SOCIAL SECURITY CHOICES-WHICH WOULD YOU PICK ?

9/3/2012

Once the elcetions are over, no matter who wins, what if the Govt. gave seniors

a choice because Social Security is bad off ( We all know they robbed it ) Here goes.

1. You can stay with Social Security.

2. You can take a lump sum, so say you paid in for 45 years and collected for 3 years and they

still owe you 42 years, that would come to $566,000.00

Once this was settled then the younger workers would pay into their own interest bearing account

with interest an untouchable... What option would you go for ? Me " LUMP SUM. "



Cheers.....Joe.........

Hi Joe,

I have never thought about this possibly because we have just now hit our forties and I do not have a rosy perspective when it comes to Social Security.

We have been doing our own investing to make sure that we do not end up broke in old age.

Should a choice such as the ones that you are mentioning be available, I think I would much rather do my own investing and opt for the lump sum.

Huggles,
Katja

9/3/2012

Katja:

I'm retired and I wish they had fixed the system

30 years ago, I worked for 46 years ! Boy times flies !

I would opt for lump sum if they did it correct ! I trust

no politician before my time, their crooks and liers !



Cheers..Joe....

9/3/2012

We need new choices !



Cheers..Joe..

Joe, I also would go for the lump sum since I no longer trust the government to pay me.

Remember the days when "Government-backed" meant security?

Look at a Dollar Bill. At one time is said, "Silver Certificate", now it says, "Federal Reserve Note". What does that mean? Is it an IOU or simply a promise to pay if then can?

Printing money with nothing to back it up is now an accepted practice. I wonder how your creditors would react if you made copies of money and sent that to them as payment.

You gave me a good laugh - I'd love to make copies of money to pay my bills - I think that leads to free room and board in prison, though. (well, not "free" either)

Unfortunately, Social Security is a system that protects people against themselves and against hard times. Regardless of the scare tactics, the U.S. government is solvent and Social Security will be paid so long as it is promised. It might not be increased and it may be adjusted (and must be) in terms of age of receipt. However, making lump sums available destroys the insurance concept that makes it an affordable program.

It will only take two things to make Social Security solvent: 1) full employment and 2) taking out social security taxes from all income for a lifetime.

There, that ends the debate and the scare. Trusting people to invest themselves is what we had before Social Security - you know - the soup kitchens and people sleeping on the streets.

Quote :

...making lump sums available destroys the insurance concept that makes it an affordable program.

That's the whole thing in a well-said nutshell. Social Security is based on what we put into it, and on the growth of that investment over time.

Ann

9/4/2012

The big scam is we don't get " INTEREST !" on the

money we put in..Also if you die before you collect or

when you are collecting and have no husband or wife

the govt. steals it from you and takes it back ! This is

your money you pay into it..

Cheers.Joe...

Agreed, DK & Ann.

When Bush wanted to have SS privatized and have people invest in their own Retirement program, I was shocked. People just won't do it. If they have money in their hands, they spend it.

As an example with my last job, the company contributed an equal amount that the employee invested as an automatic salary deduction to a Mutual Fund. A few of the employees had that amount returned to them every month. They wanted to use the money to buy a car or other things. For the few who would utilize the savings plan, it just wouldn't work. Mandatory deductions are the only way and our SS program is a life-saver. When people wake up to reality, it is usually too late.

Even though SS is theoretically our money, it is not treated as such. In Germany, the money deducted for retirement belongs to the employee. The employee can elect to have the entire sum paid out upon retirement or sent in monthly payments. The principal amount accrues interest and extends the life-time benefits. In this case, the money does belong to the employee. The government does not use the money as it does in the US. I don't mind our government using the money in an emergency, but as with any money borrowed, they should pay interest. We never learn if/when they pay it back. They rob it and then say there is not enough funds to pay future benefits. Not a good feeling.

My teacher's pension works more in the way you've described, Abe.

