- Joined
- May 6, 2011
- Messages
- 14,697
- Reaction score
- 5,704
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
No, it was designed as one brick in a wall attempting to turn back a popular tide sweeping toward socialism and quite possibly communism as the result of the latest and most devastating global collapse of capitalism. It sought to fund a modest income floor for covered workers beneath which none could fall no matter how badly things turned out for them.Well, I disagree with the whole SS system. It was designed for people that were too financially useless to save up for retirement.
It's actually a highly professional and smoothly run operation that gets tens of millions of monthly payments to retired and disabled beneficiaries and to their dependents and survivors. All at low administrative cost.Now, imo, it's basically a giant, governmental, bureaucratic mess that politician's love because it gives them more power/control over the masses.
So let me pose this question in a different way. SS is going broke and adjustments will have to be made.
No, it isn't. The only question is whether the present system can pay 100% of scheduled benefits for at least 75 years. If you use really, really pessimistic assumptions that have always proved wrong in the past, you can create a scenario where 100% of scheduled benefits can be paid for only about 20 years and then 75% of benefits for all years after that. People who use words like "broke" or "bankrupt" with regard to Social Secuirty don't understand what SS is or how it works.So let me pose this question in a different way. SS is going broke...
Adjustments are an OPTION. If those pessimistic assumptions turn out to be only a little too pessimistic, the Trust Fund will in fact never run out of funds, and 100% of scheduled benefits will always be paid even if we do nothing....and adjustments will have to be made.
There is already a clawback based on receiving SS plus a federal pension. Other pensions do not result in any such thing, but if your married-filing-jointly income from all sources exceeds $32,000, increasingly large parts of your SS benefits become subject to income tax.Should their be an across the board equal cut in benefits or should those who get a luxurious gov pension and SS get a bigger benefit cut than those of us who depend exclusively on SS?
LOL! Such as they are, federal unions cannot bargain over wages or benefits. Those are all set out in legislation passed by Congress.Another thing to remember is these pensions are so ridiculous because of gov unions.
Not jealous, resentful is a better word. I resent that I paid for him to do virtually nothing for 25 years and now I will pay for his cushy gov retirement package. This kind of crap is breaking this country.
So let me pose this question in a different way. SS is going broke and adjustments will have to be made. Should their be an across the board equal cut in benefits or should those who get a luxurious gov pension and SS get a bigger benefit cut than those of us who depend exclusively on SS?
It will destroy our economy and all you retired or soon to be retired gov employees laughing all the way to the bank won't have much to laugh about when your entire retirement check plus your SS check won't buy a loaf of bread.
The same person that cares little what you think Mr. Over-sized words...me.And who determines that?
LOL! Space cadet economics at work. Price levels move independently of the money supply. Inflation risk is a perceived probability that price levels will rise in the future. Nobody votes on it. It's a standard market risk that the supposed "risk-takers" have tired of and want to dump off on you instead. Sounds like you are ready to be a good little draft-animal and have a few more bones in your back broken in order to help out those who are already quite wealthy.Inflation risk is a function of government printing too much money.
So let me pose this question in a different way. SS is going broke and adjustments will have to be made. Should their be an across the board equal cut in benefits or should those who get a luxurious gov pension and SS get a bigger benefit cut than those of us who depend exclusively on SS?
Another thing to remember is these pensions are so ridiculous because of gov unions. This is a perfect example of how they are making America go broke. SS AND a gov union pension and most of you are OK with it. No wonder I live on a mountain side with no freakin neighbors! No wonder I'm stocking up on guns ammo and food, you guys are NUTS :lol:
Either "never do today what you can put off until tomorrow" was enthusiastically embraced in the private sector, or this guy wasn't quite the useless troll you tried to painty him as. Just plain BS either way.Retired as a GM-13 and moved on to a more profitable career in the private sector.
LOL! There was a lot of intrigue and infighting over the position of small turkey farm manager? That's not quite the headline federal job series, you know, and of course GM-13 and GM-14 were ranks under the PMRS system that was abolished by Congress in 1993.His successor made GM-14 and is still employed there as the supervisor of a small turkey farm. The next guy was much better at political infighting and moved even further up the management ladder after turning the division over to another incompetent.
