Social Security: Don't "Save" It; Raise It!

[kwc57]

"But we can"t afford it."

With a federal tax rate of nearly 15% of US GDP, some of us can more than afford to provide seniors with more than $10,000 a year to live on. Unless you're expecting Congress to manufacture a new IRA that grows hair, the best option to elevate the 39% of the average workers preretirement earnings that Social Security currently pays is to "find an additional 5 percent of taxable payroll, or find the money elsewhere."

Lifting the cap on payroll taxes without raising benefits to those above it provides an additional 2.32%

"Dedicating revenues from the estate tax at its 2009 levels to Social Security gets another half percent. A few other tweaks, like covering new public employees, add another 0.42 percent.

"The remainder can be found by raising the payroll tax by roughly 1 percentage point for both employees and employers..."

"Retirees today are shortchanged on Social Security because they have been shortchanged on wages for their entire working lives.

"The labor economist Richard B. Freeman points out that the hourly earnings of workers dropped by 8 percent from 1973 to 2005 while productivity shot up 55 percent or more.

"The United States is one of the few developed countries where workers are routinely cheated of a share in higher productivity.

"And where has the money from the extra productivity gone? It’s gone right to the top, to the top few percent.

"If wages had been paid fairly based on productivity, there would have been enough money subject to the payroll tax to avoid even a modest shortfall."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/opinion/20geoghegan.html?hp

Damn it George! No matter how many times you ask, you are not entitled to MY money. Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part. Bugger off!

 

[DiamondDave]

Everyone should be given an opt in or out choice for SS.

If it were so great, why the fuck is it mandatory??.. people would be FLOCKING to it by choice

Seriously Dave? Because a few of you out there don't like it and would opt out, you are trying to tell us that the masses agree with you? I beg to differ.

I beg to differ.... it is mandatory because the government is in it for power, or slush funds, etc and needs to force people to do it rather than them taking their monies elsewhere at higher returns... the government NEEDS those forced 'donations'...

Oh.. you would still have a lot out there who want into a money for nothing scheme... or the lazy who just don't want to think... but that in itself does not equate to it being some grand concept and great system of return...

Again.. if it were so great, you would not have to have it as mandatory.. people would flock to it if it were better than other options

 

[auditor0007]

It's not a matter of whether we CAN or CAN'T afford it, George. For some of us it's a matter that we don't WANT to have anything to do with it.

I would suggest that probably 20% of the current SS payers would OPT OUT immediately if given the option to not pay anything in and not get anything out. I know I would and a large number of others I know would.

Now, with that option, I'd be more than happy to see another option that would let people like you pay MORE than they are required to as well.

How does that sound to you?

Sounds great until people like you opt out and end up broke in retirement, and then scream that you need government help. While there may be some who would opt out and actually save for their retirement, a great many more would just continue living paycheck to paycheck, never putting anything away. And in the end, the burden would fall upon everyone else. This is the reason the program covers everyone and you cannot opt out.

So, I can't opt out because the majority of Americans are idiots? Not that I disagree with most Americans being idiots, but it's a pretty asinine reason make it mandatory.

If someone would voluntarily opt out and then not do anything about their retirement then fuck 'em. It's not my responsibility to care for someone else's stupidity. If we did care for them after all they did we would just be an enabler to ignorance and stupidity.

And the reason we have SS is so we are never faced with such a situation. It's the same reason every other industrialized country in the world has some type of similar system for their retirees. In fact, most countries period have some type of Social Security program. The few that don't are among the poorest nations in the world. And that is where you want put us, with the poorest nations in the world. What you fail to realize is that as a society, Americans support and want SS, unlike the few who do not.

 

[linyatta]

I put into social security for 14 years and after changing jobs, I was opted out by the government because I am a teacher (Windfall Elimination Provision). I just lost all of that "savings."

Now, I don't quite understand how all of that money, that I really didn't mind paying because I thought I might get it back, has been stolen from me. I am a charitable person, but I would like to be able to choose my own charity.

If and when I return to the public sector I would relish the opportunity to opt out of being forced to donate to charity and use that money to help me get to a point where I won't need charity later one.

I am a prideful, independent person and accept the fate of my actions. I can't help but expect the same from others. Exceptions always apply.

 

[auditor0007]

If it were so great, why the fuck is it mandatory??.. people would be FLOCKING to it by choice

Seriously Dave? Because a few of you out there don't like it and would opt out, you are trying to tell us that the masses agree with you? I beg to differ.

I beg to differ.... it is mandatory because the government is in it for power, or slush funds, etc and needs to force people to do it rather than them taking their monies elsewhere at higher returns... the government NEEDS those forced 'donations'...

