Archive

Social Security Running 130B Deficit This Year, Trust "Fund" Empty By 2037.

  • tk421
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110127/ap_on_re_us/social_security

    Now the government is acknowledging what everyone with a brain has known for a long time, SS is broke and only going to get worse. The article states that the "fund", which is supposed to be $2.5T, will last until 2037 but note this paragraph.
    Social Security has built up a $2.5 trillion surplus since the retirement program was last overhauled in the 1980s.
    The $2.5 trillion surplus, however, has been borrowed over the years by the federal government and spent on other programs. In return, the Treasury Department has issued bonds to Social Security, guaranteeing repayment, with interest.
    There is NO fund. It's spent, gone, vamoose. Those not already retired or probably within 5 years of retirement will be paying higher taxes and receiving lower benefits for the rest of our lives all because of the government's greed and unwillingness to keep their hands out of the pot.

    Is anyone willing to admit that they still think that SS is a good program? I am only 25 now, I do not want to spend 30-40 years paying for the retirement of others when I will not see a single penny of that money back. It is another tax, plain and simple.
  • Writerbuckeye
    It's a ponzi scheme built on the backs of people who aren't likely to collect a dime.

    Thanks a lot, Franklin, you all-but-a-socialist-in-name-only. Your legacy is going to be the possible bankruptcy of the US government.
  • iclfan2
    tk421;654590 wrote:Is anyone willing to admit that they still think that SS is a good program?
    You must not know this site. Plenty of morons on here think SS is good and shouldn't be privatized. There only reasoning is that the general public is too stupid to save it that we'd just have a bunch of poor people running around. Heaven forbid we let people be homeless for what they got themselves into.
  • sleeper
    It's a freaking joke.
  • tk421
    iclfan2;654658 wrote:You must not know this site. Plenty of morons on here think SS is good and shouldn't be privatized. There only reasoning is that the general public is too stupid to save it that we'd just have a bunch of poor people running around. Heaven forbid we let people be homeless for what they got themselves into.

    Yeah, I know. Us Americans are too fucking stupid to take care of our own money, so we depend on the government to steal er I mean "manage" it for us. I don't think the government could successfully run a lemonade stand, yet we're trusting retirement for everyone to them. I want an option to opt out, if that happened I'd sign up today.
  • dwccrew
    tk421;654913 wrote: I want an option to opt out, if that happened I'd sign up today.

    I've been saying this for several years now. If I had the option, I would opt out. But so would the majority of people and the government wouldn't be able to "borrow" money from the trust anymore.
  • tk421
    dwccrew;654918 wrote:I've been saying this for several years now. If I had the option, I would opt out. But so would the majority of people and the government wouldn't be able to "borrow" money from the trust anymore.

    Exactly, it's another tax source for the government. You could put the same amount of SS money in the Dow or the S&P and get extremely higher returns than the government is going to give even with the recent troubles, especially now that benefits are going to have to be reduced.
  • believer
    tk421;654938 wrote:Exactly, it's another tax source for the government. You could put the same amount of SS money in the Dow or the S&P and get extremely higher returns than the government is going to give even with the recent troubles, especially now that benefits are going to have to be reduced.

    I agree and for the record, I can appreciate how frustrated and angry the 20 and 30-something's are at helping to fund SS when it appears that this American socialist ponzi scheme may not be around for you to enjoy when you hit retirement age.

    But as I have often posted on OC and that "other" site time and time again, for guys like myself who are in their 50's and looking at retirement just around the corner, Social Security had better be available to us. I've paid into the $2.5 trillion "system" since I collected by first genuine paycheck when I was 15 years old. My grandparents had Social Security/Medicare benefits when they retired and now my parents have it.

    Millions of people are in the same boat as myself. We had taxes automatically deducted from our paychecks by Federal mandate for decades and have received annual statements from the Feds showing us what we've paid and what the disbursements will be when we reach retirement age.

    Like it or not many if not most average American in my age group view SS as the cornerstone of their retirement. Rightfully so. The Feds collected our money by mandate for decades and made a promise to pay. They'd better make good on that promise. If they do not - if SS is cut and/or eliminated - the Feds are going to have a lot larger problem on their hands than trying to figure out how to repay the "trust" fund. The "trust" fund they've been dipping into (probably illegally) to help pay for DC's incessant and insatiable thirst for spending taxpayer dollars on worthless,redundant, and inefficient Big Government "services."

    I'll agree that we need to ween ourselves off the SS system, but this should be a gradual adjustment over the next few decades. As this occurs the Feds and state governments should provide tax shelters and incentives for younger generations entering the workforce to encourage private retirement investments and savings to help offset the gradual phasing-out of SS.
  • tsst_fballfan
    I want the option to opt out and get MY money that I paid in. I would settle for no interest just what I actually paid. :shrugs:
  • Writerbuckeye
    I worked for years in the SS system (about 15) and will only see a small percentage of what I paid in, if I'm lucky. Because I also have a public retirement, my ability to collect SS has been significantly reduced by the same geniuses who have been robbing the trust to pay for all their pet projects.

