No dude. Your fundamentally dishonest statements make you a partisan hack. Why do you need to state "republicans have had SS in the crosshairs for years?" That isn't true. Why not phrase the question honestly? Do you think the Republican plan to privitize SS is of any merit? Says the same thing and isn't all liey and such. And for the record is some right wing cook goes and shoots up the social security office that is probably your fault. You should be more responsible with the words you choose.
All of the money you have been paying into social security went to pay SS recipients. The huge surpluses produced by the Baby boomers were robbed by the government to pay for unfunded expenses. 2011 is the first year in which SS contributions do not equal SS distributions, so the government must now begin paying for the shortfall they created. This will add to the deficit.
What's dishonest about it? It's no secret that the Republicans have had social security reform as a mission for years. They tried to privatize it under Bush and learned the hard lesson that the citizens didn't want it. And for a very good reason. Privatization made Social Security less secure.
Yeah. Let's stick with the status quo. I know I feel real secure about my prospects for cashing in on 40 years of paying in to it :nope:. As "Trumpet" said, we can't be responsible for all of the idiots out there. Privatization would work for people with the sense to take advantage of it.
Sure it is. Retirees without savings will end up in our charity hospitals and public housing that you will pay for in taxes. It's impossible to save enough for retirement on a minimum wage or other low salary job. Social Security is not a pension and it is never intended to replace retirement savings. It's a subsistence income. It was intended to keep our elderly from living in cardboard boxes.
Who's stopping them? That's why IRA's, 401Ks, and deferred compensation plans are available. They are tax deferred retirement accounts and they are completely privatized. I've taken advantage of all of them. Social security is a safety net for those with incomes too low to save anything else. It's another sad Republican mantra that anybody that is for social security is lazy and unworthy. Most are disabled or elderly and have never been on welfare.
I advocate letting me keep my 6.2% that's going into a black hole, in addition to all of those things you mentioned. I paid it. I want it.
You got it. You are going to collect maximum benefits when you are 65. Social Security will be entirely solvent in your lifetime.
Here is how I would fix Social Security: Make it optional for employees if they put a pre-defined portion of the 6.2% saved into other qualified retirement accounts. Also those who opt out without enough credits to qualify for benefits are disqualifed from receving future benefits. Give employers a 3% credit for employees who opt out provided they pay at least. They pay increase wages for opt out employees by at least 1.5%. Immediately increase the full retirement age to 70 for anyone under 49 1/2. Make the partial retirement age 65. Increase the number of credits/quarters necessary to qualify for benefits from 40 to 60 and eventually to 80. Also increase the wages required to earn a credit. Drop the limit on credits that can be earned in a year. Put a means test in place based on liquid networth (house is exempt). If 4% of your nest egg exceeds X your benefit is reduced by Y. This can reduce the benefit to 0. Benefits can increase if the nest egg is reduced by whatever. Decrease the amount people on public pensions with sufficent credits to qualify for SS benefits can receive. There is already a windfall in place but I am saying make it smaller. Tie COLA to inflation, but cap it at 3%. If there is a deflationary period reduce benefits.
