Doesn’t Europe have better retirement plans, cheaper health care, and WAY more vacation time than the U.S.? Should we just invade England, perhaps?
The power’s back on, though, right?
So why call it “my” account then, j.c.? I understand the first part of your post, but I still maintain that when they saw it going south, they could have saved themselves a big headache by giving us a choice: “Do you want to continue or not? If not, we’ll issue you a check and you’ll be out of the system.”
It’s not even a savings account, for OG’s sake! You pay it in, someone else takes it out, and who knows what you’ll be left with?
Like El_Kabong, my retirement date is 2013. Right now, I’ll get a little over 700 bucks a month from SS. Adjusting for inflation and who knows what else, I may or may not see a portion of that money.
I, and many others like me,(Baby-Boomers) will have to make some major lifestyle adjustments. Let’s hope we’re not reduced to eating cat food, as E_K mentioned in his thread.
Q
Not to be picky, wasn’t SS start in the previous centtury, rather than the one before that?
Erm… sorry, but somewhere I was promised some money if I made it to a certain retirement age. I would like to actually enjoy the rest of my life on this planet, get to smell the roses I bypassed trying to eke out a living, and go to the “Happy Hunting Grounds” a satisfied German-American Kraut whose parents brought him here, and made his life better.
I would like to think that when I reach retirement age I would be comfortable enough to be able to volunteer my time to help others in some way. But I can’t do that if I’m worrying about feeding my own German ass, right?
We need SS reform. We need a workable plan, and the people that sweated and toiled need to see the results of their labor in their “golden years”, and they don’t need to be short-changed just because it wasn’t their “turn”!
Q
If you die before you are 66, then you dont take any money out, and you forfeit all, everything, that you contributed over the past 50 years.
Exactly - but what chance does a Social Security reform bill have of passing in today’s political environment? We have terrorism, war, a crumbling economy, and a dismal lack of decent movie offerings to concern ourselves with. On the bright side – eh, nevermind.
Cowboys kicked some major ass tonight!
On the bright side, blondes are mollified by shiny objects, like a 1920s style death ray.
Sorry, back to the GD…
You have a CITE on that, right? 
Continuing on: are there are SS revision bills up for consideration? Are we all doomed to die in poverty?
Continuing budget surpluses are what we need, not what we have. Unless we get continuing budget surpluses, then money wil be robbed from social security, making it less solvent. With budget surpluses, we can actually save money in the social security system since there are surpluses in the social security accounts already.
Germans to work longer
Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung ^ | 29 August 2003 | Carola Schlagheck
German workers will retire later and live on less pension income if the key proposals of the government’s social reform commission are implemented. The Rürup Commission presented its ideas for a reform of Germany’s ailing pension, health and social welfare systems, hammered out over the course of nine months, on Thursday. Its proposals are not binding but will serve as a basis for the government’s own reform plans, scheduled to be released this fall.
“Many of the proposals are right and sensible; we all know that only affordable pensions are safe pensions,“ Social Minister Ulla Schmidt of the Social Democratic Party said when she was handed the commission report on Thursday. Commission head Bert Rürup, an economics professor, said the proposals would “safeguard German pensions for the long term“ even in the face of looming demographic challenges.
Social Democratic Chancellor Gerhard Schröder said that Schmidt’s reform plans would take into account the commission’s recommendations, although not necessarily every single one of them.
Some of the most painful measures leaked before the report was officially released had sparked a hefty domestic debate during the past two weeks. Among other things, the commission proposes a gradual hike of the legal retirement age to 67 from the current 65 between 2011 and 2035 as well as a reduced rate of increase for pension payouts. Germans born in 1969 would thus be the first to work until 67.
Obviously reluctant to endorse such a measure, Schröder said early retirements should first be tackled. The average actual retirement age in Germany is currently below 60. The aim of the commission’s pension reform proposals is to prevent a fast appreciation of the cost of German labor by keeping pension payroll withholdings, currently 19.5 percent of gross wages, below 22 percent until 2030. The commission forecast pension contributions of 22.9 percent by 2040.
The Rürup Commission would have average pension payouts decline to 41.6 percent of gross wages from the current 48 percent by 2030, although state subsidies for additional private provisions would suffice to bring the combined pension payout to 48.1 percent.
Susanann - you shouldn’t post more than 5% of an article without including a link to the website, just a friendly FYI.
We do have a crisis in the U.S., with no remedy in sight.
Not to mention the heat in Dallas. But, I digress.
Blonde,
Thank you for the friendly reminder.
I didnt post the entire article, but it is more than 5%.
I knew I couldnt post an entire article, and I didnt, but I didnt know there was a ““5%”” limit.
But anyways, here is the link to the article:
The remedy is really quite simple.
Not much different than anyone who is currently spending more than they make.
Get the current federal spending down. Stay out of costly unnecessary foreign wars. Balance the budget, get back american jobs and factories, and start to have surpluses, lots of federal budget surpluses.
