Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

8 Bumps

For those who think Social Security will be around for them when they retire... (Spin off from another question)

If the social security system was still a viable option, then WHY is this year's annual report that is due every April 1st, still missing?!

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7/9/882990/-What-happened-to-the-Social-Security-Annual-Report

When SS started, there were 40 people paying in for every beneficiary. NOW, it's less than 3 people paying in to cover every beneficiary! Also, the retirement age then was 65, and the average life expectancy for men was 64! NOW the retirement age is 67, and average life expectancy for men is 72--and SS now covers spouses, children, and the disabled from the age of 18, etc.

In less than 5 years the first big round of Baby Boomers will be retiring which is bound to tip the scales further.

There is no "special fund" that has been put aside for SS--payments come from the general ledger--which as you know, is not looking to healthy these days!

 
LoriKeet

Asked by LoriKeet at 8:19 PM on Jul. 17, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

Level 45 (194,908 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (53)
  • http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/05/28/james-clyburn-supports-means-testing-for-social-security/


    If anyone is interested in just how close means testing is to fruition with Social Security through the debt commission.

    jewjewbee

    Answer by jewjewbee at 10:26 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • I'm not holding my breath that it will be there, LOL! The chest with the SS funds is full of IOU's......It probably won't be around in 5 yrs., let alone the 23 until I'm eligible.
    29again

    Answer by 29again at 9:40 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • LoriKeet,


    Love your link. LOL


    I have been getting my SS check for 16 years this November, will be 82 years old.


    Good luck to you younger ladies, hope you get yours, but set some money aside every month just in case.

    Natesmom507

    Answer by Natesmom507 at 11:52 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • Girl, I can retire in twenty years. I know it will not be there!
    m-avi

    Answer by m-avi at 8:21 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • That's a tough one!!! We really should try not to depend on Social Security, because we don't know if it will even be available. I am 43 and working on my Plan B, so that in 10 years or so, my residual income will be working for me so that I don't have to worry about having Social Security. If it is available (which I doubt) that is just added income, but if not I won't be in a bad way. There are definite things that you can do regarding a Plan B.
    valos3942

    Answer by valos3942 at 9:06 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • I wish I could find something on Fox talknewsradio regarding something John Gibson was saying about 2 days ago. There is currently a proposition being considered that will only provide SS for those citizens who did not save or have retirements. Yup, that's right the responsible are going to get hammered again and those who were clueless will be bailed out. If at retirement, a person has enough saved up to live on-they will be ineligible for SS even though they paid into it for 25-35-50 years. I'll keep looking for links regarding the issue.
    jewjewbee

    Answer by jewjewbee at 10:01 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • SS was not intended to be a sole source of income. It was intended to suppliment retirement savings.
    Carpy

    Answer by Carpy at 11:15 AM on Jul. 18, 2010

  • Without viable jobs to pay in, it will be gone long before that.
    Change=change- cents, not checks.


    I am way more concerned about health care costs which will likely rise. Most oldsters use their fair share of health services. We'll do fine with the rest, as long as we remain reasonably healthy. An early stroke, Cancer or injury involving long term rehab or treatments are the nail.in.the.coffin for many. Thankfully we are both very healthy and reasonably fit.
    Sisteract

    Answer by Sisteract at 9:09 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • I know it's not going to be around and it is aggravating to see that $200 or so a month deducted for social security. We pay more in social security and medicare than we do federal taxes. Both of which will not be there when we are eligible to receive those benefits. I
    I'd rather take it that money and invest it in something more sound. Either that or the system needs a huge overhaul, but an overhaul will probably make it worse than it is now.

    It's a tough one to decide because SS has been perceived as a safety net for the elderly and disabled. I know when my mother died, we received her money and my dad invested it in CDs that matured when we turned 18.
    Izsarejman

    Answer by Izsarejman at 9:57 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

  • http://politics.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2010/01/29/dont-means-test-social-security-lets-not-kill-the-golden-goose-.html


    Here's one link, I'm trying to find just who it is that wants to impose the means test.

    jewjewbee

    Answer by jewjewbee at 10:18 PM on Jul. 17, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN