/——/ I was responding to a poster who said anyone under 54 would be denied Social Security. I replied it would be delayed, but not denied.Then my bad and apologies.
I probably misunderstood.
WW
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
/——/ I was responding to a poster who said anyone under 54 would be denied Social Security. I replied it would be delayed, but not denied.Then my bad and apologies.
I probably misunderstood.
WW
That is why the republican party is pushing to raise the age of ssi and keeping it barrowly high enough to retire at all. Billionaires and the elites want wage slaves. They want to milk every cent from our poor and middle class and they can't allow retirement.Make people work longer so corporations can use them up so then they have a short retirement.
Have you added up the total amount you paid in and compared it to how much you'll get out? The average worker pays $3,000/year into SS. Now, let's say you work for 45 years, from age 20 to 65 and pay that much every year. That's a grand total of $135,000 you pay in. Now, the average SS payout is $16,800/year. That means that you stop getting back what you paid in and start getting more out after 8 years. Are you going to stop collecting SS when you're 73? That's all that you earned and paid for, after all.
There is no rate of return. Any excess SS funds (those not needed to pay the immediate benefits of current retirees) is put into the general fund and immediately spent there. Then it is paid back out of the general fund. You have made a valid point, however, that investing the excess funds in even very solid, stable funds would generate a much needed rate of return and help offset some of the costs of the program.Now do the calculation with compound interest over those 45 years. Let's say a reasonable rate of return at 3-4%.
WW
That's stupid.Yea. Put it in bitcoin
Sheesh
There is no rate of return. Any excess SS funds (those not needed to pay the immediate benefits of current retirees) is put into the general fund and immediately spent there. Then it is paid back out of the general fund. You have made a valid point, however, that investing the excess funds in even very solid, stable funds would generate a much needed rate of return and help offset some of the costs of the program.
So will hadit's (or Lesh's) kids live at least 2-years longer than them, statistically speaking?My rough calculation's factoring in the time value of money, and using your parameters of 3,000 per year for 45 years...
The result is not $135,000 because of the time value of money.
The closer figure is $250,000 in present day dollars over that same time period using the same base amount.
So instead of paying out all you put in at 8 years, it's actually about 15 years taking you to 80 years. Which using the "life expectancy" measurement (which I disagree with fundamentally anyway) is 79.11 years in the United States.
WW
So will hadit's (or Lesh's) kids live at least 2-years longer than them, statistically speaking?
(If SS ages are pushed back 2-years for the next generation)
The bottom line is: Unless "fixed" SS only pays 70% of promised benefits after 2034.Don't know. Depends on Hadit's (or Lesh's) age and the age of their children.
I'd say, off the cuff without specifics - possibly.
"Next generation" though is not a quantified statement. I'm at the very end of the Baby Boomer generation, the next being Generation X's born staring in the 60's.
Gen X's are just getting ready to enter their 60's.
.
.
What I previously pointed out was that if you start "grandfathering" (which isn't a real fix, it's a political move to make it palatable for "seniors" that I define as those over 50) it doesn't do anything to fix SS by the 2030's because those under 50 aren't going to begin drawing SS until the 2044.
WW
/——-/ When did Joe become a Republican?That is why the republican party is pushing to raise the age of ssi and keeping it barrowly high enough to retire at all. Billionaires and the elites want wage slaves. They want to milk every cent from our poor and middle class and they can't allow retirement.
Raising the earnings cap is not acceptable IMO. Those folks at the top are already paying twice as much as the majority of others for the same benefit.The bottom line is: Unless "fixed" SS only pays 70% of promised benefits after 2034.
Potential "fixes" include:
1. Raising the early and full retirement ages, currently 62 & 66 to 64 and 68.
2. Raising the cap on earnings, currently $130,000. Meaning SS tax stops at $130,000. Say raise to $260,000.
3. Raise the SS taxes taken from pay checks & employers.
4. Or some combination of the above.
Considering generational fairness.
Okay, good point. I should have verified that. It won't be long, however, before there will be no excess funds to invest anywhere and the program will run a deficit. Then, if we don't take action now, the general fund will have to be tapped not only to pay back those bonds that were purchased, but will have to subsidize the program directly.
You are incorrect on two counts. Social Security funds do not go into the general fund and excess funds do earn interest.
Social Security funds are invested in U.S. Treasury Bills (basically an interest bearing bond). That is in the law, it is the ONLY thing that can be done with excess funds.
Therefore excess SS funds have been earning interest.
WW
The bottom line is: Unless "fixed" SS only pays 70% of promised benefits after 2034.
Potential "fixes" include:
1. Raising the early and full retirement ages, currently 62 & 66 to 64 and 68.
2. Raising the cap on earnings, currently $130,000. Meaning SS tax stops at $130,000. Say raise to $260,000.
3. Raise the SS taxes taken from pay checks & employers.
4. Or some combination of the above.
Considering generational fairness.
Everything the government does is government subsidized, jackass.It isn't "government subsidized" jack ass.
We all paid into it
Okay, good point. I should have verified that. It won't be long, however, before there will be no excess funds to invest anywhere and the program will run a deficit. Then, if we don't take action now, the general fund will have to be tapped not only to pay back those bonds that were purchased, but will have to subsidize the program directly.
If the government invested SS funds in the economy it would soon own the entire country.All excess SS funds go into the general fund, where they are promptly spent. That money has to be repaid out of the general fund, which is borrowed from any source that will pony up some money. Take that cycle out of the picture, allow the excess funds to be invested outside of the government, and you can say it's not government subsidized.
Is your orange god actually running or is he just fleecing idiots like you?Or nothing happens except we al laugh at you.
How is he "fleecing?" anyone?Is your orange god actually running or is he just fleecing idiots like you?