    It's not that I desperately need the money, and I may choose not to even file for it, but the idea that I had to pay into something that is basically a black hole is what pisses me off. I'd have much rather had the money to put into a private retirement account.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    tsst_fballfan;655037 wrote:I want the option to opt out and get MY money that I paid in. I would settle for no interest just what I actually paid. :shrugs:

    Agreed, between my wife and I there has been paid close to half a million into SS. We fully expect to receive NOTHING. On the one hand I understand Believer's POV but that's the attitude that got us in the mess in the first place. People talk a good game about fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice, until it hits them directly. This is why the baby boomers are the worst generation, they have no problem screwing their kids and grandkids as long as they get what they were "promised." It is also why SS reform will never happen until we hit financial armageddon. The GOP doesn't want to piss off current and near-future recipients, and the DEMS still hold on the half-assed belief that this was ever a good idea.
  • fan_from_texas
    Manhattan Buckeye;655115 wrote:Agreed, between my wife and I there has been paid close to half a million into SS. We fully expect to receive NOTHING. On the one hand I understand Believer's POV but that's the attitude that got us in the mess in the first place. People talk a good game about fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice, until it hits them directly. This is why the baby boomers are the worst generation, they have no problem screwing their kids and grandkids as long as they get what they were "promised." It is also why SS reform will never happen until we hit financial armageddon. The GOP doesn't want to piss off current and near-future recipients, and the DEMS still hold on the half-assed belief that this was ever a good idea.

    Exactly, exactly, exactly.

    What pisses me off is when the Boomers start talking about fiscal prudence now, though by fiscal prudence they mean "Don't touch anything that helps us, like SS, but cut away at things that only help younger people, like Education." Boomers seem intent on screwing everyone else and ruining future generations.
  • FatHobbit
    believer;654942 wrote:Millions of people are in the same boat as myself. We had taxes automatically deducted from our paychecks by Federal mandate for decades and have received annual statements from the Feds showing us what we've paid and what the disbursements will be when we reach retirement age.

    Like it or not many if not most average American in my age group view SS as the cornerstone of their retirement. Rightfully so.

    I get where you're coming from and I sympathize with you. You paid into it, so you want your money back. But I feel the same way. Why should I continue to pay into it when there is likely no chance I will get anything back?
  • Bigdogg
    There are lots of easy fixes.

    http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/planning-to-retire/2010/5/18/12-ways-to-fix-social-security
  • fish82
    Interesting. I have no problem with most of these solutions. I'm most in favor of a 5% benefit cut for new beneficiaries, and a boost to future contributions. I also think a little bit of privatization wouldn't hurt a bit.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    These aren't fixes, these are phase-outs, and it should have happened years ago. Telling future generations they will pay more and get less is not a "fix." There is nothing to fix about a ponzi scheme. People will continue to live longer (apparently the dumbass FDR administration didn't see this happening) and put more strain on the people at the bottom of the ponzi.
  • queencitybuckeye
    FatHobbit;655165 wrote:I get where you're coming from and I sympathize with you. You paid into it, so you want your money back. But I feel the same way. Why should I continue to pay into it when there is likely no chance I will get anything back?

    The only real way to "fix" this program is to phase it out over time. Unfortunately, that will mean that there will be people who pay in and never see a dime of benefits.
  • Writerbuckeye
    I don't get the ire over Boomers by some on here. Many of the decisions to spend the trust money were not made by Boomers, but by our parents generation. Did Boomers continue the insanity when they got the helm? Oh you bet. But they are hardly the only folks to blame here.

    Now if you want to blame them for being the largest generation ever created and causing too much strain on resources, have at it, but we didn't have anything to do with that, either.

    I get the feeling a lot of this is anger just because it will be the sheer numbers of Boomers collecting benefits that will end up bankrupting the system. Hell, it's in deficit mode now, and Boomers have only just now started to collect benefits.