Oh.. you would still have a lot out there who want into a money for nothing scheme... or the lazy who just don't want to think... but that in itself does not equate to it being some grand concept and great system of return...

Again.. if it were so great, you would not have to have it as mandatory.. people would flock to it if it were better than other options

Everyone with half a brain realizes that without SS and Medicare, we would have an enormous underclass of poor retirees. This is not what America is about no matter what you try to make us believe.

 

[DiamondDave]

Sounds great until people like you opt out and end up broke in retirement, and then scream that you need government help. While there may be some who would opt out and actually save for their retirement, a great many more would just continue living paycheck to paycheck, never putting anything away. And in the end, the burden would fall upon everyone else. This is the reason the program covers everyone and you cannot opt out.

So, I can't opt out because the majority of Americans are idiots? Not that I disagree with most Americans being idiots, but it's a pretty asinine reason make it mandatory.

If someone would voluntarily opt out and then not do anything about their retirement then fuck 'em. It's not my responsibility to care for someone else's stupidity. If we did care for them after all they did we would just be an enabler to ignorance and stupidity.

And the reason we have SS is so we are never faced with such a situation. It's the same reason every other industrialized country in the world has some type of similar system for their retirees. In fact, most countries period have some type of Social Security program. The few that don't are among the poorest nations in the world. And that is where you want put us, with the poorest nations in the world. What you fail to realize is that as a society, Americans support and want SS, unlike the few who do not.

We have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail.. we are also not a mob rule society and have a constitution that is SUPPOSED to protect from mob rule of a majority wanting to take at the expense of a minority (as in the ones that want SS and others to contribute to it for them as well)

 

[boedicca]

Call the WAAAHHMMMMMMMMMMBulance.

Georgie Porgie is having another death throes of progressivism fit.

 

[DiamondDave]

Seriously Dave? Because a few of you out there don't like it and would opt out, you are trying to tell us that the masses agree with you? I beg to differ.

I beg to differ.... it is mandatory because the government is in it for power, or slush funds, etc and needs to force people to do it rather than them taking their monies elsewhere at higher returns... the government NEEDS those forced 'donations'...

Oh.. you would still have a lot out there who want into a money for nothing scheme... or the lazy who just don't want to think... but that in itself does not equate to it being some grand concept and great system of return...

Again.. if it were so great, you would not have to have it as mandatory.. people would flock to it if it were better than other options

Everyone with half a brain realizes that without SS and Medicare, we would have an enormous underclass of poor retirees. This is not what America is about no matter what you try to make us believe.

People have the freedom to succeed that goes hand in hand with the freedom to fail.... government is not, nor should it be, your nanny

 

[boedicca]

I put into social security for 14 years and after changing jobs, I was opted out by the government because I am a teacher (Windfall Elimination Provision). I just lost all of that "savings."

Now, I don't quite understand how all of that money, that I really didn't mind paying because I thought I might get it back, has been stolen from me. I am a charitable person, but I would like to be able to choose my own charity.

If and when I return to the public sector I would relish the opportunity to opt out of being forced to donate to charity and use that money to help me get to a point where I won't need charity later one.

I am a prideful, independent person and accept the fate of my actions. I can't help but expect the same from others. Exceptions always apply.

That's the problem with Social Security. It's not Your Savings. Your taxes were immediately spent by the government on benefits for current retirees, or borrowed to fund other non-related programs.

The real solution is to move to a Chilean style retirement system of privatized accounts that belong to the individual. Politicians can't touch the money, and the individual can will the money to his or her family if there is any left at the time of death.

 

[linyatta]

I put into social security for 14 years and after changing jobs, I was opted out by the government because I am a teacher (Windfall Elimination Provision). I just lost all of that "savings."

Now, I don't quite understand how all of that money, that I really didn't mind paying because I thought I might get it back, has been stolen from me. I am a charitable person, but I would like to be able to choose my own charity.

If and when I return to the public sector I would relish the opportunity to opt out of being forced to donate to charity and use that money to help me get to a point where I won't need charity later one.

I am a prideful, independent person and accept the fate of my actions. I can't help but expect the same from others. Exceptions always apply.

That's the problem with Social Security. It's not Your Savings. Your taxes were immediately spent by the government on benefits for current retirees, or borrowed to fund other non-related programs.

The real solution is to move to a Chilean style retirement system of privatized accounts that belong to the individual. Politicians can't touch the money, and the individual can will the money to his or her family if there is any left at the time of death.

I like the sound of that alternative. I am quite sure everyone would agree it is better than the status quo. Why can't we get this done? are any lawmakers working on this?