The surpluses we will get from both social security and the general fund, can be saved and invested for use later when the baby boomers retire and there are fewer workers.
Wow, Susanann, why didn’t anyone else ever think of that??
I dont know, but I think it would be nice to try it.
I dont know why anyone would be against it if they did think of it.
If any individual was spending more than they made, and was not putting away/saving for their retirement, I would also advise the same thing to them.
It is really a sound concept, and it works.
I was going to make a comment on these last few posts, but my irony-meter is going all out of whack.
I’m not worried. I’ve got my retirement all planned out. I’ll have a nice supplemental income, which should be more than enough to cover my needs through my senior years, and still allow my descendents to inherit a goodly sum.
[SUB]Now, if only Ed McMahon would return my calls…[/SUB]
I think this displays a common misunderstanding of what Social Security is. Social Security is not a retirement account. It is not welfare.
It is a social income insurance program.
There is no “your money” or “my money” in Social Security, no more than I would get to claim ownership over a tank because my taxes support the Pentagon.
Everyone pays Social Security not because they will get their money back, but because the risk and the potential benefits are shared by all tax-paying Americans. Also, SS is not just about retirement: ask the large number of widows or minors who receive SS benefits because the breadwinner in their family died.
And as far as Social Security being forced on everyone, tough titties. I never asked to pay sales tax, either.
Thank you for your words of reason, Ravenman.
The line of yours that really got me, Quasi was where you feared for your entitlement to your SS bucks, to allow you discretionary funds to buy life insurance to leave an estate for your kids.
How bout we just discontinue SS DIB - some lucky stiff gets disabled after working 5 years, and sucks off the federal tit for the next 50 years, drawing out far more than he ever paid in. Waah! It just isn’t fair!
Maybe they should keep track of individual payments, and when you draw out more than you paid in plus interest, you are euthanized.
Last time I did any research into this (98-ish) the official line was the following for a worker who retired in 2015:
Months to recover taxes:
High earnings - 45
Average earnings - 30
Low earnings - 22
Months to recover taxes and interest:
High earnings - 229
Average earnings - 157
Low earnings - 111
Given your expected monthly benefit, I’m guessing you are classified as a low to average worker. Tho you may quibble over the rates of interest in the gov’t calculations, they say you will break even on SS including interest on your taxes paid if you live approx 9-13 years after you retire. Hell - you’ll get your contribution back in less than 3 years! Sure beats the stock market over the past couple years, where you could have lost everything.
Which brings up another point. All too often IMO the folk bitching most about SS are the ones who need it least. IMO, the strongest argument AGAINST such things as privatization is that the vast majority of folk who really depend on SS lack sufficient investment sophistication.
Anyone who relies on SS to be a primary source of income in their retirement is either in for a rude awakening or had better really like cat food. Just follow you own saving/investment plan, and consider the monthly SS payments extra gravy to pay for your greens fees or to buy presents for the grandkids.
Largely because no one is against it at all. It is what it will take to acheive it that gets argued over. In a dictatorship, your solution is simple. In a democracy or republic, there needs to be consensus on what to cut and how much. It is easy to say “Cut superfluous spending!” but hard to get an agreement on what spending, exactly, is superfluous. Furthermore…
The government, however, is not an individual, and a government’s economic policy is only very rarely able to be compared to an individual’s, or even a company’s. There is little question in the minds of most economists, AFAIK, that deficit spending can and does work in ways that perfect budgets cannot and do not.
The line of yours that really got me, Quasi was where you feared for your entitlement to your SS bucks, to allow you discretionary funds to buy life insurance to leave an estate for your kids.
Dinsdale, I’m not alone facing having to pay for my own life insurance upon retirement, and I am doing research now so that I will have a plan already in place when that time comes. I don’t understand what about that statement got you riled up? I’m no financial wizard, I have no investments (other than what I put into my 401K), and I , like many others, am just concerned about my and my son’s future.
**Given your expected monthly benefit, I’m guessing you are classified as a low to average worker. **
I’m sure you meant “wage-earner” right? 
But I must apologize for unintentionally giving some misinformation about my SS benefit. I was stating the half that I paid in, not the total amount. I’m sorry for mis-stating that.
Finally, you take a jab at my lifestyle, which I think is unfair as you do not know me. I don’t pay greens fees, I am not a member of any country club and I live in an apartment. It’s not a spartan lifestyle, but it sure as hell isn’t extravagant either. And as to your opinion that the people who bitch most about SS are the ones who need it least, well that’s just plain wrong in my case.
As to what I stated in the OP, I have read all the posts following it, but I still feel that at some point the system is in danger of collapsing if it isn’t fixed. Okay, so don’t give me a lump-sum check, but at least assure me and others like me that the money we contributed will be there when we need it.
I appreciate y’all for contributing to this thread, which was my first venture into GD-land, and I also thank you for being cordial.
Quasi