    All this anger should be directed at the idiots in Congress who have continued to rip off the Trust, and have not even tried to shore up the system (for decades and decades) even when they knew this day was coming.
  • Manhattan Buckeye
    The anger towards the boomers is likely directed to their hesitance to join in the sacrifice. Sure, they weren't the only generation to exploit the situation, but they are the ones currently saying "ok, let's fix this but don't touch our benefits." Entitlement. Entitlement. Entitlement. Sacrifice is for their children and grandchildren. And it is both political groups. I don't think my Dad has voted for a DEM since John Glenn, and constantly gripes about the debt and spending, but by God if you reduce his pension or add a co-pay to his health insurance he'd gripe to holy Hell, he gripes now with a $20 co-pay. And he actually knows he's part of the entitlement generation draining us dry.
  • CenterBHSFan
    Manhattan Buckeye;655276 wrote:and constantly gripes about the debt and spending, but by God if you reduce his pension or add a co-pay to his health insurance he'd gripe to holy Hell, he gripes now with a $20 co-pay.
    I've actually noticed ALOT of people doing this as well. My Dad is one of them. He pays $25 per doctors visit and $50 per hospital stay, and a few bucks per prescription. That's it. And he bitches about it excessively. It doesn't matter that he can't remember the last time he was in the hospital (it's been that long ago) and it doesn't matter that he only goes to the doctor when he can barely move - he just thinks that since he pays his insurance every month that there shouldn't be a copay.
    I've tried to show and tell him how much more expensive it CAN be, but it goes in one ear and out the other. If it wasn't for me, he'd still be on an 80/20 program, anyway, which would be much much much worse on his pocket. Not that it would break his bank to begin with...
  • Writerbuckeye
    Okay, well extrapolating to an entire generation from an experience with your father (and maybe some others) is a bit of a stretch. That said, I'm not going to say you're wrong simply because there's a selfishness in this country that has seemingly become a part of being an American.

    Boomers were probably the first generation to feel entitled because our parents worked so hard to give us a better life than they had. In the process, a lot of us got spoiled and expected to get whatever we wanted.

    I'm not one of them, however, simply because I've had to work very hard for everything I've gotten. My parents weren't able to instill that entitled feeling into me.

    My retirement plan just upped a regular office visit to $20 and added a specialist fee of $35 per visit (didn't have that before). I have no problem with that, or the higher prices I'm paying on meds, because I KNOW I have it good and am thankful to have a good medical plan when so many don't even have basic coverage.

    On the other hand, I went into public service for two reasons: (1) because I honestly felt like I wanted to do something to give back and (2) was willing to accept less in pay for the security the benefits offered (I know my family's medical history and genetics and figured odds weren't in my favor).

    So I'm not one of those who feels entitled, is VERY thankful for what he has, and likely won't even apply for Social Security benefits (If I live long enough) because I am comfortable with what I have.

    I hope there are more out there like me. I have to believe there are.
  • sleeper
    The worst part about it, is everyone wants this to get fixed, but no one is willing to sacrifice anything to get it done. The older generations wants to get theirs since they've been paying into it all their life, and the younger generation doesn't want to pay because they know they won't be getting anything when they retire. There needs to be a compromise to get it solved, and that is likely not going to happen.

    Basically, the younger generation is the one getting fucked, because the older generation will likely be dead or near death before the real problems hit. Thanks a lot.
  • believer
    Manhattan Buckeye;655115 wrote:Agreed, between my wife and I there has been paid close to half a million into SS. We fully expect to receive NOTHING. On the one hand I understand Believer's POV but that's the attitude that got us in the mess in the first place. People talk a good game about fiscal responsibility and shared sacrifice, until it hits them directly. This is why the baby boomers are the worst generation, they have no problem screwing their kids and grandkids as long as they get what they were "promised." It is also why SS reform will never happen until we hit financial armageddon. The GOP doesn't want to piss off current and near-future recipients, and the DEMS still hold on the half-assed belief that this was ever a good idea.
    I understand your points MB, but the fact remains the Feds confiscated (yes confiscated) a significant portion of my income over the past 4 decades and counting with the understanding and clear social contract that when I reach retirement age I will receive a return on that mandated involuntary "investment."

    This was NOT my choice. It was mandated by Federal law.

    You can call us the worst generation all you want, but it was NOT my "boomer" generation who did it either. You can thank FDR and his socialist cronies for this "entitlement" mentality and capitalized on by politicians ever since. This all happened decades before the boomers were born.

    You're damned right I expect my money back.
  • majorspark
    I hope it works out for you believer. Sad thing it about a ponzi scheme is not everyone gets what they were promised or their money back.
  • believer
    majorspark;655586 wrote:I hope it works out for you believer. Sad thing it about a ponzi scheme is not everyone gets what they were promised or their money back.
    I agree. The difference here is I was forced by law to participate in the ponzi scheme. Normally I wouldn't recommend it.

    Listen folks, I'm opposed to government entitlements for this very reason. If my SS dollars had been applied to my own private savings, investments, or even if I simply chose to blow it out my ass it would have been my choice with my money. Even with my 401K I can option to take out a loan against it if I'm in financial need, etc. But Social Security. Nope...not allowed to touch it until I'm 65 and a half.

    Like I've said...it's my money and I expect the Feds to make good....period.