I don't get SS, even though I paid into it through the joint return Bill and I both signed for fourteen years. It does qualify me for Medicare, and if I had never worked, I would be able to draw SS, but because I didn't pay into the program during the later years, while I was single and teaching, the law says I don't qualify for any payments. SS is still set up on the assumption that wives generally stay at home and are supported by their husbands. If I had remarried, there would be nothing at all coming from those 14 years. Any SS rights would be connected to my new husband's benefits.

The system definitely needs to be adjusted to meet the 21st century world, but the whole point is that more can be done collectively than individually.

Ann

9/4/2012

Did anyone read what I said ? If you die before you collect or

if you die while collecting the govt. steals it back ! It's not theirs

to steal back, we paid into that system, it's our money ! It should

be closed out and given to that person's estate..

Cheers..Joe..

Social Security is insurance. Pay out is based on a formula. We do not get back what we pay in. We get back according to a formula that counts on the young people filling the workforce faster than retirees retire and some people dying and not collecting. Those who are on social security disability are young and have not paid in according to what they receive. There are multiple layers to Social Security and the only thing that went wrong is the downturn in wages, the loss of jobs to overseas sweat shops and profit hogs and the ruined economy that had losses of jobs right into the beginning of the Obama administration and has not grown fast enough since to fill the gap from the loss in taxes due to the job losses under Bush and those generated by the Bush administration policies.

It is a wise system, just like investments in annuities. If you take a lump sum payment from an annuity, it may be 120,000. If you take a "life payment" it may pay out triple that over the lifetime of the recipient. The actuarial charts help the insurance companies determine how much you pay for an annuity to get your pay outs and how long. If you die, they usually have a fixed flat rate payout to heirs.

Again, the only problem with our Social Security, one of the best systems in the world, is that the boomers are a big bubble in the society and there are not enough young workers in the workplace with high enough wages to fill in the payments needed. Therefore, those payments need to be made up by extending the taxes for social security to include all income in a lifetime, not just the middle class paying all their lives and the wealthy class getting a break at around $100,000 and paying no more. That's a simple solution.

But the wealthy class would rather scare us into getting rid of Social Security so they don't have to be involved in our safety net; after all, they have their own. They can risk the stock market. Normal people cannot.

9/4/2012

DK...

Those who make $100,000 to several million

should pay the 6.5% tax , even if you make 10 million

this would make ss solvent.....

Cheers...Joe...

joefrank wrote:

9/4/2012

DK...

Those who make $100,000 to several million

should pay the 6.5% tax , even if you make 10 million

this would make ss solvent.....

Cheers...Joe...

Yes, and that 6.5%, even at the higher number of dollars, would be a drop in the bucket compared to the effect of meeting the financial needs of the individual on the average wage-earner's deduction. The wealthier tax-payers would scarcely miss it.

Ann

Mr. Joe - put 'er there! We have absolute agreement on an issue. :-)
How many years did it take? You have a beautiful soul - must have for all those beautiful pictures, photo and paint. That's why I stick with you in spite of our political differences - we connect anyway. :-)

Anyway, that's why SS is a non-issue. I wish the rest of our U.S. problems were as easy to solve - like bigotry, greed, poverty, illiteracy, immigration, unemployment, lost jobs, .......... maybe we can fix those too.

9/4/2012

DK...

My wish all my life is why can't people get along,

if people were to drop color, religion, they would see

we're all human beings, we bleed, we eat, we cry, I'm

afraid it won't happen in my lifetime....It disturbs me

greatly when I see leaders of countries ( like Syria,) killing

their own peope and I question God why ?



Cheers...Joe...

Dear Joe,

What you are talking about is world peace. As long as governments exists there will be no peace. Governments are about control and putting the party in power forward to dictate to the people that they govern. Unless most of the worlds population all of a sudden got educated about how the elected rule, nothing will happen.

I am remembering Animal Farm. We are Boxer and the rest of the farm animals at this stage of American politics. The politicians are the pigs.

Have you noticed the writing on the wall.

Some animals are more equal than others........

We are not them.

Love,

Betty