Not at DP either, it would seem.In government, competence is not a prerequisite for success.
Unsuccessful work situations arise from a variety of sources. Management with a brain seeks to resolve such circumstances through things like training, reassignments, and counseling. Removal of an employee should be the last resort. There was obviously some potential identified that caused the guy or gal to get hired in the first place. Scrapping him or her is simply writing off the entire investment that has been made in this person when other steps might yield the sort of positive return that had originally been anticipated. Such an approach probably wouldn't play so well in shoot-em-up Cowboy World though.I agree. It is a shame that some have poor work ethic. Those type of people should have to work on a farm or ranch. Maybe they would learn the meaning of a days pay for days work.
You are lacking in something called insight. Only putting money in a coffee can or stuffing it under a mattress returns the same amount that you deposited. Did you know that mortgage lenders receive back MORE than the amount that they lent to a homebuyer? Why don't you complain about that?So you have no qualms about receiving more money than you contributed, based on someone else working. Gotcha!
The thing that most people don't understand is that most government workers pay into their pension program. It is not a freebie given to them. As for SS....you still have to meet the minimum quarters of work over and above your government service in order to be eligible for SS and the amount you receive is reduced due to the pension you receive.
I thought SS monthly payouts were reduced by pension payouts?
How pensions affect your Social Security benefit
You are lacking in something called insight. Only putting money in a coffee can or stuffing it under a mattress returns the same amount that you deposited. Did you know that mortgage lenders receive back MORE than the amount that they lent to a homebuyer? Why don't you complain about that?
You are describing the separate Supplemental Security Income program that assists the indigent elderly, blind, and otherwise disabled. It's a welfare program funded entirely from general revenues.I realize that is what it is. But that is not what I think it should be. It should be emergency funds for poor seniors...which would greatly cut down on it's overall costs.
Where to begin. That's not at all how it works, the only reason payroll taxes are a part of your gross income is so that you can afford to pay the tax, and real rates of return for average income workers and below are actually quite good. The wealthy don't do as well. In a few rare cases they can even end up with negative rates of return. Too bad for them. The princess sometimes has to put up with the pea.It's ridiculous that middle class people have to basically give money to the government for the latter to hold for a few decades - only to give much of it back (with horrible return rates).
Mortgage lenders are fronting money for the purchase of a product based on the ability to pay it back. For that, they receive funds (interest) to compensate for the use of those funds.
The amount one receives on SS which exceeds the amount they contributed far exceeds the amount of interest accumulated on that money. It is taken from the funds contributed people people who are still in the workforce.
Next?
No, the year in which one turns 62 is used in calculation of the "windfall" elimination, but it applies whenever one retires and continues until one dies, exhausts the other pension, or reaches 30 years of coverage under SS.Only if those pensions were supplied by exempting those earnings from SS or if they are recieved when you retire "early" taking SS before your specified SS "full benefit" age.
It was designed to provide an income floor that would be there no matter what else happened. Wealthy people may be able to amass other resources for retirement. Many not-wealthy people are not able to do so, and their numbers are now increasing.SS is designed to supplement other retirement income, not to replace it.
You pay into it, but seeing the amount it takes out first hand, I can't imagine that if you actally calculated it up that the amount you pay in is anywhere close to what you'd get out
So you are able to understand the concept in that context.Mortgage lenders are fronting money for the purchase of a product based on the ability to pay it back. For that, they receive funds (interest) to compensate for the use of those funds.
Your SSN is not linked to a personal account that earns any interest at all. You are way, way out in left field here. Meanwhile, ALL insurance works the way that SS does. Good drivers pay to repair the cars of those who talk on cellphones and drive into trees. Non-smokers pay to rebuild the burned down homes of those who smoked in bed. Workers pay to maintain a basic lifestyle for those foolish enough to have lived beyond their capacity to work effectively. In each of these cases, actuarial analysis reveals the levels of current premiums needed to pay current claims while also accumulating a padding of reserves against future claims. There is nothing unusual going on here. It's the standard insurance model.The amount one receives on SS which exceeds the amount they contributed far exceeds the amount of interest accumulated on that money. It is taken from the funds contributed people people who are still in the workforce.
I recommend that you undergo a few years of schooling. I'm not going to be able to do it all here.Next?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?