
My new wife (she’s years younger) and 3 year old will need it when I’m gone ... and my life insurance as long as I kick off before my 64th birthday ... hopefully for them.
This seems like a good idea,but if my employer had withheld from my paychecks an additional amount after withholding for everything else required by law,I’d have been in serious financial difficulty after about the first year of this. And I held down a skilled job most of my working days.
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.