 

[Contumacious]

Whenever I read about folks who support social security I know that they are victims of government education


" Every politically controlled educational system will inculcate the doctrine of state supremacy sooner or later. . . . Once that doctrine has been accepted, it becomes an almost superhuman task to break the stranglehold of the political power over the life of the citizen. It has had his body, property and mind in its clutches from infancy. An octopus would sooner release its prey. A tax-supported, compulsory educational system is the complete model of the totalitarian state. "

–Isabel Paterson, The God of the Machine (1943)

 

[Wacky Quacky]

Sounds great until people like you opt out and end up broke in retirement, and then scream that you need government help. While there may be some who would opt out and actually save for their retirement, a great many more would just continue living paycheck to paycheck, never putting anything away. And in the end, the burden would fall upon everyone else. This is the reason the program covers everyone and you cannot opt out.

So, I can't opt out because the majority of Americans are idiots? Not that I disagree with most Americans being idiots, but it's a pretty asinine reason make it mandatory.

If someone would voluntarily opt out and then not do anything about their retirement then fuck 'em. It's not my responsibility to care for someone else's stupidity. If we did care for them after all they did we would just be an enabler to ignorance and stupidity.

And the reason we have SS is so we are never faced with such a situation. It's the same reason every other industrialized country in the world has some type of similar system for their retirees. In fact, most countries period have some type of Social Security program. The few that don't are among the poorest nations in the world. And that is where you want put us, with the poorest nations in the world. What you fail to realize is that as a society, Americans support and want SS, unlike the few who do not.

It is not my responsibility to care for someone else's idiocy. I will keep saying that as long as I have to.

And the "every other industrialized country" argument never works for me. We are not every other industrialized country. Our politics are different, our constitution is different, our people are different, what works for them may not work for us, so drop it. We tried a federal retirement plan and it's going belly up. it's time to try something new. I want something that will make us better than every other industrialized country.

 

[linyatta]

Even if I was going to get SS, I wouldn't get enough to stop working. I guess if you live in poverty you don't miss a beat, but middle class (whatever that is) will not find it of much use, we have to fund our own retirement and take care of the the poor.

 

[WillowTree]

Here's an idea. How about if you've never even gotten off your ass and woked and paid into the system you get ZERO... How about that?

 

[editec]

Here's an idea. How about if you've never even gotten off your ass and woked and paid into the system you get ZERO... How about that?

With the exception of suvivor's benefits that is how it works, WT.

 

[georgephillip]

The breakdown of the social contract within this type of capitalism we currently practice is that the workers are not getting a healthy share of the wealth that they produce.

As capital;ism demands a healthy split between consuming and creating wealth, this imbalance is leading us to the economy malaise we are experiencing today.

And this trend has encouraged by a wide variety of policies in taxation, and trade, and labor relations passed by BOTH PARTIES in the USA in the last 40 years or so.

There is no magic bullet to solve this problem, folks.

There are multiple areas in our social contrct that we need to fix, but far as I can tell, we lack the foresight to make the hard political decisions we'd need to make to solve this problem.

Those areas in our social contract that need fixing require clawing back some of the lost productivity gains from the last forty years, ed.

The 8% loss loss in hourly earnings workers have experienced since 1973 has gone only one place.

It's the same place Republicans AND Democrats turn to for campaign funding.

We can get that money back for ourselves and our descendants.

But not if we continue "choosing" between Democrat OR Republican.

 

[initforme]

"You already won the "birth" lottery just by being born in this country."

This is the biggest bunch of cr#p I've EVER heard. Made me throw up in my mouth.

 

[georgephillip]

The solution is personal responsibility. Stop relying on government solutions to personal problems. It's not radical, we've survived as a species for thousands of years, we'll continue to survive, even without Social Security. Stop being whiny bitches and blaming others for your own failures. Own your own life. You already won the "birth" lottery just by being born in this country. If you can't make something of it, buy a mirror and blame that person. That's who let you down.

If someone steals your car at gunpoint, would you rely on government for a solution?

There seems to be a small moral distinction between thugs who use guns and thugs who use credit default swaps or low interest rates from central banks to borrow vast sums of money and speculate in commodities like food and oil.

Personal responsibility won't compensate for an economic system designed to cheat millions of productive individuals out of thirty years of productivity gains. If someone stole 8% of your earnings between 1973 and 2005 with a handgun, would you whine or buy a mirror?

Possibly you think the rich are through stealing?
They're not.

 

[georgephillip]

Everyone should be given an opt in or out choice for SS.

With the understanding there will be no government bail outs for bad investment decisions or Wall Street pillage?

 

[Anachronism]

With the understanding there will be no government bail outs for bad investment decisions or Wall Street pillage?

Definitely. Those of us who opt out would have no safety net to catch us should we fall.